It's a lot like an Agatha Christie novel, figuring out this Armageddon thing. We have a crime, the bombing of Gaza. We have victims, the Palestinians. We even have the culprits, the people running the Israeli government. But are they the principal actors here? We have accomplices, the people running the US and UK governments. But, again, are they the primary motivators?

I think it is worthwhile when trying to understand a long running situation to look behind the stage props, the actors, the details of the plot and dialogue to inquire into the motivations of the writers, producers and directors of the “show”. To look for the source.

What do we know about Israeli history, culture and people? Are they autonomous or are they dependent on others or act on others instructions? We know that the Rothschild family has been heavily involved in the formation and growth of Israel; that they have provided a lot of the initial funding and have used their political clout to further the cause of Israel. It is highly unlikely that their influence over Israeli policy has waned over the years. International bankers tend to do things as a group. There are other Jewish banking families and I think it is entirely reasonable to believe they are involved with the Israel enterprise as well. When these banking families get involved in something, they like to control it and they treat everything as an investment. They have a purpose and they want a return. It's business ..... the business of the pursuit of evermore wealth and power.

The history of Israel has been one of violence from the start; a seemingly unending series of terrorist attacks and oppression against the Palestinians interspersed with wars. The Israelis have started all these wars bar one, the 1973 “Yom Kippur War”. We might conclude that they are belligerent and extremely aggressive and wont hesitate to start a war to further their interests. Why do they behave like this? The Israelis themselves have more land than they need to live in peacefully; always have. This can be simply demonstrated by the fact that they have had to aggressively promote immigration to Palestine to Jews living all over the world to populate the place. Indeed, the Israelis had to engage in “false flag” terror campaigns against the Sephardic (Oriental or Semitic) Jews living in other Middle East countries to drive them into Israel. Many claim much the same thing happened to the Ashkenazi (non-Oriental, non-Semitic) Jews in Europe through the oppression caused by the Nazis together with support from the Zionists. Historically, Jews have shown a marked resistence to immigrating during the twentieth century to Palestine as it was known prior to 1948 and to Israel as it is now known. Recently, the Israeli government has been offering large inducements to Iranian Jews to emmigrate to Israel. These have not been taken up.

Obviously there is another agenda at play here. As mentioned earlier, the principal actors here are likely to be the “International Bankers” and, if so, it is their agenda we are witnessing being played out. But first, let us return to the Israelis. How is it possible for these Jews, who have lived peacefully amongst, and as part of, a large number of other nations, to suddenly become this belligerent and warlike people?

If we look at their culture, we find it is built on ancient texts, The Hebrew Bible otherwise known as the Old Testament and the Talmud. Both these texts are exclusivist i.e. they promote the Jews as being separate from and superior to the rest of humanity. They are “God's Chosen People” which makes the rest of humanity “God's Rejected or God's Scorned or God's Enemy” and thereby the Jews' enemy. This notion of “God's Chosen” sets them up in contention with the world and if God has rejected the rest of humanity and they are now his enemy then if the Israelis attack and kill any of these same people they are doing God's work. There is no getting around this inescapable conclusion.

This world view of choseness and separateness is inculcated in Jews through their culture from birth if they happen to grow up and mix in a Jewish religious community. This is inevitable.

There are many calls for mercy and justice in the Old Testament but many of these are directed towards the disenfranchised in their own community and even when they are directed towards the benefit of the stranger it becomes confusing, contradictory. What this then requires is a sort of schizophrenic approach to these scriptures which alternatively call for mercy (Micah 6.8 ) and war (Micah 4:13) and genocide (Joshua 6:17-24). This doesn't make for a peaceful and balanced mindset. Indeed, it calls for a “splitness” in the mind to be able to function with this internal contradiction. This internal contradiction must create conflict, first internal conflict and then later external conflict

For the same reason, Christians suffer from exactly the same complaint, if not more so, as the calls for mercy and justice are even more pronounced in the New Testament. In fact, Jesus specifically rejected the priest class and its attendent legalism (the myriad of laws which, in the end, sanction wrongdoing), and the culture of violence and revenge that is such a part of the Old Testament. (See John ch8: 31-44. Jesus accuses the Judeans, known at the time as the Jews as opposed to the Israelites from Israel, as being murderers and followers of Satan. It was the Judeans who had “The Law”, the Torah, the first five books of what is now the Old Testament which called for genocide).
The answer to this mental conflict for Christians and Jews alike is to either follow the way of violence and exclusiveness or the way of mercy and inclusiveness ..... or have two minds, to split.

This cultural programming for both Jews and Christians alike lies relatively dormant until it is triggered through propaganda usually attending some crisis (also usually manufactured) and a target or victim and the means for acting out this violent disposition is provided i.e. wars against “the other”. A large number of both Christians and Jews have shown themselves quite capable of exploitation of the each other. Both groups share the Old Testament and its sentiments and both claim the title of “God's Chosen People”. Despite this competition for God's favour, many Christians and Jews have managed to unite. They have united to persecute a third group, the Muslims, specifically the Palestinians. Some very vocal Christian and Jewish leaders would have us believe that the Palestinians are not only their enemy but everybody's enemy and even God's enemy because they are resisting God's will that Palestine belongs to the Jews as outlined in the Old Testament alongside calls to genocide (See both the Books of Deuteronomy and Joshua).

As noted earlier, large sections of the populace of both countries are predisposed to violence through religious training, or programming if you like, in large part authorised and validated by leaders pointing to passages in the Old Testament. It is not only violence being advocated but a particular kind of violence: war, slavery and genocide. This is not only sanctioned by the God of much of the Old Testament, but demanded by him. This “god” cannot be the God who created the Universe and all in it because he would be at war with his own creation; at war with himself. This is not possible. If it were possible then this God would have a split mind and as God is mind/spirit without a body this means a split nature which means two Gods; a creator God and a destroyer God; a good God and an evil God. Which God was Joshua listening to when he was told to kill every living thing, man, woman, child and beast in Canaan?
(The Christian God though a three part God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, are all of the same nature. Jesus said, “You see me and you see the Father”).

A further argument that this god of genocide is not the God that created the Universe and all in it is this; if this god was the Creator God and wanted to eliminate an entire people, he could simply withdraw their life from them, he being the source of all life. This would have a huge advantage for his “Chosen Ones” in that they would not now have to murder men, women and children and be dead or uffering from injuries and/or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and nightmares and the ongoing deliterious effects of the resultant bloodlust infecting the present and subsequent generations. To command they be murderers is hardly nurturing your “Chosen People”. Once a people visit violence upon an enemy, they bring this same spirit of violence back into their own community when they return. It is now in their psyches and being denied it will fester to erupt against perceived internal and external enemies later on. The only God that would do this is one who wanted the destruction of ALL people, perpertrator and victim alike. Yet this genocidal god can't destroy by itself, it needs to employ humans to do it. If it needs help to destroy then it couldn't possibly create by itself; the defining quality that makes God God. This genocidal god, if it exists at all, is not God but some sort of other being and so should not be given any credence or authority let alone worshipped and followed.

You see the problem here? If you choose war and genocide, you are either obeying an evil, destructive being who wants to destroy you, too, or you are deluded/insane and hearing voices or just straight out evil yourself. What you cannot be is following a loving creator God.

Let us turn to the “accomplices”. Successive US and UK governments have provided taxpayer funds, armaments and political cover for Israel over many years. Both of these countries' governments have been happy to “give” the Israelis a land that belonged to neither of them. Such arrogance! Both the United Kingdom and the United States are “Christian” countries led by “Christian” men (by and large). Both these countries have long and sordid histories of colonialism and empire building, of enslaving whole peoples. Their justification .... the New Testament (go preach the good news to all the nations) and the Old Testament (appropriating the “Chosen People” title) and their methods .... straight out of the Old Testament (war, plunder and genocide). Though it must be noted that “the Good News” which was once exclusively Christianity, is now joined by “Democracy” and “Our Way of Life” (materialism/hedonism) as the religious reasons for the non-religious.

Who are we really dealing with here? Are there actors or interests behind these governments controlling them? Those that know the mechanism of credit creation, the banking system, already know the answer to this. Bankers such as the Rockefellers, Warburgs and Morgans (Christians, Jews and Calathumpians, whatever) control the country's economy by creating money they have just pulled out of thin air by extending credit (which is received as debt to the borrower). It also furnishes them with immense wealth and power over others, not the least of which are politicians and, in turn, the control of the education, legal, police and military systems. They dominate businesses including the media. Everything is channeled their way. If it is not, then they change it. They rule. They rule Britain, the US and also Israel. To see one country ruling another is to miss who is ruling them all.

However for all their power, these bankers and their attendant elite face two problems. One is that the lust for power and wealth is never satisfied. They always want more and so are always busy plotting the next expansion. As The Oracle in the film, “The Matrix” said, “What do men with power want? More Power”!
The second problem is that because their power is based ultimately on fraud, a lie, this may be discovered and then this powerbase will be taken from them.

The country's wealth that is the backing (or that which gives it value) for the bankers manufactured Money Supply belongs collectively to the citizens of the nation, not the bankers. The wealth that comes from the issuance of the Money Supply belongs to the peoples' governments. Should the truth become widely known, then these bankers risk losing all their power and perhaps even their heads. Certainly their heads were at risk when they were dealing in past years with functioning monarchies. The monarch was always liable to discover the truth to arrest them all with no notice. Monarchies were a problem for the bankers.

The First World War eliminated many of the monarchies and hobbled the rest. The First War was of great benefit to the bankers quite apart from the profits that came from providing the loans and armaments that made the war possible in the first place. But today they are still at risk of discovery and overthrow even with a non-functioning democracy. There is always the risk of it awakening and functioning as it should. So this is why totalitarian (but not hereditary) governments are prefered such as fascist and communist ones. (As an interesting aside, the only thing Marx found praiseworthy with Western capitalist countries was their banking system!)

This is the risk posed by the bankers' own fellow citizens . There is also a risk posed by any foreign government that does not use this private banking system. First it would show another system is possible and second, it would flourish. The answer to both these risks is to dominate the world to such an extent that rival countries and systems no longer exist and the populations are controlled to the point of total domination. "1984", in other words. No free thought can be allowed if the risk is to be totally negated. These people, these bankers imperfectly control, in large part, the so called Western world and somewhat more perfectly control the state of Israel. They need an increasingly police/fascist state in the West and the crushing and control of every country in the world presently outside their influence. The principle ones are Iran, Russia and China. This is the goal. All their efforts have and will be building towards this including, and especially, the creation and expansion of Israel. They need a place from which to rule. A place that is totally under their control and a place that holds significance and authority in the minds of people (including Muslims). What better place than Jerusalem?

So given all the above, I see further wars (but not their outcome) as inevitable in an attempt to hide the truth. Truth is their enemy and for good reason.
Another compelling reason (for them) to wage ever more wars is that these people have committed many many crimes. To survive prosecution and, indeed, to survive at all, they need to keep up the level of fear and preoccupation with survival for everyone else. Nothing does this better than ever more wars and terror.

So, we have two malevolent forces intent on war and both driven by power over others and both focusing on Jerusalem. One force are the adherents of a genocidal god who makes appearences throughout the Old Testament which was written some 2500 to 3000 years ago. Many of these adherents sit in churches and synagogues around the world. The other force is a financial elite of international bankers who first made their appearance on earth some 300 years ago. Both forces are being driven by the same people, the bankers, and they have launched a rollercoaster they are mentally incapable of stopping. We must put the brakes on by withdrawing our silent support.

Would we be more powerful and successful against this evil (and more at peace with ourselves) if we rejected violence and the notions of retaliation and punishment and promoted instead truth, inclusiveness, compassion and mercy as our weapons? If we acted this out by refusing employment that furthered warfare especially military service? If we helped others avoid having to do military service or manufacture weapons through poverty or the threat of poverty? By noncompliance in every form we can think of; by speaking truth at every opportunity? How else do you break this spell, that a violent God can be good, that has afflicted so many Christians and Jews alike?

If we challenged every Christian or Jew who utters exclusive, racist and violent things and asked instead, “Is this what you think your Creator God wants of you? The God who created us all?”

Or perhaps, “Why would your God want you to destroy someone he created; someone he could kill himself if he wanted to and spare you the blood on your hands and its attendant trauma?”

The Creator God cannot be violent without doing violence to himself, without splitting, as argued before. If we are made in God's image, do we then do violence to ourselves when we do violence to others? (By “violence” in this context, I mean that measure of physical force that in any way goes beyond that minimum necessary to restrain the violent from harming us.)

Can we bring violence to an end by refusing to participate in it; by refusing to support it wherever we find it being taught be it in our church, our synagogue, our club, our employment, our government?

In this essay, which needs to be relatively short, I have tried to simplify things without being simplistic. There is much else going on, of course, but I wanted to focus on something that is fundamental to this apocalyptic world situation that is not getting much attention. And also focus on where we might start to undo this situation without running the risk of exacerbating it through further violence.

McJ's picture

The Predators Tour

Morgan Stanley Protest

"If these activists are as dedicated as they are desperate, expect this to become a trend."

I like the title of their protest - The Predators Tour!
I wonder how long before these demonstrations turn violent? They are sure to attract some agent provocateurs.

From the Raw Story:

Homeowner group protests 'predator' CEOs outside their mansions
Stephen C. Webster
Published: Monday February 9, 2009

Monday, a group of 350 to 400 at-risk homeowners, organized by the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, staged a series of protests outside the mansions of wealthy bankers in a moneyed Connecticut neighborhood.

"Called the 'Predators Tour' these actions were the start of NACA's 'accountability campaign,' an aggressive, confrontational protest aimed at several top executives of companies that refuse to allow NACA to renegotiate the terms of loans on behalf of members, according to NACA CEO Bruce Marks," reported the Stamford Times.

"Sporting bright yellow shirts that read, 'Stop Loan Sharks,' protesters demanded more accountability from the CEOs of the financial institutions responsible for the millions of unaffordable mortgages in the state and across America," reported NBC New York in an article titled, "Grab Your Torch and Pitchfork."

Protesters also gathered outside the mansions of William Frey, the CEO at Greenwich Financial Services, and John Mack, CEO of Morgan Stanley.

"The move was part of the nonprofit group's national accountability campaign to get company executives to support refinancing loans to keep people in their homes, according to Liz Floyd, one of the organizers and a counselor with the group," reported the Stamford Advocate. "... [The] group believes the executives contributed to the subprime mortgage crisis."

"During the protest, organizers shouted through bullhorns and carried signs in the middle of the road for more than an hour, prompting the police to shut down a portion of Glenville Road, according to Lt. James Heavey," reported the Greenwich Times.

None of the protesters were arrested, but "more than 100 signs" were left on the front gate of Frey's mansion. Lt. Heavey told the Greenwich Times that Frey was not home, and he had not returned a call from the Associated Press at deadline.

"Frey was targeted, Marks explained, because he has filed a class-action lawsuit against Bank of America on behalf of two of the bank's major investors alleging that the bank violated contractual law when it moved to modify hundreds of mortgages to make them more affordable," continued reporter Amanda Norris.

"Marks said that despite the risk and controversy involved in confronting millionaire money brokers on their own turf, NACA's tactics were the only effective means of exerting pressure on an otherwise uncaring and oblivious elite."

The protests were just one portion of a three-day homeowners workshop put on by the NACA.

The organization is setting up a "financial predators registry" of executives who did not cooperate with the group. On its Web site, CEOs of institutions such as National City, HSBC, Nation Star, HomeQ, Litton and others are prominently displayed, along with links to photos and valuations of their homes and their direct phone numbers.

"'No one has ever gone in such huge numbers to these guys' homes,' Marks continued. 'If they don't do the right thing, we'll be back. We are the junkyard dogs. Once we grab on, we will not let go.'"

The group's Web site explains: "Some lenders, such as Bank of America and Citigroup, have sought out NACA as a valuable partner in reaching underserved communities and have achieved great success. When lenders have exploited low- and moderate-income and minority communities, as in the case of Fleet or The Associates, NACA proved to be a tireless foe.

"... Corporations prefer to hide behind a veil of anonymity, but in reality they are run by people who make decisions and are responsible for the consequences. NACA shines a spotlight on the CEOs, executives and directors who perpetrate financial injustice. NACA ensures that their neighbors, relatives and employees are made aware of their actions. In addition, NACA holds the decision-makers accountable to the public everywhere they go. NACA’s hundreds of thousands of members across the country may appear at and disrupt their speeches, events, and meetings. Backed by extensive research, NACA and its members deliver a compelling wake-up call to decision makers everywhere, letting them know that they will be held personally accountable for their actions."

"Morgan Stanley said its mortgage servicing business 'actively collaborates' with NACA to structure solutions for qualified borrowers so they can remain in their homes," reported the AP. "A proposed agreement by NACA was delivered Saturday afternoon.

"'We are reviewing it now and expect to come to mutually agreeable terms,' Morgan Stanley said in a statement."

newjesustimes's picture

Open thread & obtained my Email address from Ron Paul

These dogs don't hunt

OK this is pretty inconsequential compared to the stuff you all have been discussing, but I wanted to mention this and I'm not sure where else to say it; I just got an Email from a website called, sent to an Email address that I only gave to Ron Paul...

An excerpt from the Email solicitation:
When you read what they say in their own words your blood will boil. Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Henry Waxman, John Kerry and others …all exposed!

Yuck. Anyway, please consider this an open thread - what's on your mind?

The Protocols of the Elders of Islam

This post makes some very important points. It is a translation of an article by Domenico Losurno, published on Losurno is an Italian philosopher and historian, and a Communist, but I hope you will read his points with an open mind. It was first translated into French by Marie-Ange Patrizio.

How black legends are built
The "Protocols of the Elders of Islam"

[Introduction by Marie]

In order to justify the apartheid inside Palestine, and the Israeli war on the Palestinian people, the atlantist media resort to the usual technique of black legends. Lies upon lies end up creating the idea there would be a world-wide islamic plot with a global plan one could call "The Protocols of the Elders of Islam," in reference to the antisemitic forgery propagated by the tsarist police. The italian philosopher and historian, Domenico Losurno, analyses here this propaganda device with regard to some historical references.

[The actual text]

Leafing through the reactions to my last book Stalin, Storia e critica di una leggenda nera (Stalin, Story and critic of a black legend), I read beside largely positive comments some signs of incredulity: is it possible the infamies attributed to Stalin and accredited by a general consensus are most often the result of distortions and sometimes of complete historical falsifications ?

I would like to suggest a reflection to these very readers, in light of the events of the last days. We have under our eyes the tragedy of the Palestinian people in Gaza, first starved by the blockade and now invaded and massacred by the terrible Israeli war machine. Let us see how the great organs of "information" react. In the Corriere della Sera of december 29th, Piero Ostellino in his editorial condemns: "Clause 7 of the Hamas Charter not only defends the destruction of Israel, but the extermination of all Jews, as is affirmed by the Iranian president Ahmadinejad." We will note that, while he makes an extremely grave claim, the journalist does not offer any quote: he wants to be taken at his word.

A few days later (January 3rd) on the same newspaper, Ernesto Galli della Loggia goes at it again. In truth, he doesn't talk about Ahmadinejad anymore. Maybe he has realized his colleague's mistake. After Israel, Iran is the one country in the Middle-East hosting the most Jews (20.000), and they don't seem to suffer from persecutions. In any case, those Palestinians living under occupation could only envy the Jews standard of living in Iran, who not only have not been exterminated, but also don't have to face the threat of "transfer," which threat the most extreme Zionists project on Arab Israelis.

Of course, Galli della Loggia is way above all that. He contends himself with not saying a word on Ahmadinejad. To compensate, he goes further on another essential point: Hamas does not stop at demanding "the extermination of the Jews" of Israel, as Ostellino claims. One should not stop half-way in denouncing the barbarians' misdeeds: "Hamas wants the elimination of all the Jews on the face of the earth" (Corriere della Sera, Jan 3). In that case too, one does not begin to see a shred of evidence: scientific rigor is the last thing on Galli della Loggia's mind, whose courage in the face of ridicule must be nevertheless acknowledged: according to his analyses, the Palestinian 'terrorists' intend to liquidate the war machine not only of Israel, but even of the USA, so as to get done with the infamies, whose world-wide scale the editorialist from the Corriera della Sera denounces. Hence, those who are capable to inflict a decisive defeat to the world superpower, in addition to Israel, can very well aspire to world domination. To sum up: it is as if Galli was finally bringing to our knowledge The Protocols of the Elders of Islam !

And just like, in their time, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, The Protocols of the Elders of Islam have now acquired the statute of established truth, and necessitate no demonstration. In La Stampa on January 5th, Enzo Bettiza immediately gives the meaning of the massive bombings of Israel, unleashed from the sky, the seas and the earth, using weapons forbidden by international conventions, against a population virtually defenseless: "This is a drastic and very violent police operation, from a country threatened with extermination by a sect that swore to uproot it from the face of the earth."

This thesis, repeated again and again, is inscribed in the framework of a very precise tradition. Between the 18th and the 19th century, the moderate abbey Grégoire was fighting for the abolishment of slavery in the french colonies: he was to be accused of being the leader of "blancophages", those black barbarians eager for the taste of White men's flesh. A few decades later, something similar happened in the United States of America: the abolitionists, often of Christian faith and non-violent trend, demanded "the complete destruction of the institution of slavery"; they were promptly accused of wanting to exterminate the white race. Again in the middle of the 19th century, in South Africa, the champions of apartheid were refusing political rights for blacks, arguing that a possible black government would have meant the systematic extermination of whites and white settlers in their totality.

The currently fashionable black legend is particularly ridiculous: Hamas, several times, has signaled the possibility of a compromise, if Israel accepted to get back to the 1967 boundaries. As everyone knows, or should know, what makes the two state solution more and more problematic, and maybe now impossible, is the continued expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. And yet, the substitution of the current Israel as a "State of the Jews" with a bi-national State which would be both the State of the Jews and the Palestinians, guaranteeing equality for all, would in no way comprehend the extermination of the Jews, exactly like the destruction of the white racial State, in the South of the United-Stated first, then in South Africa, certainly did not mean the destruction of Whites. In reality, those who wave, one way or another, the Protocols of the Elders of Islam want to turn the victims into executioners, and the executioners into victims.

Today's fashionable mythologies on Stalin and the communist movement in its entirety are no less grotesque and instrumentalised. Take the thesis of the "hunger holocaust", or the thesis of the "terrorist starvation", that the Soviet Union would have imposed on the Ukrainian people in the thirties. In support of this thesis, there exists, and we are offered, not a pound of evidence.

But this is not the most important point either. The black legend offered in a planified manner, especially in Reagan's time and at the time of the Cold War, serves to hide under the rug the fact that the "terrorist starvation," blamed on Stalin, has been implemented for centuries by the liberal West and, in particular, against the colonised people, or what it would have wanted to reduce to colonial or semi-colonial conditions.

This is what I have tried to demonstrate in my book. Immediately after the great black Revolution, at the end of the 18th century in Saint-Domingue/Haiti, that broke both the chains of colonial domination and those of the institution of slavery, the United States were answering through the declarations of Thomas Jefferson, saying he wanted to reduce to starvation the country that had the impudence to abolish slavery. The same behavior has been adopted in the 19th century. Immediately after October 1917, Herbert Hoover, at the time a senior official in the Wilson administration, later to be president of the United States, was explicitly waving the threat of "absolute hunger" and of "death by starvation" not only against Soviet Russia but against all the peoples ready to get contaminated by the bolchevik revolution. At the start of the 60s, an assistant to the Kennedy administration, Walt W. Rostow, was boasting about the fact the United Stated had managed to put back "decades" the economic development of the Popular Republic of China !

This is a policy that continues to this day: everyone knows imperialism tries to economically strangle Cuba, and if possible to reduce it to Gaza's condition, where oppressors can exercise their power of life and death, long before their terrorist bombings with, already, the control of natural resources.

We have thus returned to Palestine. Before they had to bear the horror he bears today, the people of Gaza had been stricken by a protracted policy that was trying to starve him, to deprive him of light, medicine, to reduce him to exhaustion and despair. In addition to the fact the Tel-Aviv government kept his right to proceed as usual, despite the "truce," with extrajudicial executions of its enemies. That is to say, even before being invaded by an army resembling a giant and experimented firing squad, Gaza was the object of a policy of war and agression. At the same time, a multi-media fire power was unleashed, especially in the West, to crush any critical resistance to the false and lying thesis according to which Israel would these days be committed to a self-defense operation: may no one question the authenticity of the Protocols of the Elders of Islam !

This is how you build the black legends: today's legend seals the Palestinian people's tragedy (the martyred people of our epoch), just like those other legends, by depicting Stalin as a monster and reducing to a criminal history the process that started with the October Revolution, mean to deprive the oppressed peoples of all hope of future emancipation.

McJ's picture

UNRWA Press Conference on Gaza humanitarian situation

UNRWA Press Conference on Gaza humanitarian situation

"The situation in Gaza is one of growing misery," the top United Nations official in the war‑torn territory said today, telling reporters it was "shameful" that Israeli politics had stranded tons of relief supplies at blocked crossing points and, in the latest blow to the beleaguered recovery effort, armed Hamas police had broken into a warehouse and seized thousands of blankets and food packs meant for needy Gaza residents.

...the Agency expected to run out of the plastic bags it needed to pre‑package relief supplies by Sunday... We are having no success at the operation level [and that] is feeding the despair and frustration of the people," he said.

He frankly could not understand why the flow of basic necessities, building materials and school supplies was being obstructed. "It’s beyond comprehension. I need these questions answered simply," he continued, saying he was tired of hearing the same "circular argument rationalized by political analysis" about who might get access to this or that. The politicians were not paying the price. Students and ordinary people were being hurt, because they were being denied access to educational materials and basic necessities. Everyone knew that all this would lead to more desperation, more anger and more violence."

I'm sure this works out well for Israel. More anger and violence by Palestinians = more reasons to attack them again.

McJ's picture

An Update on Canada's First Convicted Terrorist

Canada's first convicted terrorist was back in court this week. WP blogged about his trial here. He was convicted in September 2008 of "participating in terrorist activities' but his conviction has not technically been registered, pending the outcome of the defence's abuse-of-process motion to have the charges stayed.

His trial and conviction is just pathetic and shameful. If it wasn't for the "US-compliant Anti-Terrorism Act" the worst thing they could have convicted this underage defendant with is shoplifting that was not even related to the 'plot'. As it is, he could get ten years in prison. His most damning entry on the audio tapes presented at the trial was to ask "if Muslims were allowed to use Nivea cream."

The defendant's lawyer is planning to argue that the police agent who recruited the teen for the 'terrorist training camp' (by telling him it was a religious retreat) had committed more illegal acts than his client.

From the Galloping Beaver:

Toronto18/ Paintball11/ Tim Hortons10 terrorist fatcamp update

G&M : RCMP agent concedes key role in set-up, running of terrorist training camp

Mubin Shaikh on Friday:

"I thought that if the RCMP didn't tell me I couldn't do it, I inferred that I could do it," Mr. Shaikh testified.

Lawyers for Canada's first underage convicted terrorist argued in court Friday that without Mubin Shaikh, assigned by CSIS and paid by the RCMP, there would have been no terrorist conspiracy at all.

In fact, minus Canada's new US-compliant Anti-Terrorism Act, the most he could have been charged with is shoplifting - and shoplifting items that were not even used in the RCMP/CSIS plot to, uh, blow up the Houses of Parliament, along with CBC and CSIS, although they weren't sure where the parliament buildings were, and behead Prime Minister Paul Martin, having failed to note he was no longer the PM.

Let's review, courtesy of Thomas Walkom, our young convicted terrorist's complicity in the plot :

He did not make bombs or buy guns. Nor did he advocate doing so.
He did not threaten to kill anyone, did not call for holy war, did not pledge allegiance to Osama bin Laden.
He did not even badmouth Canada's military efforts in Afghanistan.

His most damning entry on the audio tapes helpfully provided by Mr Mehta, who testified along with the other crown witness at the kid's trial in September that he believed him to be innocent, was to ask "if Muslims can use Nivea cream".

So what was he convicted of ?
Walkom explains Superior Court Justice John Sproat's guilty verdict last September :

"Under the anti-terror legislation, the government doesn't need to prove an accused terrorist took part in or even knew about a specific plot.
All it has to prove is that he knowingly participated in the activities of a terrorist group and contributed either directly or indirectly to anything "enhancing" its abilities."

Oh well, the kid definitely qualifies then.
As RCMP/CSIS fatcamp troop leader and prosecution star witness Mubin Shaikh testified at the kid's trial, he convinced the reluctant teen to attend the training camp by telling him it was a religious retreat:

"I don't believe that (he) is a terrorist," he said outside the courtroom.
"I don't believe he should've been put through what he was put through, but that's our system."
Shaikh said he did not believe that the defendant was aware of the group's violent plans."

And yet under "our system", if the kid's lawyers are not successful in overturning his conviction by a sole judge, the kid could get ten years for, as Hysperia remarked in comments at the time, "something that someone else might have been doing without his knowledge.".

Syndicate content