“Stage Two” of the BP Gulf of Mexico Environmental Disaster

Since BP’s catastrophic Macondo Blowout in the Gulf of Mexico last year, the Obama Administration has granted nearly 300 new drilling permits [1] and shirked plans to plug 3,600 of more than 28,000 abandoned wells, which pose significant threats to the severely damaged sea.

Among those granted new permits for drilling in the Gulf, on Friday Obama granted BP permission to explore for oil in the Gulf, allowing it to bid on new leases that will be sold at auction in December.

Reports Dow Jones:

“The upcoming lease sale, scheduled for Dec. 14 in New Orleans, involves leases in the western Gulf of Mexico. The leases cover about 21 million acres, in water depths of up to 11,000 feet. It will be the first lease auction since the Deepwater Horizon spill.” [2]

Massachusetts Rep. Ed Markey objected to BP’s participation in the upcoming lease sale, pointing out that:

“Comprehensive safety legislation hasn’t passed Congress, and BP hasn’t paid the fines they owe for their spill, yet BP is being given back the keys to drill in the Gulf.”

Environmental watchdog, Oceana, added its objection to the new permits, saying that none of the new rules implemented since April 2010 would have prevented the BP disaster.

“Our analysis shows that while the new rules may increase safety to some degree, they likely would not have prevented the last major oil spill, and similarly do not adequately protect against future ones.” [3]

Detailing the failure of the Dept. of Interior’s safety management systems, Oceana summarizes:

• Regulation exemptions (“departures”) are often granted, including one that arguably led to the BP blowout;
• Economic incentives make violating rules lucrative because penalties are ridiculously small;
• Blowout preventers continue to have critical deficiencies; and
• Oversight and inspection levels are paltry relative to the scale of drilling operation.

Nor have any drilling permits been denied [4] since the BP catastrophe on April 20, 2010, which still spews oil today [5].

28,079 Abandoned Wells in Gulf of Mexico

In an explosive report at Sky Truth, John Amos reveals from government data that “there are currently 24,486 known permanently abandoned wells in the Gulf of Mexico,and 3,593 ‘temporarily’ abandoned wells, as of October 2011.” [6]

TA wells are those temporarily sealed so that future drilling can be re-started. Both TA wells and “permanently abandoned” (PA) wells endure no inspections.

Over a year ago, the Dept. of Interior promised to plug the “temporarily abandoned” (TA) wells, and dismantle another 650 production platforms no longer in use. [7] At an estimated decommissioning cost of $1-3 billion [8], none of this work has been started, though Feds have approved 912 permanent abandonment plans and 214 temporary abandonment plans submitted since its September 2010 rule. [9]

Over 600 of those abandoned wells belong to BP, reported the Associated Press last year, adding that some of the permanently abandoned wells date back to the 1940s [10]. Amos advises that some of the “temporarily abandoned” wells date back to the 1950s.

“Experts say abandoned wells can repressurize, much like a dormant volcano can awaken. And years of exposure to sea water and underground pressure can cause cementing and piping to corrode and weaken,” reports AP.

Leaking abandoned wells pose a significant environmental and economic threat. A three-month EcoHearth investigation revealed that a minimum of 2.5 million abandoned wells in the US and 20-30 million worldwide receive no follow up inspections to ensure they are not leaking. Worse:

“There is no known technology for securely sealing these tens of millions of abandoned wells. Many—likely hundreds of thousands—are already hemorrhaging oil, brine and greenhouse gases into the environment. Habitats are being fundamentally altered. Aquifers are being destroyed. Some of these abandoned wells are explosive, capable of building-leveling, toxin-spreading detonations. And thanks to primitive capping technologies, virtually all are leaking now—or will be.” [11]

Sealed with cement, adds EcoHearth, “Each abandoned well is an environmental disaster waiting to happen. The triggers include accidents, earthquakes, natural erosion, re-pressurization (either spontaneous or precipitated by fracking) and, simply, time.”

As far back as 1994, the Government Accountability Office warned that there was no effective strategy in place to inspect abandoned wells, nor were bonds sufficient to cover the cost of abandonment. Lease abandonment costs estimated at “$4.4 billion in current dollars … were covered by only $68 million in bonds.” [12]

The GAO concluded that “leaks can occur… causing serious damage to the environment and marine life,” adding that “MMS has not encouraged the development of nonexplosive structure removal technologies that would eliminate or minimize environmental damage.”

Not only cement, but seals, valves and gaskets can deteriorate over time. A 2000 report by C-FER Technologies to the Dept. of Interior identified several different points where well leaks can occur, as this image (p. 26) reveals. To date, no regulations prescribe a maximum time wells may remain inactive before being permanently abandoned. [13]

“The most common failure mechanisms (corrosion, deterioration, and malfunction) cause mainly small leaks [up to 49 barrels, or 2,058 gallons]. Corrosion is historically known to cause 85% to 90% of small leaks.”

Depending on various factors, C-FER concludes that “Shut-In” wells reach an environmental risk threshhold in six months, TA wells in about 10-12 years, and PA wells in 25 years. Some of these abandoned wells are 63 years old.

The AP noted that none of the 1994 GAO recommendations have been implemented. Abandoned wells remain uninspected and pose a threat which the government continues to ignore.

Agency Reorganization

The Minerals Management Service (MMS) was renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) last May after MMS drew heavy fire for malfeasance, including allowing exemptions to safety rules it granted to BP. An Office of Inspector General investigation revealed that MMS employees accepted gifts from the oil and gas industry, including sex, drugs and trips, and falsified inspection reports. [14]

Not only was nothing was done with the 1994 GAO recommendations to protect the environment from abandoned wells, its 2003 reorganization recommendations [15] were likewise ignored. In a June 2011 report on agency reorganization in the aftermath of the Gulf oil spill, the GAO reports that “as of December 2010,” the DOI “had not implemented many recommendations we made to address numerous weaknesses and challenges.” [16]

Reorganization proceeded. Effective October 1, 2011, the Dept. of the Interior split BOEMRE into three new federal agencies: the Office of Natural Resources Revenue to collect mineral leasing fees, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) “to carry out the offshore energy management and safety and environmental oversight missions.” The DOI admits:

“The Deepwater Horizon blowout and resulting oil spill shed light on weaknesses in the federal offshore energy regulatory system, including the overly broad mandate and inherently conflicted missions of MMS which was charged with resource management, safety and environmental protection, and revenue collection.” [17]

BOEM essentially manages the development of offshore drilling, while BSEE oversees environmental protection, with some eco-protection overlap between the two agencies. [18]

Early this month, BSEE Director Michael R. Bromwich spoke at the Global Offshore Safety Summit Conference in Stavanger, Norway, sponsored by the International Regulators Forum. He announced a new position, Chief Environmental Officer of the BOEM:

“This person will be empowered, at the national level, to make decisions and final recommendations when leasing and environmental program heads cannot reach agreement. This individual will also be a major participant in setting the scientific agenda for the United States’ oceans.” [19]

Bromwich failed to mention anything about the abandoned wells under his purview. Out of sight, out of mind.

Cost of the Macondo Blowout

On Monday, the GAO published its final report of a three-part series on the Gulf oil disaster. [20] Focused on federal financial exposure to oil spill claims, the accountants nevertheless point out that, as of May 2011, BP paid $700 million toward those spill claims out of its $20 billion Trust established to cover that deadly accident. BP and Oxford Economics estimate the total cost for eco-cleanup and compensatory economic damages will run to the “tens of billions of dollars.” [21]

On the taxpayer side, the GAO estimates the federal government’s costs will exceed the billion dollar incident cap set by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (as amended). As of May 2011, agency costs reached past $626 million.

The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund’s income is generated from an oil barrel tax that is set to expire in 2017, notes GAO.

With Monday’s District Court decision in Louisiana, BP also faces punitive damages on “thousands of thousands of thousands of claims.” U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier denied BP’s appeal that might have killed several hundred thousand claims, among them that clean up workers have still not been fully paid by BP. [22]

Meanwhile, destroying the planet for profit continues unabated. It’s time to Occupy the Gulf of Mexico: No more oil drilling in our food source.

Notes:

[1] U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, “Status of Gulf of Mexico Well Permits,” n.d. http://www.bsee.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Permits/Status-of-Gulf-of-Mexico-Well-Permits.aspx

[2] Tennille Tracy, “US Govt Approves First BP Deepwater Exploration Plan in US Gulf Under New Rules,” Dow Jones News Wire, 24 Oct. 2011. Reproduced athttp://www.firstenercastfinancial.com/news/story/45441-us-govt-approves-first-bp-deepwater-exploration-plan-us-gulf-under-new-rules

[3] Michael Craig and Jacqueline Savitz, “False Sense of Safety: Safety Measures Will Not Make Offshore Drilling Safe,” Oceana, 20 Oct. 2011http://na.oceana.org/sites/default/files/reports/OffshoreSafetyReport_Oceana_10-18-11.pdf

Also see Oceana’s online appendix showing an analysis of each new safety measure’s effect on safety.http://na.oceana.org/sites/default/files/OnlineAppendix_SafetyReport_Oceana_10-19-11.pdf

[4] U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, “Application for Permit to Drill (APD) Approval Process and Definitions,” n.d.http://www.bsee.gov/uploadedFiles/APD_Facts_and_Definitions_BSEE.pdf

[5] See, e.g.:

David Edwards, “New evidence of a massive oil slick near Deepwater Horizon site,” Raw Story, 1 Sept. 2011. http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/09/new-evidence-of-a-massive-oil-slick-near-deepwater-horizon-site/

Frank Whalen, “Oil Still Gushing from Bp Well in Gulf,” American Free Press, 2 Sept. 2011. http://americanfreepress.net/?p=341

Dahr Jamail, “Environmental Disaster in the Gulf of Mexico: The Escalation of BP’s Liability,” Global Research, 5 Oct. 2011.http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26947

Luis R. Miranda, “Gulf of Mexico Sea Floor Unstable, Fractured, Spilling Hydrocarbons,” The Real Agenda, 10 Oct. 2011. http://real-agenda.com/2011/10/10/gulf-of-mexico-sea-floor-unstable-fractured-spilling-hydrocarbons/

[6] John Amos, “Over 28,000 Abandoned Wells in the Gulf of Mexico,” 18 Oct. 2011.http://blog.skytruth.org/2011/10/abandoned-wells-in-gulf-of-mexico.html

[7] U.S. Dept. of the Interior, “Interior Department Issues ‘Idle Iron’ Guidance,” 15 Sept. 2010. http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Interior-Department-Issues-Idle-Iron-Guidance.cfm

[8] Siobhan Hughes, “Plugs Ordered on Idle Wells: Move to Permanently Seal Sites in Gulf Could Cost Billions but Create New Work,” Wall Street Journal, 16 Sept. 2010.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703743504575493782591743858.html

[9] U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, “Idle Iron Update,” n.d. (pp. 9-16) https://www.noia.org/website/download.asp?id=47290

[10] Jeff Donn and Mitch Weiss, “Gulf of Mexico hides 27,000 abandoned wells,” Associated Press, 7 July 2010.http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20100707-Gulf-of-Mexico-hides-27-000-1068.ece

[11] Steven Kotler, “Planet Sludge: Millions of Abandoned, Leaking Oil Wells and Natural-Gas Wells Destined to Foul Our Future,” EcoHearth, 17 Aug. 2011.http://ecohearth.com/eco-zine/green-issues/1609-abandoned-leaking-oil-wells-natural-gas-well-leaks-disaster.html

[12] U.S. Government Accounting Office, “Offshore Oil and Gas Resources: Interior Can Improve its Management of Lease Abandonment,” (GAO/RCED-94-82) May 1994.http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat3/151878.pdf

[13] J.R. Nichols and S.N. Kariyawasam, “Risk Assessment of Temporarily Abandoned or Shut-in Wells,” C-FER Technologies, Oct. 2000.http://www.boemre.gov/tarprojects/329/329AA.pdf

[14] U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Office of Inspector General, “Investigative Report – Island Operating Company, et al.,” 31 March 2010.http://www.govexec.com/pdfs/052510ts1.pdf

[15] U.S. Government Accounting Office, “Results-Oriented Cultures: Implementation Steps to Assist Mergers and Organizational Transformations,” (GAO-03-669) 2 July 2003. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-669

[16] U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Oil and Gas: Interior’s Restructuring Challenges in the Aftermath of the Gulf Oil Spill,” (GAO-11-734T) 2 June 2011.http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11734t.pdf

[17] U.S. Dept. of the Interior, “Interior Department Completes Reorganization of the Former MMS,” 30 Sept. 2011. http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Interior-Department-Completes-Reorganization-of-the-Former-MMS.cfm#

[18] U.S. Dept. of the Interior, untitled document distinguishing the areas of responsibility between the BOEM and the BSEE. n.d.http://www.bsee.gov/uploadedFiles/A%20to%20Z%20Guide%20web%20version%281%29.pdf

[19] U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, “BSEE Director Delivers Remarks at the International Regulators Forum 2011 Global Offshore Safety Summit Conference,” 4 Oct. 2011. http://www.boemre.gov/ooc/press/2011/press1004.htm

[20] U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Actions Needed to Reduce Evolving but Uncertain Federal Financial Risks,” (GAO-12-86), 24 Oct. 2011. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1286.pdf

[21] U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Preliminary Assessment of Federal Financial Risks and Cost Reimbursement and Notification Policies and Procedures,” 9 Nov. 2010. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1190r.pdf

[22] Sabrina Canfield, “Judge Denies BP Appeal That Might Have Killed Thousands of Claims,” Courthouse News Service, 24 Oct. 2011.http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/24/40864.htm

Caribbean Sea Pirates In Crisis

(A lecture on Economics delivered at Rhodes Forum on October 9, 2011)

The crisis peaking in Britain is of a Caribbean-sea-pirate type: long time no trophies, while lifestyle has to be maintained. Neoliberal policies have undermined the toughest folk on earth, hard-working, prudent, obedient, stiff-upper-lipped red-faced Brits, the people who managed India, burned down the White House and withstood Hitler. Their backbone – Yorkshire miners and Sheffield steel workers – was broken by their Golders Green grocer-at-large, a.k.a. the Iron Lady. She folded down the industries, and turned the Isles into a Tortuga-like pirate paradise, a place for financiers to relax, unwind and plan their raids.

England has become the most godless society in the world. Buses with the logo “There is no God” cruise London. In the Globe theatre, Mysteries are staged, purported to be revivals of Tony Harrison’s 1977 production based on medieval British plays but, in direct opposition to the previous production and to the old original, it is overtly anti-Christian. Instead of the Jewish high priest and his coterie, the evil guys are … Christian priests in full dress. The Holy Virgin is presented as a young coloured tart in a short dress. Not a single voice of protest has sounded in England. But you can be sure that if director Deborah Bruce had put rabbis back into the place of the priests, we’d have never heard the end of it.

England is home to al Fayed and Abramovich and to millions of immigrants imported to service them. The English provided financial services, ran security companies, charged a lot for education. The country went upmarket, and lost its productive base, just as the tulip-adoring Dutch did in 17^th century. Now, if they do not rob, they have nothing to live off of. They need to fleece foreigners just to make ends meet.

Now they are being hit by a Crisis of Confidence. Not only do ordinary people feel they have been cheated once too many, but the powerful and rich outsiders share the feeling, which is particularly strong in Russia and other post-Soviet states, in the oil-producing states, in countries with national industries. This feeling has been translated into action:

• Hugo Chavez has demanded his physical gold back;
• Vladimir Putin has declared his candidacy for the post of President;
• Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, the main proponent of Russian Sovereign Wealth Fund, has been fired.
• Russia has decided to dramatically increase military spending; this is fallout from the Libya War.

The fate of Qaddafi hovers like worrying Hamlet’s father’s spirit over many presidential and managerial desks. The Libyan leader amassed quite a fortune, some for himself and his family, some for his nation, placed it in various banks, funds and shelters, and it turns out that instead of greenbacks he could have amassed so many beautiful reddish maple leaves with greater satisfaction and safety. With a wave of their hands, the US and its allies froze the assets and later stole them. Some assets were given to arbitrarily chosen Libyans, a.k.a. “Benghazi rebels”, some were used to pay for the dog food that was airlifted to Tripoli to feed people made destitute by the NATO strikes.

This was the biggest robbery of a sovereign state ever, and the biggest robbery of private fortunes as well. And it taught many nasty and greedy people a lesson in Gospel truth: Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where thieves break in and steal. These people thought that they could find a safe refuge from despotic rulers, rebellious masses and ordinary robbers by placing their wealth in the safekeeping of the Swiss gnomes or some other civilized environment. Now they’ve learned that electronic money in Cayman Islands is no safer than the folded 20-dollar bills under your mattress. What a shock!

Why does this cause a crisis? The corrupt officials and wealthy tycoons of the outer world, that is, outside of the US and Western Europe, are the powerful secret weapon of capitalism. When capitalism was on the verge of collapse, this doomsday weapon was used, the tables were turned upon socialism, and the USSR collapsed. Its wealth was stolen by these men and women, and delivered to the Western banks, to power another twenty years of luxury for bankers.

Since then, the officials and tycoons have functioned like bees, busily collecting the sweet sweat of the ordinary citizens’ brow. They siphon their takings into overseas banks – beehives, thinking it is safe. The West has encouraged them to think this way. They have spread rumours that Putin and Lukashenko have put away billions into Western banks for a rainy day. Their media have told stories of oligarchs who were able to escape to their riches when they fell from grace. Many silly and corrupt officials and greedy businessmen believed it and kept collecting honey.

This honey collection is the best-guarded secret of capitalist superiority. It is based of human weakness. Drug mafias do the same: they produce and sell drugs and extract money to keep in the banks. This works instead of savings, and even better. When economists bewail low rate of savings in the US, they forget to count savings executed via drug cartels. This was one of the reasons of the US ten years stay in Afghanistan: the drugs fuel banking system.

Privatisation is another great tool: the privatised properties feed so many derivatives produced by the bankers. The privatisers need the banks, and to the banks they take their profits. In the post-soviet space, the officials charge their commission in the form of bribes, and these moneys also go to the banks.

Thus, the corrupt officials, businessmen and drug barons perform an important function for the world financial system: the Western bankers did not have to go to remote Russian town or Indian village to squeeze a few roubles or rupees from a worker. The bees bring honey to the beehive.

With the robbery of Libya, even the silliest and most corrupt official in Russia or Kazakhstan has discovered what bees painfully learn, too. When beehives are full of honey, the beekeeper smokes the bees away and collects the product. The bees may have planned to use it for their retirement or for home improvement, but they sadly discover that humans have other plans for their honey. The first wave of Crisis 2008 was the beginning of a smoking-out operation; the Libya campaign is the second stage showing what can be done to crisis-resistant bees.

Given the total information superiority of the Masters of Discourse, such robbery can be justified at any time. Russian wealthy men suspected they couldn’t just salt away a billon and run to Bahamas. I have heard about the men who tried: when they came to collect, they were told that their visa had expired, that they would have to produce proof it was honestly earned, or that it was gone for some good reason.

Two countries catered to the runaways: Britain and Israel. The Jewish billionaires who run to Israel were duly fleeced by the Jewish state. Nevzlin had to contribute half of his wealth to some doubtful Israeli enterprises; Gaydamak was ruined almost to the point of bankruptcy. Gusinsky was run from jail to jail and was ripped off by established Israeli families. Britain provides refuge for the runaway oligarchs and shields them from criminal investigation. It fleeces them well: the fabulous billions of Boris Berezovsky were shrunk down to a few million. But the rest still hoped that they would be allowed to keep some of their illegal gains in the comfort of the West if they abide by Washington’s orders. Now this hope, too, is fading away.

The bees do not deliver honey anymore. There are more ways of getting honey. The Western banks and states promoted their loans and they allowed the recipient politicians to steal the loans, as Perkins has. But now this method is less popular, as the odds of successfully stashing stolen goods have gone down considerably. Much hated in the West Vladimir Putin, the past and future president of Russia, paid off all Russia’s debts at first occasion, while another hated “dictator”, Lukashenko, also refused IMF loans.

Then, there are the sovereign wealth funds. The oil-producing countries usually keep a big part of their earnings in the US and the UK. These funds are held hostage to the good behaviour of the producer. Iran lost its funds after embracing an Islamic regime. Some Russians consider it a form of tribute their country pays to their vanquisher in the Cold War. They even connect Breivik’s attack to Norway’s plan to repatriate its SWF, a plan that is anathema to the US. There is no practical reason for Russia to keep its money invested in US funds for very low interest while Russian industries pay high interest on such borrowed money. And as we know, these funds may be frozen or seized any moment. They can also disappear as a result of imprudent investment as once happened to Swedish and Norwegian pension funds.

For 11 years, Alexei Kudrin was finance minister of the Russian Federation. He was the most vocal and influential proponent of the US-held funds among Russian officials, and he was duly applauded as a prudent and excellent financier. A few days ago he expressed his dissatisfaction with President Medvedev’s plan to increase military spending dramatically. He was sacked right away. This was quite a shock for the man who considered himself a cut above; it was a shock for his supporters.

The Wikileaks cables reveal that Kudrin was considered by the US Embassy the “most transparent and realistic senior GOR interlocutor on economic issues. He has also been the most forward-leaning in seeking economic cooperation with the U.S. and other western countries”. Among Russian officials, some find him “irritating” and accuse him of treason, say the cables. Kudrin supported a soft line in foreign policy and opposed the line represented by Putin’s Munich speech. At the peak of the 2008 crisis, he gave money to the banks and completely stopped government spending for six months. Incidentally, Kudrin was never charged with huge fraud and theft of so-called Kuwait and Algeria Debts Affairs, though his deputy has spent a few months in jail. This neo-liberal, monetarist, pro-western figure at the key position was lost to the West within a few weeks of the fall of Tripoli. And that bodes ill for the western beneficiaries of the Russian SWF, whether it is repatriated or allowed to wither.

This is the reason for the crisis. Even the bad guys have lost confidence in the system. The collapse of the USSR postponed the crisis that was long overdue. So much wealth was taken out of the dismembered chunk of the USSR! The successor-countries were robbed, and their robbed goods used to subsidise a better life of the West. The bankers and financiers got used to living well while controlling the streams of cash and assets. But they forgot an important rule of beekeepers: leave some honey in the hive, otherwise the bees will not bring more product. They ripped off too much, from too many people, and now the people have lost whatever confidence they had in the system.

Why Continue Two Useless Wars?

Our young kids have fought two wars for ten years in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Total cost exceeds $1 trillion.  Result:  horrific deaths on both sides, destruction and no resolution.  Does anyone know or understand why we sent 6,200 kids to their deaths and another 40,000 brought back home without legs and arms or their minds? We can expect a minimum of 100,000 post-war suicides from combat troops with scrambled brains.  That doesn’t count the ones that stumble forward with alcohol, drugs and poverty.

Did we stop terror?

Suicide bombers and killers blow up churches, government buildings and outposts as regularly in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2011 as they did in 2001.  No leader in the United States understands that Muslims will defend their lands against Americans until the last one dies.  We would have to kill every single last one of them to win.

Did we bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan?

Iraq and Afghanistan cannot agree on a constitution or path toward peaceful co-existence any more than a bunch of 5^th graders arguing over a jar of cookies.  Karzi is a puppet of the United States.  We send endless billions of dollars to prop up him and Malaki.  We might as well flush that money down a New York City sewer.

Did we find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

We found not one single weapon worthy of such fear to go in and blow up an entire country on George W. Bush’s whim.  He caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and 2.5 million refugees.  What he did to Iraq and its citizens defies human understanding.   Lyndon Baines Johnson did the same thing to Vietnam. He killed 58,267 kids while he blew up another 2.1 million Vietnamese.  In his book Fog of War 35 years later, the architect of Vietnam Robert McNamara said, “I made a mistake.”

George W. Bush is too stupid or inept to write a book on how brainless his decision to destroy Iraq and Afghanistan turned out to be.  A full 17 of the purported hijackers came from Saudi Arabia.   Bush should have attacked Saudi Arabia and destroyed that country.

However, overwhelming evidence shows that 9/11 was an inside job.  If it was, George Bush should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and America.

Iraq provides yet another example of stupid men in power doing stupid things for stupid reasons with incredibly painful outcomes for millions of innocent people, children and countries.

Are we any safer from terror in the United States after 10 years of war?

More terrorists reside in the United States from our irrational immigration policies than ever before.  We’ve got 40,000 MS-13 gang members in 35 states selling drugs to millions of our kids.  (Source: Newsweek)  We have 10 million illegal alien Mexicans stealing jobs from Americans and breaking our laws while we pay for their medical, educational, babies, prison and food needs.  We import 2,000 Muslims per month from places like Palestine, Iraq and Somalia—as refugees—any of them potential terrorists.

Note that Iranian-American immigrant Manssor Arbabsiar attempted to kill a Saudi ambassador this week. Notice American born MuslimAnwar al-Awlaqi inspired the shoe bomber, underwear bomber, New York Times Square bomber and Major Hasan to kill Americans.

Does anyone think that victory can be won against a religious jihadist Muslim group like al-Qaeda?

We would have to kill most of the Muslim world to kill al-Qaeda.  The Koran dictates that all good Muslims “convert or kill non-believers and Jews.”  That’s the prime directive of Islam.  We can pretend it is a peaceful religion, but every terror event in the world since 1972 has been planned and carried out by Muslims.

If we fight for another 10 years to make it a 20 year war, what will we accomplish?

If the American people sit back and do nothing, the military industrial complex will continue those two wars for another 10 years.  The military won’t win, but it won’t lose, but it will continue fighting and dying as it sacrifices our kids in an endless conflict.   We’ll hear weekly news reports that we’re close to victory, but we need another 40,000 troops.  We’re seeing the light at the end of the tunnel and we don’t want those who have died to have died in vain.   General so and so is making a “new” plan to win the war…ad nausea.

Like corporations that Americans have been protesting against for the past week, the military industrial complex possesses no heart and no conscience.  Young men and women’s deaths mean nothing.

How do we stop those wars, the deaths and the senselessness?

1. We withdraw all our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan immediately.
2. We let their leaders solve their problems.
3. Leaving Muslim lands deletes their reasons for jihad.
4. Enforce our borders with our troops to secure our country.
5. Engage a moratorium on all immigration for 10 years.
6. Use the $12 billion monthly war cost to improve our country.

It’s absolutely crazy to carry on two wars for ten years without any positive result. It’s even crazier to continue fighting them for another 10 years.  It’s even worse that the majority of American citizens lack enough gumption to stand up and speak out against the endless insanity of war perpetrated by our Congress, Bush and now Obama.  In the end, it’s just plain sickening on a mental, physical and spiritual level.

Rick Perry, Glenn Beck and Alan Dershowitz: Meshugener or Shmucks?

Mishugener is a Yiddish word meaning insane or crazy. A Schmuck is Yiddish for a self-made fool- but it also refers to male only anatomy.

Beck is a Mormon with close ties to the Tea Party and fundamentalist Christians. A fundamentalist is best understood as one who is so attached to their point of view that they have quit thinking!

Beck has been in Israel for more than a week preparing for his “Restoring Courage” rally which was attended by some of the 81 US Congressional Representatives who are in Israel on a junket paid for by the American Israel Education Foundation, an affiliate of AIPAC.

“One week before announcing his candidacy for president, Texas Governor Rick Perry led an all-day prayer rally in a stadium in Houston. Don Finto led the prayer for Israel and openly called for Israelis and all Jews to accept Jesus in order to bring “a great revival to the entire world.” [1]

Don Finto is the author of Your People Shall Be My People, which provides instructions in how to avoid overt proselytizing and emphasizes that Christian Zionists are Israel’s only friends.

True friends tell you the truth and the truth is that Christian Zionists are NO friend to the people of Israel or America!

As Mordechai Vanunu, the Whistle Blower of Israel’s WMD program explained to me in 2005:

“The time has come for the United States to see the truth of Zionism. It began as a secular nationalist movement, not a religious one. Then some Christians believed that when Israel became a nation, it was the beginning of the second coming. They are deluded if they believe peace will come through atomic weapons. Atomic weapons are holocaust weapons. Christians should be the first people against them. The Christians in America should be helping the Christians here. America needs to wake up to this fallacy that Jesus will come back by nuclear war. America needs to wake up to the fact that the Palestinian Christians here have no human rights. Aren’t Christians supposed to be concerned about other Christians? Aren’t Christians supposed to be concerned about all the poor and oppressed?” [2]

On August 22, 2011, Alan Deshowitz wrote: “Should Israel Welcome Glenn Beck’s Support?” Which was published first @ www.hudson-ny.org/2374/glenn-beck-israel

What follow his quotes are my rebuttals.

Deshowitz: “All decent people, whether on the left or the right, should support Israel’s right to exist as the democratic nation state of the Jewish people.”

All decent people, whether on the left or the right, should support Palestine’s right to exist and Israel is NOT a democracy!

In the May 28, 1993 edition of Yedioth Ahronoth, Ariel Sharon explained:

“The terms ‘democracy’ or ‘democratic’ are totally absent from the Declaration of Independence. This is not an accident. The intention of Zionism was not to bring democracy, needless to say. It was solely motivated by the creation in Eretz-Isrel of a Jewish state belonging to all the Jewish people and to the Jewish people alone. This is why any Jew of the Diaspora has the right to immigrate to Israel and to become a citizen of Israel.”

Jeff Halper, American Israeli, co-founder and coordinator of Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and Professor of Anthropology wrote:

“An ethnocracy is the opposite of a democracy, although it might incorporate some elements of democracy such as universal citizenship and elections. It arises when one particular group-the Jews in Israel, the Russians in Russia, the Protestants in pre-1972 Northern Ireland, the whites in apartheid South Africa, the Shi’ite Muslims in Iran, the Malay in Malaysia and, if they had their way, the white Christian fundamentalists in the US-seize control of the government and armed forces in order to enforce a regime of exclusive privilege over other groups in what is in fact a multi-ethnic or multi-religious society. Ethnocracy, or ethno-nationalism, privileges ethnos over demos, whereby one’s ethnic affiliation, be it defined by race, descent, religion, language or national origin, takes precedence over citizenship in determining to whom a county actually ‘belongs.’” [3]

Deshowitz: “All decent people should support Israel’s right to defend its civilians from terrorist attacks.”

Indeed and decent people should also be able to read this chart courtesy of ifamericansknew.org

• 124 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,463 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000. (View Sources & More Information)

• 1,084 Israelis and at least 6,430 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000. (View Sources & More Information)
  

• 9,226 Israelis and 45,041 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000. ( View Sources & More Information.)

Deshowitz: “All reasonable people should favor a just peace that assures Israel’s ability to thrive in a dangerous neighborhood and to defend its borders.”

Israel has NO declared borders and reasonable people should also be able to read a map-but they will not find the over 500 Palestinian villages and towns that were wiped [ethnically cleansed] from the so called holy land beginning in 1948, when Israel became a State:

Dershowitz: “The Jewish state is demonized by the hard left in America, by virtually the entire left in much of Europe, and by most of the left and right in Ireland, Norway and Sweden. Its right to exist is denied by a high proportion of Arabs and Muslims, and most of the Arab and Muslim nations do not have diplomatic relations with Israel.”

President Harry Truman crossed out the word “Jewish state” on the draft of the Establishment of Israel that was cabled him and substituted the “State of Israel” before he signed onto it.

Israel’s establishment was also contingent upon upholding the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Read more…

Dershowitz: “In many circles, anti-Zionism easily morphs into anti-Semitism.”

According to Webster’s Dictionary a SEMITE is a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs or a descendant of these peoples, thus Palestinians are as much a Semite as any Jew!

Dershowitz: “The general assembly of the United Nations has become the world’s new Der Sturmer, whose podium hosts, and many of whose audience members cheer, virulent anti-Semites such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”

In 2006, Virginia Tilley, Professor of political science wrote:

“In his October 2005 speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad never used the word ‘map’ or the term ‘wiped off.’ According to Farsi-language experts like Juan Cole and even right-wing services like MEMRI, what he actually said was ‘this regime that is occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.’

“In this speech to an annual anti-Zionist conference, Mr. Ahmadinejad was being prophetic, not threatening. He was citing Imam Khomeini, who said this line in the 1980s-a period when Israel was actually selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as so ghastly then.

“Mr. Ahmadinejad had just reminded his audience that the Shah’s regime, the Soviet Union, and Saddam Hussein had all seemed enormously powerful and immovable, yet the first two had vanished almost beyond recall and the third now languished in prison.

“So, too, the ‘occupying regime’ in Jerusalem would someday be gone. His message was, in essence: ‘This too shall pass.’”

Dershowitz: “One need not accept all of Beck’s positions on Israel—and I certainly do not—in order to agree with him that support of Israel is one of the great moral issues of the 21^st Century.”

Indeed it is a moral issue and as Jeff Halper also explained:

“This conflict impacts the global community and especially everyone in the USA.
“Tony Blair said 70% of all the conflicts in the world can be traced back to the Israeli Palestinian conflict. If we do fix this conflict it would be a tremendous step forward in global reconciliation. This whole issue is based on Human Rights and it is a global issue requiring global intervention.

“It has been said that the Israelis do not love this land, they just want to possess it. There have been three stages to make this occupation permanent. The first was to establish the facts on the ground; the settlements. There are ½ million Israeli’s and four million Palestinians here. They have been forced into Bantustan; truncated mini states; prison states. It is apartheid and Bush and Hillary are both willing collaborators.

“In 1977, Sharon came in with a mandate, money and resources to make the Israeli presence in the West Bank irreversible. The second stage began in April 2004 when America approved the Apartheid/Convergence/Realignment Plan and eight settlement blocs. This is just like South Africa!

“The Bush Sharon letter exchange guaranteed that the USA considers the settlements non-negotiable. The Convergence Plan and The Wall create the borders and that is what defines Bantustans. Congress ratified the Bush plan and only Senator Byrd of West Virginia voted no and nine House Representatives.

“Israel has set up a matrix of control; a thick web of settlements guaranteed to make the occupation permanent by establishing facts on the ground. Israel denies there is an occupation, so everything is reduced to terrorism. It is our job to insist upon the human rights issue, for occupied people have International Law on their side.” [4]

Dershowitz: “I welcome the support of religious Christians who love Israel for religious reasons. I abhor the ignorant and misguided efforts of other Christians, such as Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu, who misuse their faith against the Jewish state. I hope that more Christians will follow in Beck’s footsteps and take the time to visit Israel. They will see Christianity thriving in Israel.”

In 1947, 20% of the total population of the Holy Land was Christian.

Today, less than 1.3% of the total population of that troubled piece of real estate is Christian and unless things change very soon, Holy Land churches will soon be nothing more than museums for the Christian Exodus coupled with their low birth rates may be the end of Christianity in the Holy Land.

Jimmy Carter’s Plan for Peace in the Holy Land calls for President Obama to courageously address the complex conflict with details resolved by the two sides but which follows the following framework:

1. A demilitarized Palestinian state, with Israeli forces being replaced by an international security force that will allow freedom of peaceful movement and that will respond to any violence from either side.

2. Mutually acceptable modifications, with land swaps to the 1967 border which allows Israelis in and around Jerusalem to remain, but a withdrawal of all other settlers from the West Bank.

3. A shared Jerusalem that will be the capital of both states.

4. The right of Palestinian refugees to return to the West Bank and Gaza and compensation to those with proven claims to the land.

ON April 29, 2002, South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu spoke about how “very deeply distressed” he was by what he observed in his recent visit to the Holy Land, “It reminded me so much of what happened in South Africa.”

The Nobel peace laureate saw “the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about. Referring to Americans, he added, “People are scared in this country to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful—very powerful. Well, so what? The apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no longer exists.” [5]

Dershowitz: “Consider Nelson Mandela’s alliances with some of most brutal dictatorships (Libya, Cuba, Syria) and supporters of terrorism (P.L.O., Iran) while he was engaged in his just struggle against the evils of apartheid. I do not recall the left condemning Mandela for doing what he had to do. But the same left was unforgiving in Israel when it was forced to make some strategic military deals with South Africa, while strongly opposing its apartheid policies.”

“An apartheid society is much more than just a ‘settler colony’. It involves specific forms of oppression that actively strip the original inhabitants of any rights at all, whereas civilian members of the invader caste are given all kinds of sumptuous privileges.” [6]

On May 14, 1948, The Declaration of the establishment of Israel affirmed that, “The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations.”

However, reality intrudes, for “The truth, which is known to all; through its army, the government of Israel practices a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp.”- Shulamit Aloni, Israeli Minister of Education, quoted in Yediot Acharonot , December 20, 2006.

In 1953, South Africa’s Prime Minister Daniel Malan became the first foreign head of government to visit Israel and he returned home with the message that Israel could be a source of inspiration for white South Africans.
In 1962, South African Prime Minister Verwoerd declared that Jews “took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived there for a thousand years. In that I agree with them, Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state.”

On August 1, 1967, Israel enacted the Agricultural Settlement Law, which bans Israeli citizens of non-Jewish nationality- Palestinian Arabs- from working on Jewish National Fund lands, well over 80% of the land in Israel.

Knesset member Uri Avnery stated: “This law is going to expel Arab cultivators from the land that was formerly theirs and was handed over to the Jews.”

On April 4, 1969, General Moshe Dayan is quoted in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz telling students at Israel’s Technion Institute that “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You don’t even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don’t blame you, because these geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either… There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”

On April 28, 1971: C. L. Sulzberger, writing in The New York Times, quoted South African Prime Minister John Vorster as saying that Israel is faced with an apartheid problem, namely how to handle its Arab inhabitants.

Sulzberger wrote: “Both South Africa and Israel are in a sense intruder states. They were built by pioneers originating abroad and settling in partially inhabited areas.”

On September 13, 1978, in Washington, D.C., The Camp David Accords were signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and witnessed by President Jimmy Carter.

The Accords reaffirmed U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338, which prohibited acquisition of land by force, called for Israel’s withdrawal of military and civilian forces from the West Bank and Gaza, and prescribed “full autonomy” for the inhabitants of the territories.

Prime Minister Begin promised Carter to freeze all settlement activity during the subsequent peace talks.

Once back in Israel, however, the Israeli prime minister continued to confiscate, settle, and fortify the occupied territories.

On September 13, 1985, Rep. George Crockett (D-MI), after visiting the Israeli-occupied West Bank, compares the living conditions there with those of South African blacks and concluded that the West Bank is an instance of apartheid that no one in the U.S. is talking about.

In July 2000, President Bill Clinton convened the Camp David II Peace Summit between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat.

Clinton—not Barak—offered Arafat the withdrawal of some 40,000 Jewish settlers, leaving more than 180,000 in 209 settlements, all of which are interconnected by roads that cover approximately 10% of the occupied land. Effectively, this divides the West Bank into at least two non-contiguous areas and multiple fragments. Palestinians would have no control over the borders around them, the air space above them, or the water reserves under them.

Barak called it a generous offer. Arafat refused to sign.

On August 31, 2001l in Durban, South Africa, up to 50,000 South Africans marched in support of the Palestinian people.

In their “Declaration by South Africans on Apartheid and the Struggle for Palestine” they proclaimed:

“We, South Africans who lived for decades under rulers with a colonial mentality, see Israeli occupation as a strange survival of colonialism in the 21st century. Only in Israel do we hear of ‘settlements’ and ‘settlers.’

“Only in Israel do soldiers and armed civilian groups take over hilltops, demolish homes, uproot trees and destroy crops, shell schools, churches and mosques, plunder water reserves, and block access to an indigenous population’s freedom of movement and right to earn a living.

“These human rights violations were unacceptable in apartheid South Africa and are an affront to us in apartheid Israel.”

October 23, 2001: Ronnie Kasrils, a Jewish Minister in the South African government, co-authored the petition “Not in My Name” which was signed by some 200 members of South Africa’s Jewish community and reads:

“It becomes difficult, from a South African perspective, not to draw parallels with the oppression expressed by Palestinians under the hand of Israel and the oppression experienced in South Africa under apartheid rule.”

Three years later, Kasrils went to the Occupied Territories and concluded:

“This is much worse than apartheid. Israeli measures, the brutality, make apartheid look like a picnic. We never had jets attacking our townships. We never had sieges that lasted month after month. We never had tanks destroying houses. We had armored vehicles and police using small arms to shoot people but not on this scale.”

American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, wrote in “The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s secret alliance with Apartheid South Africa” that Israeli officials “formally offered to sell South Africa some of the nuclear-capable Jericho missiles in its arsenal” and that PW Botha, South Africa’s defense minister asked Shimon Peres-who was then Israel’s defense minister-for nuclear warheads.

Peres offered them “in three sizes” which are understood as conventional, chemical and nuclear weapons.

The two signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that “the very existence of this agreement” was to remain secret.

On 4 June 1975, Peres and Botha met in Zurich and by then, the Jericho project had been renamed Chalet. The top-secret minutes of that meeting recorded that:

“Minister Botha expressed interest in a limited number of units of Chalet subject to the correct payload being available…Minister Peres said the correct payload was available in three sizes. Minister Botha expressed his appreciation.” [7]

Botha did not go ahead with the deal because of the cost and the fact that final approval was dependent on Israel’s prime minister.

South Africa did build its own nuclear bombs and also provided much of the yellowcake uranium that Israel required to develop its nuclear arsenal.

The documents also confirmed that former South African naval commander, Dieter Gerhardt admitted there was an agreement between Israel and South Africa called “Chalet” that involved an offer by Israel to arm eight Jericho missiles with “special warheads” understood as atomic bombs.

“Some weeks before Peres made his offer of nuclear warheads to Botha, the two defense ministers signed a covert agreement governing the military alliance known as Secment. It was so secret that it included a denial of its own existence: ‘It is hereby expressly agreed that the very existence of this agreement shall be secret and shall not be disclosed by either party.’”

That ‘secret’ military agreement signed by Shimon Peres and P W Botha of South Africa can be seen here:

• Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons

Come this September, the U.N. General Assembly will vote on whether to recognize Palestine as an independent and sovereign state with full rights in the United Nations.

The UN was the body that carved up the so-called holy land.

Here’s hoping that come this September the UN will do justice for Palestine which requires that Israel be held accountable to its promises.

Here’s hoping that we the people of the world will never forget that all life is interconnected and that what is good for Americans is good for Israelis, Palestinians, and Everyone in the World:

Equal Human Rights: Read more…

1. With friends like Glenn Beck…

2. Eileen Fleming, BEYOND NUCLEAR: Mordechai Vanunu’s FREEDOM of SPEECH Trial and My Life as a Muckraker: 2005-2010

3. Jeff Halper, An Israeli in Palestine: Resisting Dispossession, Redeeming Israel, Page 74

4. Winning the War of Legitimacy

5. The Link, “About That Word Apartheid”, April-May 2007, Published by Americans for Middle East Understanding, Inc.

6. Apartheid Ancient, Past, and Present Systematic and Gross Human Rights Violations in Graeco-Roman Egypt, South Africa, and Israel/Palestine, By Anthony Löwstedt. Page 77.

7. Israel South Africa Nuclear Weapons

Flash Mobs Feature Black Racial Violence Against Whites

After “Flash Mobs” erupted in Philadelphia, African-American Mayor Nutter said, “You damaged your own race.”

While the public enjoys a snapshot view of the racially charged “Flash Mobs”, the mainstream media dampens its coverage to soften the impact on white America.  Ironically, Mexican “Flash Mobs” have been killing Blacks in Los Angeles for years as reported by the late radio host Terry Anderson.

“Then there are the racial similarities: The attackers are invariably black,” said writer John T. Bennett.  “Blacks are more likely to be victims of violent crime than any other group due to black-on-black crime. “If the races were reversed, we would be witnessing an outpouring of guilt of biblical proportions. Instead, the victims are white and we get an outpouring of ignominious silence. So far, precious few leaders in academia, politics, the legal system, or the media have spoken out directly against this troubling trend.”

With 68 percent of African-American children being raised by single mothers, the poverty, anger and young males entering their teens and early twenties fuels the phenomenon.  The complete breakdown of the African-American family unit gives no role models for young blacks.  They do, however, play in violent media arcades where they play deadly games that foster violent behaviour. (Source: Dottie Lamm, Denver Post columnist)

They take their anger out on whites:

• At the Wisconsin State fair, groups of black teens numbering anywhere from 25 to 100 “were targeting anyone who was white or appeared to look white,” and beating them, according to the local police chief. At least 18 people were injured, and 30 have been arrested.
• In Denver, couples leaving restaurants were being attacked by a group of black men with baseball bats.
• A young white man named Carter Strange had his skull fractured by a mob in South Carolina. He was attacked at random while jogging.
• A young white man named Dawid Strucinski was beaten into a coma by a mob in Bayonne, NJ.
• Anna Taylor, Emily Guendelsberger, and Thomas Fitzgerald were beaten to the ground and stomped in separate Philadelphia flash mobs.
• “Every weekend in July,” according to local news, “police have battled large, flash-mob beatings and vandalism” in Greensboro, NC.
• In a mostly-white suburb of Cleveland, witnesses reported large groups of young blacks walking through the streets, “shouting profanities and racial epithets,” and one man was viciously beaten while leaving a restaurant with his wife and friends.
• A young white lady named Shaina Perry was taunted and beaten by a black mob in Milwaukee who remarked “Oh, white girl bleeds a lot.”

America has always suffered racial problems from the time of slaves, to the KKK and on to job discrimination.  But today, with Dr. Martin Luther King’s civil rights marches in the past, this country seems to be digressing as 13.4 million children, many of them Blacks, live in extreme poverty. Black dropout rates from high schools exceed 50 percent.  Unemployment rates for Blacks lead all races in percentages.  It’s nearly impossible to hire someone who is illiterate.

When young blacks see others riding in cars, wearing fancy clothes and enjoying the good life, they have found ways to respond.  As our economic conditions continue to degrade and 15 million Americans suffer unemployment—and our Congress continues importing cheap labor at 200,000 immigrants per month—“Flash Mobs” will continue to evolve as a response to African-Americans’ conditions.

Obama Stops Enforcing The Constitution: Free Pass To 20 Million Illegal Aliens

In the most anti-American act of his short term in office, Barack Hussein Obama, an outsider president gave amnesty to over 20 million illegal aliens and possibly a much higher number when the final count arrives.

Obama, America’s chief law enforcement officer, decided to stop enforcing the law.   No more deportations of illegal aliens!  Usurp every legal immigrant and American citizen!  U.S. borders do not mean anything anymore and U.S. sovereignty has been assigned to the highest bidder: employers of illegal aliens.

We will watch a border charge by the world’s poor like never before.  At least three billion people on the planet live on less than $2.00 per day and they all want to come to America “for a better life.”  You can bet a huge percentage of them will do everything they can to cross America’s borders to become a resident of the United States.

But, as they pour over the U.S. border, they degrade the American environment, quality of life and standard of living.  Their numbers cannot be sustained.

Cecilia Munoz, formerly of the racist group La Raza, posted on the  that under the president’s direction an amnesty was declared for illegal aliens in America. In Orwellian Newspeak she said, “Today, (DHS) announced that they are strengthening their ability to target criminals even further by making sure they are not focusing our resources on deporting people who are low priorities for deportation.”

California writer Rick Oltman said, “It was cowardly and was accomplished with lies and deception and it will do irreparable harm to America and Americans. It was cowardly because Obama and the political elites of both parties who want amnesty for illegal aliens knew they couldn’t get the legislation passed.  Obama didn’t even try it when the Democrats controlled both Houses in Congress because poll after poll shows super majorities of Americans don’t want amnesty, they want enforcement.

Obama violates his oath of office, “To preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

What Obama’s action actually accomplished: free ride for employers of cheap 21^st century slave labor. It gives every corporate employer free rein to hire a compliant work force. It takes jobs away from millions of Americans.  It aids and abets meat packing plants, hotels, restaurants, construction companies, roofing companies and fast food companies to hire with immunity from the law.  It maintains minimum wage and keeps Americans unemployed.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce heralded the move by licking its chops for all the money it puts into the pockets of elites while U.S. taxpayers pick up the subsidizing tab by paying for schools, hospitals and prisons.

A 19 point bulletin spells out who should be exempt from federal law enforcement.  Everybody, every type of illegal alien can be exempted.  “This list is not exhaustive and no one factor is determinative.”

Enforcement is out, illegal aliens are in.

“News reports also indicate that the Obama Administration will be dropping active deportation cases against over 300,000 illegal aliens,” said Oltman. “They will all be getting work permits, if they don’t have them already.  Ten percent unemployment in the country and 300,000 were just added to labor market.  And, of course, if they don’t find jobs, expect them to start sucking up taxpayer benefits like welfare and food stamps and healthcare. Expect, in very short order, a surge on the border.”

If you remember, back in 1986, Reagan signed an amnesty for 1.2 million illegal aliens. It turned out to be 4.3 million applied for citizenship.  At 20 million illegals in the USA in 2011, we will see a demographic nightmare emerge from wholesale avoidance of U.S. laws.

Mass immigration pushes this country toward an added 100 million within the next 25 years and 138 million by 2050.  (Source:  US Census Bureau, PEW Report, “US Population Projections” Fogel/Martin)  The ramifications of this amnesty guarantee that the United States will become a polyglot of poverty, ethnic tension, environmental degradation and lowered quality of life and standard of living for most Americans.  No one will escape the coming water shortages, energy shortfalls and resource scarcities.

We will all experience a diminished America as we slide into educational demise as well as becoming a scattered and disenfranchised country.  When it comes to “Flash Mobs”, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Carnage in Norway – Refreshing the Narrative

So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists… – Manifesto of Anders Behring Breivik

War-making storylines tend to lose their steam. Sustained warfare requires more than just a plausible Evil Doer. A credible narrative is also essential. To remind us who to hate, who better than a murderous Nordic Muslim-hater?

Far-fetched? How many Americans had heard of the Taliban before March 2001 when destruction of the ancient Buddhas at Bamiyan was reported worldwide as a ‘Cultural Holocaust’? Voila! An Evil Doer brand emerged and was soon repackaged as Islamo-fascism.

Six months later, an attack on U.S. soil left little doubt that outraged Americans would be provoked to war. Combine an emotionally wrenching mass murder with manipulated intelligence and an invasion was assured—of Iraq. That miscue required sophisticated pre-staging.

Residents ofWashington,DCwell recall the sniper attacks that left ten dead during the October 2002 lead-up to a Senate vote on a war resolution sponsored by Jewish Zionist Senator Joe Lieberman. Those well-timed murders ensured a heightened sense of insecurity and helped ratchet up the requisite hatred—to invade a nation that played no role in 911.

Remember the Times Square Terrorist? A car belonging to a Muslim was found with two WalMart propane tanks, an alarm clock, a box of fireworks and some fertilizer. When? In May 2010 during the lead-up to a UN vote on a nuclear-freeMiddle East—opposed by Israel.

To sustain hate requires a sustained stream of plausible reasons to hate. Plus careful maintenance of a ‘generally accepted truth’ that keeps attention focused on a credible threat.

Preparing the Minds

Islamo-phobia was a fresh threat when it first appeared in a 1993 article in Foreign Affairs. Yet it dates from 1990 when Princeton Islamic scholar Bernard Lewis, an avid Zionist, touted “The Roots of Muslim Rage.” By 1996, Harvard Professor Samuel Huntington was ready to publish The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

With more than 100 nongovernmental organizations promoting The Clash, Americans experienced a seamless segue from an old narrative to a new. Without missing a beat in Pentagon spending, we ended a global Cold War and, by consensus, began a global War on Terrorism.

Huntington argued that cultural and religious identities would emerge as the primary source of conflict. To gain traction, The Clash consensus required a series of events that could be plausibly blamed on Muslim Evil Doers. That was 15 years ago—a long time to sustain a story line.

With Osama bin Laden dead and war-weary Americans nearing the tenth anniversary of 911, The narrative was losing its punch. Plus the storytellers face a transparency problem: Intelligence agencies worldwide have identified pro-Israelis as the common source of the manipulated intelligence that induced the invasion of Iraq.

What’s a Zionist to do? Answer: look to past successes.

Timing is Everything

Ten days prior to 911, Tel Aviv announced a $1 million grant to Israeli super-spy Jonathan Pollard. Why then? The timing suggests Tel Aviv was signaling its operatives and sayanim (Hebrew for volunteers).

The Norwegian shooter is akin to the narrative-advancing snipers who emerged in the lead-up to the Senate vote authorizing the U.S. military to invadeIraq. In the lead-up to next month’s UN vote on statehood forPalestine, the carnage inNorwayfreshened up a stale story line.

This latest mass murder was committed on the 65^th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel in Tel Aviv. That mass murder was an operation of the Irgun, Zionist-terrorist predecessors to the Likud Party of today’s Benjamin Netanyahu.

The same night that Israel launched its Six-Day War in June 1967, Irgun operative Mathilde Krim was continuing her torrid affair with President Lyndon Johnson—in the White House. Why then? Because that land grab ensured the roots of the Muslim rage required to shape future events.

Why would a Norwegian Zionist target Norwegians? For the same reason that Irgun Zionist Menachem Begin murdered Jews in the King David Hotel: to advance a narrative.

In September 2000, Likud Prime Minister Ariel Sharon led a provocative march toJerusalem’sTempleMount. When, after a year of calm, suicide bombings recommenced, Sharon and Netanyahu warned that only when Americans “feel our pain” would we appreciate their plight.  To feel Israel’s pain, they said, would require thatAmericalose 4,500 to 5,000 to terrorism, the initial estimate of those lives lost to a mass murder one year later.

The well-timed operation in Norway turned to mass murder as a means to remake the world order in plain sight.  Those complicit specialize in maintaining a story line that dates from when the medieval Crusades pit Christians against Muslims.

Absent the success of such deceit, we may forget whom to hate.

Canadian Immigration: Racism, Multiculturalism and Cultural Relativism

The Truth Comes Out About the Infamous ‘Racist’ Poster in Calgary…

This week, Canadian Environmentalist Tim Murray asked penetrating questions as to what constitutes a hate crime or hate speech.  In Canada’s accelerating immigration crisis, more and more Canadians want to know why their country is being flooded with relentless immigration.  Citizens are forced to “shut up” for fear of being locked up.   This is the latest report:

“Police said none of the statements on the posters constitute a hate crime.”

“So there you have it!” said Murray.  “The so-called ‘racist’ poster that sent self-proclaimed ‘anti-racists’ into a panic was not so racist or hateful. The poster that Immigration Minister Jason Kenny thought was “crude and menacing” but not so crude and menacing as to be illegal. According to a press report by CBC news,  the police said that none of the statements on the poster constitute a crime. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/08/02/calgary-anti-immigration.html

“What counts then, in Canada, is not what is said, but by whom it is said. If it is said by people that some other people don’t like, then the statements must be removed from public view.  Therefore a group that the Multicult Thought Police designates as a “hate group” is not to be allowed to even make statements that are not “hateful”. So what were these statements?
“Did you know Immigration costs Canadian taxpayers $23 billion annually? 265,000 new immigrants enter Canada every year. The official unemployment rate is 7.7%. Does this seem right to you?”http://www.cireport.ca/2011/08/the-poster-campaign-by-blood-and-honour-canada-deemed-to-be-racist.html

“How crude! How menacing! And how correct! Except that the figure “265,000”  understates the number of immigrants who enter Canada every year by 395,000—if you add the 380,000  entrants admitted on so-called “temporary” visas  to the 280,000 “immigrants” who came in 2010. That is right folks. As Sun TV’s  Brian Lilley put it, each year they plop another Mississauga into the country. Is there any other nation on earth this mad? If not, we could certainly give Australia a run for its money in the derby to see who will populate and perish first.

“What is “crude” here is the belief held by all federal political parties that immigration-driven population growth is necessary to stimulate economic growth. And according to the poll conducted by David Colette last year, fully half of Canadians feel menaced by this growth and the policy of hyper-immigration for which Jason Kenny is a front-line booster. Meanwhile another 34% of those polled indicated that theydon’t want immigration levels increased. But who cares what ordinary Canadians want? Only the political class and their oracles in the CBC know best.

“Canada is indeed as Mark Steyn would describe it. A conformist culture that celebrates diversity in everything but thought. I can only reiterate what I said over three years ago:

The only way freedom is going to be restored, be it in the office, the warehouse or the college campus is for people to exercise it. Courageously and in defiance of speech codes and harassment guidelines.

“The totalitarian impulse to control has thrived in past decades from our complacency and fear.”

“So challenge… multicultural thought control first in its university lair, then at work and in the media…….Freedom is a muscle that atrophies from disuse. Canadians appear to be of such a nature as to expect institutions, particularly government institutions, to take care of their needs in perpetuity. We have asked government to protect us from illiteracy and ill-health and the vagaries of the market place, but it has not stopped there, it has endeavored to protect us from ourselves. From our thoughts and words.

“Now we have but one option. To cut the noose or stop breathing. In an authentic democracy, the people have a right not to be “educated” by their government. They have a right to read “hate” literature and make their own judgments.”
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2758

Analysis of Breivik’s Ideas – Part 2

Breivik hated Reds even more than Muslims. The Pakis should be deported, but the Commies ­ shot as traitors, he wrote in his 2083. He fumed against communism like Hitler in Mein Kampf, but Hitler had better reasons. Hitler competed against the Communists for the hearts of German workers, AND Hitler competed against the softies within the national-socialist movement in Germany, who (notably the brothers Strasser) were prepared to deal with communists.

A long time has passed since then. Communism won in the titanic struggle of 1945, but suffered a huge setback in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Consequently, anticommunism has lost its meaning since at least 1991, but probably even earlier. Today, it could possibly mobilise a few old-timers in Washington DC, but maybe not even them.

It is with great astonishment we witnesses of Communism’s defeat read in 2083 that Communism was victorious:

“The US but especially W. Europe lost the Cold War due to the fact that we didn’t persecute the Marxists after WW2. If we had executed each and every Marxist and banned Marxist doctrines (not only the economical aspects but the cultural as well ­ internationalism, extreme feminism, extreme egalitarianism, anti-elitism, anti-nationalism) we would not be in the current situation. Instead, our traitorous and weak minded post-WW2 leaders allowed the Marxists to gradually infiltrate many aspects of society after WW2, especially our universities and the media (see the beginning of book 1 for a complete overview of how this happened). The first ML pioneers (Marxist-Leninists) were allowed to indoctrinate the ’68 generation, those who run things today.”

Breivik arrives at the unexpected conclusion that both the EU and the US are, in our present age, “socialist” or even “communist” states, “EUSSR and USSR” organised in accordance with Marx’s teachings. I did not know that Karl Marx envisaged a society with hundreds of billionaires and millions of paupers. One would have to be mad to describe the contemporary US and EU as “communist dictatorships” ­ these societies are extremely inegalitarian — workers are on the bottom, while the super-wealthy have an ostentatious lifestyle unheard of even in Medici’s Florence.

The reason for this unexpected conclusion is that Breivik intentionally confuses Marxism-Leninism as the ruling ideology of the Soviet Union and Maoist China, with the neo-Marxist western ideology of Fromm and Adorno, Marcuse and Lukacs. With all due respect, the Cold War was NOT a war with them, but a war against the USSR and its allies, a war with its geopolitical as well as ideological components. Western neo-Marxists were rather the allies of the Capitalist West in that war, and their contribution to the fall of the Eastern citadel of Communism was enormous, as they successfully undermined the Russian elites’ belief in their own ideology.

Though Breivik quarrels with the Western Marxists, he finds it convenient to connect them with the Gulag and with alleged mass murders in the USSR. This is dishonest: the Western neo-Marxists were against Stalin, and they called their Eastern brethren “Stalinists”, at least since the short-sighted Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin in 1956.

Khrushchev, a crypto-Trotskyite, frogmarched the Communists through an unnecessary and unpopular de-Stalinisation instead of letting bygones be bygones. Nowadays President Medvedev is talking again about de-Stalinisation; probably this talk will prevent his re-election. The people of Russia have differing views about Stalin, but the vast majority were and are against de-Stalinisation, for to them it symbolises the breakdown of the national masculine heroic paradigm.

Breivik accuses the Communists of supporting “extreme feminism”. This is odd. Joseph Stalin was the ultimate symbol of masculinity: the great Yugoslav director Dushan Makkaveev depicted him in his Mysteries of the Organism in priapic form. De-Stalinisation can be viewed as an attempt to unman the Father-figure of the Communist world. Again, Breivik’s ridiculous claim can be explained by his desire to gather all the Reds into one big heap: from grim NKVD commissars to California sociologists to the Norwegian teenagers he shot. He learned this nasty trick from his Neocon teachers: they paint every nationalist by the same brush as Adolf Hitler.

We reject it out of hand: not every traditionalist and nationalist is a Breivik or a Hitler; the Communists take differing positions on tradition, with Eastern Stalinists being quite conservative, traditional and mildly nationalist, while Western neo-Marxists rejected the bourgeois nationalism which caused two world wars.

Breivik stresses the Communist origins of the Frankfurt school’s founders, of Theodor Adorno and Georg Lukács ­ but the neocons, too, were red-diaper babies or even active Trots before switching sides. Gramsci indeed dreamed of cultural hegemony as the means of arriving at socialism. He thought that a new “Communist man” might be created before any political revolution. However, Gramsci was mistaken. This theory of Gramsci was used to preach a reformist, non-revolutionary way, avoiding a violent takeover of banks and factories. The idea was played up by the Euro-Communists and, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, disappeared with the Euro-Communist parties.

Lenin was right, and Gramsci was wrong: you have to take away from the capitalists both their chequebooks and their factories, their weapons and their newspapers, their parliament and their government, otherwise they will turn every agenda of yours to their benefit. The Frankfurt school and other Western neo-Marxists stood by the West in the Cold War.

The Western neo-Marxists behaved like the proverbial man who searched for a lost coin under the lamppost. Though he knew he had lost the coin elsewhere, there was more light under the lamppost. They did not know how to interact with workers, and so preferred to work with minorities, students, feminists. It was easier, but led nowhere, as we now see. The workers of Spain and Greece rose up last month, but the neo-Marxists were nowhere to be found. They did not lead this real popular revolt, as they were only used to their toy revolutions in the field of semantics.

The neo-Marxists gave up on revolution, gave up on socialism, gave up on the workers, and instead preferred to work “so no future Holocaust would be possible”. Kevin McDonald, from California State University, wrote that they choose to follow their Jewish agenda rather than the Communist one. Breivik had not read McDonald the Terrible, or at least never referred to him, being such a good pupil of Jewish pundits. KMD’s explanation was forbidden to him. He just intoned that what these men did IS communism. Actually, many texts in 2083 are old anti-Jewish screeds with find/replace Jews by Marxists.

Regretfully Breivik was wrong: the communists did not win. We did not move even one step closer to communism by promoting gay marriages and multiculturalism. Fighting against Christianity and family does not help, either. All these steps were appropriated and used by Capital and against workers. Actually, the objectives of socialist revolution and “no more Holocausts at any cost” are mutually exclusive. For the first objective, we need brave and daring men, for the second, all men must be unmanned, for real men are unpredictable.

The proof that Breivik speaks nonsense (even in his own terms) can be found in his 2083, where he rates European states according to their acceptance of what he calls “cultural Marxism”. Not surprisingly, Russia and other countries of the Communist block are the freest from this dogma, while Germany, Sweden and Norway are the most subservient. Indeed, destructive western neo-Marxist theories were never popular in the East, where capitalism was dismantled in the real sense and there was no need for a make-believe pseudo-communist ideology to paper over a capitalist economy.

As for the West, 1968 was not, as Breivik says, V-day for Marxism, but the beginning of a turn towards the Iron Heel. Our freedoms peaked just after the long-gone year of 1968. 1968 was a turning point in America. In 1968, the richest Americans contributed 90% of their income to the state, while now they pay less than 30% (never mind that they do not pay even that much by cleverly exploiting tax shelters, exempt funds and other tricks). It was in 1968 that the American worker’s minimum pay peaked in real terms. Looking back, 1968 was the moment in history when mankind was nearest to the stars.

As children of the defeated ’68 revolution, we were free to love, smoke, think and act. We could travel and fly without being stripped at the airport, and our booze was not confiscated. We could make love and smoke in cafés. Since then, it has been downhill all the way: smoking has been banned, free thought has been incarcerated by Political Correctness, and political action has been reduced to joining a Facebook group.

In the US, as Noam Chomsky has told me, the U-turn coincided with the teachers’ strike in New York which reminded the Jews that their narrow interests are not necessarily best served by progressive and revolutionary tactics. Accordingly, the revolutionary ideologists of ’68 acquiesced in pacifying the masses, and the chances for a new holocaust or even loss of influence were indeed minimised.

The masculinity of the Left receded, too. Support of dubious gender politics and retreat from the class struggle changed the Left. While the Left had always pushed for equality between the sexes, this equality leaned rather towards the masculine pole: whether it was a worker building the barricade, sailors storming the Winter Palace, cigar-smoking barbudos of Castro, they were all manly symbols of the Left. During the epic confrontation of the first half of 20th century, the Red Guards were not more feminine than the Stormtroopers, and Ernst Thaelmann was not less masculine than Ernst Roehm.

The present misbalance of male/female factors in the developed world was caused by technological developments (man’s physical strength is less needed), by ideological shift and by capitalists’ desire to maximise profit by employing women. As a result, men are frustrated. Their old traditional role of providers is over; their jobs went away to China, fighting is done by drones. Breivik’s massacre bears the mark of a frustrated and marginalized Norwegian man.

Breivik felt his manhood threatened by “television, where nearly every major offering has a female ‘power figure’ and the plots and characters emphasize the inferiority of the male and superiority of the female by government-mandated employment preferences and practices that benefit women and use ‘sexual harassment’ charges to keep men in line, [by] colleges where women’s gender studies proliferate and ‘affirmative action’ is applied in admissions and employment.”

Yes, the killer is a psychotic man whose vision is hardly adequate, but his point should be considered. Even his hatred towards Muslim immigrants could be traced to the threat to his manhood presented by virile, unencumbered-by-fear-of-harassment-charges Southerners successfully competing for the charms of the Nordic girls. This massacre and its possible follow-ups might well have been averted if this European man did not feel his manhood threatened in so many ways.

The massacre is a sign that the Yin/Yang balance of Europe is severely biased; it should be restored and this urgent task can’t be delayed ­ this is an important lesson of the Friday 22 massacre.

Analysis of Breivik’s Ideas – Part I

Breivik’s “2083” The Mass Murderer’s Manifesto

Analysis of Breivik’s Ideas: The massacre was essentially a publicity stunt…

After the tears have dried and the cries of outrage fallen silent, we may begin to recognise that the cinematic qualities of the Utoya Massacre were drawn from trashy horror flicks. It is a recurring theme within the Friday the 13th Screams at Elm Street genre that a serial killer must stalk a peaceful summer camp and murder innocent youths. Friday the 22^nd’s killer effectively brought the celluloid violence to life, further crystallizing the phenomenon of Man’s nightmares intruding onto reality. This trend towards violence began innocently enough with grim dime novels and gore spattered cinema, but it then began to deaden the minds of our children with “first-person shooter” video games of increasing realism. Nowadays those same children have grown into soldiers directing unmanned drone attacks upon far-away lands, and at least one of them has visited a nightmare upon this peaceful island summer camp.

Shooting people who can’t shoot back is a vile act, the mark of a mass murderer, a paid executioner, or a NATO soldier. For two hours the killer professionally, confidently, and coolly stalked the unarmed youths, executing them one by one in absolute safety; for one hundred days the killer’s ex-classmates, now in NATO Air Force, professionally, confidently, and coolly stalked unarmed Libyans from the absolute safety of distant compounds. Breivik hated Muslims, hated Socialists, no doubt he hated Qaddafi, a Muslim Socialist; but his deed better than a thousand Qaddafi-dispatched terrorists should remind the people of Europe that wars abroad will bring war home, too. There are too many licences to kill being produced.

Why did he do it? We can answer the question: the massacre was essentially a publicity stunt to attract worldwide attention to the killer’s opus magnum, a 1500-page compendium entitled “2083”. Breivik’s screed is no great work of human spirit; it is rather a copy-paste hodgepodge of Neocon ravings against Islam and Communism. In any case it does merit a look, if only because so many people were killed in order to make us read it. If this Breivik was a Herostratus, let us see why he burned down the temples of so many lives. Moreover, we must pinpoint where he went wrong.

2083 reveals that a new, vicious strain of political virus has emerged from the genetic engineering labs within the think tanks of the Neocons. The Masters of Discourse have long referred to traditional conservatives as “Nazis” because they oppose unrestricted immigration. They have made much hay of the fact that Nazis once considered Jews to be corrupt, once opposed the weaknesses of homosexuality, and once admired spirituality of the Muslims. The bad guy was supposed to be racist, love Adolf Hitler, hate Jews and gays. He did not have to hate  Commies because Communism was a similar totalitarian ideology according to Karl Popper and George Bush. The new strain passed through these filters.

The long labours of Jewish ideologists within the Neocon movement have borne fruit, and now it is the Jews who are considered to be above suspicion, the homosexuals who are considered strong, and conservative Muslims who are held to be alien to the new conservatism. Today we are witnessing the rapid spread of many well-financed political parties and activist groups that connect far-right ideas with sympathy to Jews, tolerance of gays, and a rabid hate of Islam. The writer of 2083, too, is pro-Jew, pro-gay, violently anti-Muslim and anti-Communist. His nearest analogue is Pim Fortuyn, the assassinated Dutch far-right Judeophile and gay politician. Breivik marched with the English Defence League (EDL), a British group set apart by its strongly pro-Jewish, anti-Muslim militancy.

Breivik’s 2083 is heavily influenced by far-right Neocon Jewish writing. As is often the case with copy-paste compilations, it is difficult to assign an accurate lineage to the conglomeration of words and those of compiled authors. However, if 2083 is ever published, the copyrights of David Horowitz and Bat Yeor, Daniel Pipes and Andrew Bostom should be given pride of place.  These are the writers who inspired Breivik to commit mass murder.

Gilad Atzmon reports that just a few hours before the attack Joseph Klein published an article entitled “The Quislings of Norway” (here) with additional incitement to murder. Klein wrote: “The infamous Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, who assisted Nazi Germany as it conquered his own country, must be applauding in his grave… Norway is effectively under the occupation of anti-Semitic leftists and radical Muslims, and appears willing to help enable the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.”

These are fighting words, and Breitvik heeded them as he loaded his guns. The content of 2083 reflects his admiration of his Neocon sources. Quotes from David Horowitz’s Frontpage articles contaminate hundreds of pages with his vitriol. Bernard Lewis has his own place of honour. The notorious Bat Yeor, an Egyptian Jewish woman living in Switzerland who coined the term “Eurabia” (an alleged conspiracy to subjugate Europe to Arabs) and did much to promote and grew rich off the fear of Islam, corresponded with the killer. She “kindly” advised him and sent him her unpublished texts. She is the only person named in his Declaration of European Independence, and her advice the newly independent Europeans should follow, according to Breivik. Bat Yeor provided “inestimable service” to his project, and is quoted extensively throughout.

Robert Spencer, a sidekick of Jihad Watch’s David Horowitz, is another great love of the killer, and so is American Zionist Andrew Bostom, self-proclaimed expert on “Islamic anti-Semitism”. Daniel Pipes is presented with his thesis that “The Palestinian phenomenon was created with the intention to justify Jihad.” Serge Trifkovic, an anti-Muslim Serb, Melanie Phillips, the British far-right Zionist who is friendly with the BNP leader Griffits, and Stephen Schwartz are all quoted, along with numerous other activists and scholars who earn their bread by demonizing Islam. (Funnily, these guys repeatedly condemned me for my “anti-Semitism”).

Politically, the killer’s sympathies lie squarely with the United States and Israel: “The creators of Eurabia have conducted a successful propaganda campaign against these two countries in the European media. This fabrication was made easier by pre-existing currents of anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism in parts of Europe.” Economically, he likes Milton Friedman and Hayek; he would get rid of taxes and welfare state.

Breivik hates the Palestinian people, and rails against the “Palestinian terrorist jihad”.  Like every good Zionist he brings up the Mufti and the Holocaust whenever possible: “Muhammad Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Arab nationalist leader, a leading force behind the establishment of the Arab League and a spiritual father of the PLO, was a close collaborator with Nazi Germany and personally met with Adolf Hitler. In a radio broadcast from Berlin he called upon Muslims to kill Jews wherever they could find them… he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz.” Among the first things the newly independent Europeans should do, Breivik declares, is to stop all support of the Palestinians.

For Breivik, as for all his Jewish teachers, Adolf Hitler represents ultimate evil. For this reason, he recommends that his readers avoid historically ominous words like “race”.  2083 is largely an attempt to categorize the other reasons to hate Muslims besides “race”. In the end, he did demonstrate to the world that he is not racist: he killed with an even hand, blue-eyed Norwegians as easily as brown-eyed guests. Breivik even hates David Duke – for being anti-Jewish. His hatred of Islam is not limited to the borders of Norway, or even of Europe – like all proper Neocons he hates Muslims wherever they are to be found.

Breivik spends many pages describing the evils committed by Turkey, including the massacres of the Armenians, Greeks and Kurds. There is a long chapter on the modern history of Lebanon where Israeli hand has been excised, and the wars are presented as a struggle between Christians and Muslims. His favourite historical hero is Vlad the Impaler, the Romanian prince better known as Count Dracula.

His logic is as primitive as it is faulty: “If all ethnical groups and all cultures are equal, why is it black Africans, Afro-Caribbean blacks, Pakistanis, Indians, Chinese, and Eastern Europeans want to abandon their own lands en masse to live in the lands of the West?”

The most obvious explanation: “because the West has robbed them blind,” does not occur to Breivik.

He continues his fallacious dialog: “If we’re all truly equal, why does the rest of the world want to live the Western lifestyle, a lifestyle created in the main by white people? Just why exactly, do they want to be part of capitalism, run businesses, work for the white man’s industries, claim the white man’s welfare and buy and use goods created by the creativity and ingenuity of Western – white – people?”

The fallacies are opaque to Breivik. His Neocon informers have not equipped him to understand that the hated immigrants had once worked in their own successful industries in their own countries. He has forgotten the colour revolutions, the actions of the IMF, and all the other signs of busy Neocon activism.

By no means can Breivik be characterised as a Christian fundamentalist; nor is he a Christian Zionist. His feelings towards Christianity are lukewarm at best, little more than a cultural solidarity. He hasn’t decided whether to call himself Christian. He is still “struggling with this myself. Some of the criticism of Christianity…is legitimate.” Like many Jewish activists, he approves of “the Second Vatican Council from the 1960s …for reaching out to Jews”, an interpretation that at one time was universally resisted by conservatives everywhere.

Breivik’s theological liberalism, however, evaporates when he considers Islam. Though his arguments are valid for immigration policies around the world, he will only speak out against Muslim immigrants. He does not call upon his country to stop tormenting the Muslim states even though this is the main reason for Muslim immigration. He cannot even consider the connection.

In any case, the immigration dispute is practically over in Europe. The understanding that immigration carries huge social costs slowly percolated through every strata of European society, and the tide has turned. Just a few years ago immigration was often viewed as a magic wand that would save the citizens from repetitive, boring chores; people do not see it this way anymore. These immigrants were not slaves, nor were they robots; they quickly became enfranchised, though not integrated. If they work they push the natives into the ranks of the unemployed or working poor; if they do not work, they overload the welfare budgets. The realization dawned slowly, but the about-face is final. Today, a Norwegian does not have to shoot his fellow citizens in order to express disagreement with immigration: this has become the mainstream attitude.

Counterpunch writer Vijay Prashad wrote: “the [murdered] Labour youth had among them children of migrants from Sri Lanka and North Africa. Their Norway was not Breivik’s Norway.” Exactly. That is why Breivik hated them: he did not want their new, international Norway to displace the Norway of his youth. Prashad condemns European conservatives who “cannot fathom that human beings are able to live convivial lives with those who are different”, but the history of Sri Lanka is not the best example of peaceful conviviality. If the people of Sri Lanka want to “live convivial lives with those who are different” they might have tried that back home – no need for the long flight to Norway. Prashad may call Merkel and Sarkozy “Nazis” for refusing to let in more immigration, and yet even he must sense that the Utoya Massacre is a strong signal that many people have had enough immigration and want it stopped.

In point of fact, immigration into Norway has slowed to a trickle. In a wild swing away from its own liberal policies, the government of Norway – like many West European governments – has changed the rules to make immigration almost impossible. In a famous case, a young girl from the Caucasus lived for some ten years in Norway, completed her university studies, wrote a novel in Norwegian – and ended up being deported as an illegal alien. Multiculturalism is a failed slogan of the past, and Breivik is as out-of-date as Prashad.

De-Zionification Now

“It (immigration) was a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental make-up and identity of this country (Britain). It was done to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions.”

(Melanie Phillips, as quoted by mass murderer, Anders Breivik, in his manifesto)

Melanie Philips, a rabid Zionist and the author of “Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within” is not happy to be singled out by Andres Breivik in his 1500 pages manuscript.   Are they suggesting that “my writing provoked the mass murder of some 93 Norwegians?” she wonders righteously on her blog. I guess that Phillips knows the answer, as much as she knows how to play with words. But I will use this opportunity to reiterate it for her, and for the rest of us — there certainly is a clear and strong resemblance between Breivik’s views and Philips’ writing. The most obvious and immediate comparison is that both oppose Islamic immigration and multiculturalism of course, but it goes much further in that both identify the enemy within the ‘left political circuit’.

Breivik cites Philips’ take  on Labour’s immigration policy: “It was done to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another ‘multicultural’ identity in its place.”

I should clearly state here that I do not think that Philips provoked Breivik’s murderous inclination. I also believe that Phillips is fully entitled to express her thoughts and ideas. Yet, it is surely reasonable to suspect that Phillips , amongst others, might have contributed to inspiring Breivik,  ideologically and spiritually.

Though Phillips writes on her blog  that the “the forces of spite, malice and venom (within liberal media) have been unleashed in a terrifying display of irrationality,” it is obvious that it is completely rational to elaborate on the significant resemblance between Phillips’ and Breivik’s ideas.

Jewish media outlets in Israel and around the world are already aware of the deeply worrying fact that Breivik wasinspired by right wing ideologies associated with Israel and Zionism. The JTA (The Global News Service Of The Jewish People) was quick to admit that numerous online postings, including Breivik’s, attack a “mishmash of anti-modern principles” that call for “the deportation of all Muslims from Europe as well as from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.” Whether we like it or not, this ‘mishmash’ of ‘global Islamophobia’ and Israeli expansionism is the true face of contemporary Zionism and Israeli ideology.

And yet, there is a further central question that no one in the media has addressed yet: how is it that Melanie Philips is getting away with openly promoting vile Islamophobia in our midst ? How is it that she and other Zionists prevail ,exactly where the EDL and the BNP fail? Why is Melanie Phillips a celebrity, whilst the BNP’s Nick Griffin is regarded as a vile racist, and a social outcast?  Similarly, I find myself wondering what on earth the board of ‘progressive’ Guardian editors had in mind when they nominated the Zionist, pro-war and openly  Islamohopbic Harry’s  Place as one of their favourite political blogs  in 2005 —  bear in mind that The Guardian’s nomination was made  at more or less the same time that the very same Harry’s Place blog won the  ‘Annual Islamophobia Awards 2006,’ within the UK section of the Islamic Human Rights Commission’s ‘Annual Islamophobia Awards.’

I believe that the answer is devastating: within our so called, liberal democratic, allegedly ‘tolerant’ discourse — it is only right wing Jews who are entitled and allowed to spread  xenophobia and hatred.

This is hardly surprising, because unlike contemporary Westerners, who seem to be more than confused by their colonial heritage  and notions such as nationalism, racism, expansionism, biological determinism, religion, and self-loving, Israel and Zionism actually celebrate all of these  symptoms, in the open.  It is far from surprising then, to see Israeli flags and Jewish symbols popping up in many far right gatherings in the UK and in other European countries, because Israel, it seems, makes racism look kosher.

The shocking ideological resemblance of the thoughts and ideals of the fearsome mass murderer Breivik and mainstream Zionist advocates  such Melanie Phillips, Daniel Pipes, David Horowitz, and Harry’s Place  should surely be a bright red alert for any sensible humanist. If we want to save our society from being dragged into a violence with no end, we must de-Zionise every possible aspect of our culture, media and political institutions.

Arguing Libya

On July 9 I took part in a demonstration in front of the White House, the theme of which was “Stop Bombing Libya”. The last time I had taken part in a protest against US bombing of a foreign country, which the White House was selling as “humanitarian intervention”, as they are now, was in 1999 during the 78-day bombing of Serbia. At that time I went to a couple of such demonstrations and both times I was virtually the only American there. The rest, maybe two dozen, were almost all Serbs. “Humanitarian intervention” is a great selling device for imperialism, particularly in the American market. Americans are desperate to renew their precious faith that the United States means well, that we are still “the good guys”.

This time there were about 100 taking part in the protest. I don’t know if any were Libyans, but there was a new element — almost half of the protesters were black, marching with signs saying: “Stop Bombing Africa”.

There was another new element — people supporting the bombing of Libya, facing us from their side of Pennsylvania Avenue about 40 feet away. They were made up largely of Libyans, probably living in the area, who had only praise and love for the United States and NATO. Their theme was that Gaddafi was so bad that they would support anything to get rid of him, even daily bombing of their homeland, which now exceeds Serbia’s 78 days. I of course crossed the road and got into arguments with some of them. I kept asking: “I hate that man there [pointing to the White House] just as much as you hate Gaddafi. Do you think I should therefore support the bombing of Washington? Destroying the beautiful monuments and buildings of this city, as well as killing people?”

None of the Libyans even tried to answer my question. They only repeated their anti-Gaddafi vitriol. “You don’t understand. We have to get rid of Gaddafi. He’s very brutal.” (See the CNN video of the July 1 mammoth rally in Tripoli for an indication that these Libyans’ views are far from universal at home.)

“But you at least get free education and medical care,” I pointed out. “That’s a lot more than we get here. And Libya has the highest standard of living in the entire region, at least it did before the NATO and US bombing. If Gaddafi is brutal, what do you call all the other leaders of the region, whom Washington has long supported?”

One retorted that there had been free education under the king, whom Gaddafi had overthrown. I was skeptical of this but I didn’t know for sure that it was incorrect, so I replied: “So what? Gaddafi at least didn’t get rid of the free education like the leaders in England did in recent years.”

A police officer suddenly appeared and forced me to return to my side of the road. I’m sure if pressed for an explanation, the officer would justify this as a means of preventing violence from breaking out. But there was never any danger of that at all; another example of the American police-state mentality — order and control come before civil liberties, before anything.

Most Americans overhearing my argument with the Libyans would probably have interjected something like: “Well, no matter how much you hate the president you can still get rid of him with an election. The Libyans can’t do that.”

And I would have come back with: “Right. I have the freedom to replace George W. Bush with Barack H. Obama. Oh joy. As long as our elections are overwhelmingly determined by money, nothing of any significance will change.”

Postscript: Amidst all the sadness and horror surrounding the massacre in Norway, we should not lose sight of the fact that “peaceful little Norway” participated in the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999; has deployed troops in Iraq; has troops in Afghanistan; and has supplied warplanes for NATO’s bombing of Libya. The teenagers of those countries who lost their lives to the US/NATO killing machine wanted to live to adulthood and old age as much as the teenagers in Norway. With all the condemnation of “extremism” we now hear in Norway and around the world we must ask if this behavior of the Norwegian government, as well as that of the United States and NATO, is not “extremist”.

The Berlin Wall — Another Cold War Myth

The Western media will soon be revving up their propaganda motors to solemnize the 50th anniversary of the erecting of the Berlin Wall, August 13, 1961. All the Cold War clichés about The Free World vs. Communist Tyranny will be trotted out and the simple tale of how the wall came to be will be repeated: In 1961, the East Berlin communists built a wall to keep their oppressed citizens from escaping to West Berlin and freedom. Why? Because commies don’t like people to be free, to learn the “truth”. What other reason could there have been?

First of all, before the wall went up thousands of East Germans had been commuting to the West for jobs each day and then returning to the East in the evening; many others went back and forth for shopping or other reasons. So they were clearly not being held in the East against their will. Why then was the wall built? There were two major reasons:

1) The West was bedeviling the East with a vigorous campaign of recruiting East German professionals and skilled workers, who had been educated at the expense of the Communist government. This eventually led to a serious labor and production crisis in the East. As one indication of this, the New York Times reported in 1963: “West Berlin suffered economically from the wall by the loss of about 60,000 skilled workmen who had commuted daily from their homes in East Berlin to their places of work in West Berlin.” ¹

In 1999, USA Today reported: “When the Berlin Wall crumbled [1989], East Germans imagined a life of freedom where consumer goods were abundant and hardships would fade. Ten years later, a remarkable 51% say they were happier with communism.” ² Earlier polls would likely have shown even more than 51% expressing such a sentiment, for in the ten years many of those who remembered life in East Germany with some fondness had passed away; although even 10 years later, in 2009, the Washington Post could report: “Westerners say they are fed up with the tendency of their eastern counterparts to wax nostalgic about communist times.” ³

It was in the post-unification period that a new Russian and eastern Europe proverb was born: “Everything the Communists said about Communism was a lie, but everything they said about capitalism turned out to be the truth.” It should also be noted that the division of Germany into two states in 1949 — setting the stage for 40 years of Cold War hostility — was an American decision, not a Soviet one. ⁴

2) During the 1950s, American coldwarriors in West Germany instituted a crude campaign of sabotage and subversion against East Germany designed to throw that country’s economic and administrative machinery out of gear. The CIA and other US intelligence and military services recruited, equipped, trained and financed German activist groups and individuals, of West and East, to carry out actions which ran the spectrum from juvenile delinquency to terrorism; anything to make life difficult for the East German people and weaken their support of the government; anything to make the commies look bad.

It was a remarkable undertaking. The United States and its agents used explosives, arson, short circuiting, and other methods to damage power stations, shipyards, canals, docks, public buildings, gas stations, public transportation, bridges, etc; they derailed freight trains, seriously injuring workers; burned 12 cars of a freight train and destroyed air pressure hoses of others; used acids to damage vital factory machinery; put sand in the turbine of a factory, bringing it to a standstill; set fire to a tile-producing factory; promoted work slow-downs in factories; killed 7,000 cows of a co-operative dairy through poisoning; added soap to powdered milk destined for East German schools; were in possession, when arrested, of a large quantity of the poison cantharidin with which it was planned to produce poisoned cigarettes to kill leading East Germans; set off stink bombs to disrupt political meetings; attempted to disrupt the World Youth Festival in East Berlin by sending out forged invitations, false promises of free bed and board, false notices of cancellations, etc.; carried out attacks on participants with explosives, firebombs, and tire-puncturing equipment; forged and distributed large quantities of food ration cards to cause confusion, shortages and resentment; sent out forged tax notices and other government directives and documents to foster disorganization and inefficiency within industry and unions … all this and much more. ⁵

The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, of Washington, DC, conservative coldwarriors, in one of their Cold War International History Project Working Papers (#58, p.9) states: “The open border in Berlin exposed the GDR [East Germany] to massive espionage and subversion and, as the two documents in the appendices show, its closure gave the Communist state greater security.”

Throughout the 1950s, the East Germans and the Soviet Union repeatedly lodged complaints with the Soviets’ erstwhile allies in the West and with the United Nations about specific sabotage and espionage activities and called for the closure of the offices in West Germany they claimed were responsible, and for which they provided names and addresses. Their complaints fell on deaf ears. Inevitably, the East Germans began to tighten up entry into the country from the West, leading eventually to the infamous Wall. However, even after the wall was built there was regular, albeit limited, legal emigration from east to west. In 1984, for example, East Germany allowed 40,000 people to leave. In 1985, East German newspapers claimed that more than 20,000 former citizens who had settled in the West wanted to return home after becoming disillusioned with the capitalist system. The West German government said that 14,300 East Germans had gone back over the previous 10 years. ⁶

Let’s also not forget that Eastern Europe became communist because Hitler, with the approval of the West, used it as a highway to reach the Soviet Union to wipe out Bolshevism forever, and that the Russians in World War I and II, lost about 40 million people because the West had used this highway to invade Russia. It should not be surprising that after World War II the Soviet Union was determined to close down the highway.

We came, we saw, we destroyed, we forgot

An updated summary of the charming record of US foreign policy. Since the end of the Second World War, the United States of America has …

1. Attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments, most of which were democratically-elected. ⁷
2. Attempted to suppress a populist or nationalist movement in 20 countries. ⁸
3. Grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries. ⁹
4. Dropped bombs on the people of more than 30 countries. ¹⁰
5. Attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders. ¹¹

In total: Since 1945, the United States has carried out one or more of the above actions, on one or more occasions, in the following 69 countries (more than one-third of the countries of the world):

Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Australia Bolivia Bosnia Brazil British Guiana (now Guyana) Bulgaria Cambodia Chad Chile China Colombia Congo (also as Zaire) Costa Rica Cuba Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Fiji France Germany (plus East Germany) Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Honduras India Indonesia Iran

Iraq Italy Jamaica Japan Kuwait Laos Lebanon Libya Mongolia Morocco Nepal Nicaragua North Korea Pakistan Palestine Panama Peru Philippines Portugal Russia Seychelles Slovakia Somalia South Africa Soviet Union Sudan Suriname Syria Thailand Uruguay Venezuela Vietnam (plus North Vietnam) Yemen (plus South Yemen) Yugoslavia

(See a world map of US interventions.)

The occult world of economics

When you read about economic issues in the news, like the crisis in Greece or the Wall Street/banking mortgage shambles are you sometimes left befuddled by the seeming complexity, which no one appears able to untangle or explain to your satisfaction in simple English? Well, I certainly can’t explain it all myself, but I do know that the problem is not necessarily that you and I are economic illiterates. The problem is often that the “experts” discuss these issues as if we’re dealing with hard and fast rules or laws, not to be violated, scientifically based, mathematically sound and rational; when, in fact, a great deal of what takes place in the real world of economics and in the arena of “expert” analysis of that world, is based significantly on partisan party politics, ideology, news headlines, speculation, manipulation, psychology (see the utter meaninglessness and absurdity of the daily rise or fall of stock prices), backroom deals of the powerful, and the excessive power given to and reliance upon thoroughly corrupt credit-rating agencies and insurers of various kinds. The agencies like Moody’s and Standard and Poor’s are protection rackets — pay our exorbitant fees or we give you a bad rating, which investors and governments then bow down to as if it’s the result of completely objective and impressive analytical study.

Then there’s the exceptions made for powerful countries to get away with things that lesser countries, like Greece, are not allowed to get away with, but all still explained in terms of the unforgiving laws of economics.

And when all other explanations fail to sound plausible, the experts fall back on “the law of supply and demand”. But that law was repealed years ago; just try and explain the cost of gasoline based on it, as but one example.

So there’s a lot to cover up, many reasons why the financial-world players can’t be as open as they should be, as forthright as the public and investors may assume they are.

Consider the US budget deficit, about which we hear a great deal of scare talk. What we don’t hear is that the most prosperous period in American history occurred in the decades following the Second World War — from 1946 to 1973. And guess what? We had a budget deficit in the large majority of those years. Clearly such a deficit was not an impediment to growth and increasing prosperity in the United States — a prosperity much more widely shared than it is now. Yet we’re often fed the idea of the sanctity of a balanced budget. This and other “crises” are typically overblown for political reasons; the current “crisis” about the debt ceiling for example. Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Reagan, now an independent columnist, points out that “regardless of whether the debt ceiling is raised the US government is not going to go out of business. … If Goldman Sachs is too big to fail, certainly, the US government is.”

In economic issues that occupy the media greatly, such as the debt ceiling, one of the hidden keys to understanding what’s going on is often the conservatives’ perennial hunger to privatize Social Security and Medicare. If you understand that, certain things become much clearer. Naomi Klein points out that “the pseudo debate about the debt ceiling … is naked class war, waged by the ultra rich against everyone else, and it’s well past time for Americans to draw the line.”

Consider, too, the relative value of international currencies. Logically, reasonably, if the British pound is exchangeable for two dollars, one should be able to purchase in Washington goods and services for two dollars which would cost one pound in London. In real life, this of course is the very infrequent exception to the rule. Instead, at places called “exchanges” in New York and Chicago and London and Zurich and Frankfurt a bunch of guys who don’t do anything socially useful get together each day in a large room, and amidst lots of raised voices, busy computers, and numerous pieces of paper, they arrive at a value for the pound, as well as for a barrel of oil, for a pound of porkbellies, and for various other commodities that affect our daily lives. Why should these speculators and parasites have so much influence over the real world, the real economy, and our real lives?

As a general rule of thumb, comrades, as an all-purpose solution to our economic ills, remember this: We’ll keep going around in crisis circles forever until the large financial institutions are nationalized or otherwise placed under democratic control. We hear a lot about “austerity”. Well, austerity has to, finally, visit the super-rich. There are millions (sic) of millionaires and billionaires in the United States and Europe. As governments go bust, the trillions of dollars of these people must be heavily taxed or confiscated to end the unending suffering of the other 95% of humanity. My god, do I sound like a (choke, gasp) socialist?

Notes

1. New York Times, June 27, 1963, p.12 ^↩
2. USA Today, October 11, 1999, p.1 ^↩
3. Washington Post, May 12, 2009; see a similar story November 5, 2009 ^↩
4. Carolyn Eisenberg, Drawing the Line: The American Decision to Divide Germany, 1944-1949 (1996); or see a concise review of this book by Kai Bird inThe Nation, December 16, 1996^↩
5. See William Blum, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, p.400, note 8, for a list of sources for the details of the sabotage and subversion. ^↩
6. The Guardian (London), March 7, 1985 ^↩
7. http://killinghope.org/essays6/othrow.htm ^↩
8. http://killinghope.org/bblum6/suppress.html ^↩
9. See chapter 18 of Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower – add Palestine, 2006 to the list ^↩
10. http://killinghope.org/superogue/bomb.htm ^↩
11. http://killinghope.org/bblum6/assass.htm ^↩

Norway killer Anders Behring Breivik recruited to a secret society in London

Remember that the hearings was closed to the public and the media. Classic Scandinavian style – an “open society” right.

The judge ordered that 32-year-old Andres Behring Breivik is to be detained without access to letters or visitors, apart from his lawyer. He’s getting four weeks in isolation. Maybe enought time to carry out more mind control experiments on Breivik.

Apparently the police knew the gunman’s name before the arresthe’s was on a intelligence watch list since March. Someone in Poland was said to be arrested, this is now being denied by Polish authorities.

Questions have been raised about why it took .

Breivik has said he was “surprised” he wasn’t stopped sooner.

Shooting Survivors Convinced There Were 2 Gunmen on Norway’s Utoya Island

In an article from the telegraph, Breivik now claims that he was recruited to a secret society in London and that he guided by an English “mentor”.

Not surprising considering his freemasonic ties and knights templar manifesto, with large chunks copied from mind control victim Ted Kaczynski.

We don’t know the truth about this “secret society” or English “mentor”, this could be nonsense put out by Breivik to further confuse the investigation. It could be the truth but it could also be the spin of the “advisers” and the “” behind the scenes.

Tragedies are always used for political purposes. This will justify another hunt for a “” that isn’t really there.

This might even change the fact that you have the right of meeting in “secret” or doing things in “secret”. Even if you might not agree to how the masons do business, I think most people value their privacy and right do do what they want to do – without the knowledge of authorities or other people …as long as it doesn’t hurt anybody.

Now your thoughts and opinions are the target and all the “insane ideas” that are spreading on the internet.

Be sure that laws will be put in place, guns will be banned and nationalism will further be branded as “extremism”.

Paul Joseph Watson wrote:

It’s also a reminder that the mainstream press instantly falls in line with whoever the establishment designates the enemy du jour to be at any given time. Now that Muslims have been so vehemently demonized as terrorists, it’s the turn of so called “right-wing extremists,” or anyone who disagrees with mass immigration, loss of sovereignty and globalist financial looting, to feel the heat.

The effort to smear European conservatives as unhinged radicals who harbor simmering urges for bloodlust is now in full swing, and it’s a demonization campaign firmly founded on the carefully crafted public portrayal of Anders Behring Breivik.

This tragedy is now in the hands the media, the police and the politicians.

They are now spinning a web designed to further trap anybody that have valid points of criticism against how society is being guided down the toilet.

Source:  Henrik Palmgren | redicecreations.com

The Craziness of Humans Worldwide

Over the weekend, a Norwegian gunman slaughtered 82 men, women and children.  He bombed several places and shot up a kids’ summer camp.  He didn’t approve of the Muslim invasion of his country and the incongruent confusion of multiculturalism.  In the past 20 years, Norway’s ruling elite imported 500,000 Muslim immigrants into that once mono-ethnic society.  That action created a growing separation and balkanization of that country.

He may have reacted to a recent report that 85 percent of all rapes and crime in Oslo, Bergen and Trondheim stem from Muslim immigrants.  While the Norwegian Islamic imams screamed, “racism, xenophobia, nativism,” the police reports validated the figures.

Is all that crazy or what?  Of course, the next question pops up, “Why did he kill regular Norwegian citizens?”  The scope of the insanity cannot be comprehended.

In Somali, as reported by the United Nations, 800,000 children will starve to death because Islamic militants promise to kill any aid workers attempting to distribute food to adults and children alike.

Abdi Guled of the Associated Press said, “Mogadishu , the capital, is a war zone.”

If you watched the weekend reports on ABC, NBC or CBS, you saw endless lines of wretched humans fleeing into Kenya and Ethiopia.

“If we are to save lives, we need to act now, to bring in massive quantities of medicines, vaccines, nutritional supplies and other aid into the region as quickly as possible,” said Shanelle Hall, director of UNICEF.

Ironically, AIDS has killed 42, 597, 559 Africans in the past 30 years.  It has currently infected 62,672, 209 that are slated to die.  One more African contracts HIV every nine seconds. (Source: http://www.kwanzaakeepers.com/africa-aids-death-count/africa-aids-death-count.htm)

But the Pope dictated that no one could or should use condoms in Africa because it was against God’s law.

Is that crazy or what?  It makes you wonder what century the Pope maintains his mindset or if he possesses a mind at all.

Going back to the situation where 800,000 African children will die of starvation, the United Nations also released its latest population projections that Africa will grow from its current 1 billion people to a mind-numbing 3.1 billion within this century.  That means that AIDS hasn’t  and won’t slow down the fecundity of the Africans.  But it also begs the question, “Does anyone have a brain in Africa?”  Or, I might add, any third world country?

Today, in countries like Africa, over 1 to 2 billion people cannot procure a clean glass of water.  Why?  Somewhere in excess of 3 billion humans do not have access to a toilet.    That’s why water systems suffer incredible pollution.  Does anyone possess an inkling of the ramifications of Africa’s adding another 2.1 billion to its current population?

This stuff just boggles my mind.  Why am I one of the few addressing it?

Try this one on for size.  India suffers 1,000 children under age 12 dying daily from dysentery, diarrhea and other water borne disease.  That’s 24/7 throughout the year folks! (Source: www.populationmedia.com )  Some estimates show that 10, 20 even 30 million Indians do not have access to a toilet.  The Ganges and all their other rivers are open sewer pipes.  I know because I saw it for myself.  Yet they grow by a net gain of 11 million annually on their way to becoming the most populated country in the world at 1.6 billion in 39 years.

Yet, on an NPR interview with Terri Gross of “Fresh Air”, an Indian transplant and editor of Time Magazine, Fareed Zakaria told Ms. Gross that immigration will make America a “vibrant” 400 million in several decades.  He fled India because of its demographic nightmare only to applaud another “American India” being formed in our country. By the way, Terri Gross didn’t ask Zakaria a single question on what another 100 million people might do to our rivers, lakes, water sources, energy, quality of life and standard of living.

Am I off base here folks?  Is it me?  Am I out of touch?  Should I be writing into Time Magazine and NPR congratulating people like Zakaria and Gross that are so out of touch with reality that they might as well live on Mars?

Who is thinking and who refuses to think?

Going back to Somalia’s nightmare:  if you go to the World Health Organization at www.worldhealthorganization.com , you will see that 18 million human beings die of starvation or starvation related diseases annually. That’s eight million adults and 10 million children that die because they cannot cultivate enough food to eat.

According to NewsVine.com , a whopping 26 million refugees are expected to be searching for a new country in order to survive within the next two to three years.  By the way, they are pouring into America at a rate of 3.1 million annually in 2011.

And yet, you won’t hear a peep from the major media networks about what America faces when Fareed Zakaria’ prediction of a “vibrant” added 100 million refugees immigrate to our shores in the next 24 years.

Why am I one of the miniscule few Americans addressing our demographic nightmare?   Why isn’t everyone screaming from the rooftops?  Why are we allowing our civilization to continue on this path?    I have attempted to interview on ABC, CBS, NBC, Today Show, Good Morning America, CNN, FOX, Charlie Rose, Bill Moyers, 60 Minutes and the top 100 radio talk shows.  They won’t touch the subject.

Are we collectively losing our minds and will we sit by quietly while we collectively lose our civilization?  That’s what it looks like from my window on the future.  Our country is growing just as crazy as the ones we read about in the news.

Here’s where we’re headed fellow Americans:

Tomorrow’s Americaproject on .

Producer: Dr. GEORGE A. COLBURNwww.tomorrowsamerica.com

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

www.starbrightmediacorp.com

www.tomorrowsamerica.com

Norway Massacre And The Jewish Right Wing Connection

Thanks to respected anti-Zionist Jeff Blankfort (who provided me with a crucial link) I have now learned that, just one day before last Friday’s Massacre in Norway, former Trotsky-ite turned neo-con David Horowitz carried an article by Joseph Klein in his Front Page magazine, entitled “The Quislings of Norway,” which might as well have provided mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik with all the motivation he needed to commit his crime.

You are advised to read the article in full here

Here are some of the ‘pearls’ produced by the pro-war Jewish rightwing magazine, just a few hours before Behring Breivik picked up his guns and launched into his lethal journey:

“The infamous Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, who assisted Nazi Germany as it conquered his own country, must be applauding in his grave…In the latest example of Norwegian collaboration with the enemies of the Jews, Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere declared during a press conference this week, alongside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, that “Norway believes it is perfectly legitimate for the Palestinian president to turn to the United Nations” to seek recognition of an independent Palestinian state.”

“During the Nazi occupation of Norway, nearly all Jews were either deported to death camps or fled to Sweden and beyond. Today, Norway is effectively under the occupation of anti-Semitic leftists and radical Muslims, and appears willing to help enable the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.”

“Norway’s Labor Party lawmaker Anders Mathisen has gone even further and publicly denied the Holocaust. He said that Jews “exaggerated their stories” and “there is no evidence the gas chambers and or mass graves existed.” While the Norwegian political establishment and opinion-maker elite may not have reached that point of lunacy just yet, they do tend to treat Muslims as the victims of Israeli oppression – as if today’s Muslims are filling the shoes of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and today’s Nazis are the Israelis.”

“Socialist leader Kristin Halvorsen has been leading the boycott Israel campaign. While serving as Norway’s finance minister, she was amongst the demonstrators at an anti-Israel protest, in which a poster read (translated): “The greatest axis of evil: USA and Israel.” Among the slogans repeatedly shouted at the demonstration was (as translated) “Death to the Jews!”

“Last year, the Norwegian government decided to divest from two Israeli entities working in the West Bank. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund divested from the Israeli company Elbit, because it has worked on the Israeli security fence that keeps out Palestinian suicide bombers. Israel has also been blocked from bidding for Norwegian defense contracts.”

“Part of the motivation for this anti-Semitism is the influx into Norway in recent decades of masses of Muslims from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia and elsewhere. Multiculturalism has taught Norway’s cultural elite to take an uncritical, even obsequious, posture toward every aspect of Muslim culture and belief. When Muslim leaders rant against Israel and the Jews, the reflexive response of the multiculturalist elite is to join them in their rantings. This is called solidarity.”

The truth of the matter is surely clear by now : it is Jewish right wing pro-war platforms such as FrontPage Magazine, Daniel Pipes,Harry’s Place and others  following their example, that consciously, openly , deviously and divisively cultivate a prevalent culture of hate and Islamophobia.

Was Behring Breivik a follower of FrontPage Magazine or the equally inciting and hateful Harry’s Place?  We cannot know for sure yet — but hopefully we will find out soon.

However, the message should be urgent and clear to all of us: police, intelligence and home security services around the world must surely investigate, and clampdown on these hate inspiring outlets, immediately. Their motivations, aims and activities must be brought under scrutiny and questioned. For the sake of peace and our general safety, law makers in Europe and America had better quickly put into place the necessary measures to restrain the activity of these Zionist warmongers in our midst.

Norway’s Mass Killer Copied the Unabomber Word for Word

Anders Behring Breivik was thought to have worked nine years of his so-calledmanifesto. Now it turns out that large parts of the script is plagiarism – copied verbatim from a known American terrorist.

The site Document.no as Sunday reveals that some of Anders Behring Breivik’s book, called “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence,” is straight out of the so-called Unabomber manifesto.

While Breivik several places in the text is careful to cite external sources, Theodore Kaczynski – known as the Unabomber – is not mentioned once.

Kaczynski is an American terrorist who was sentenced to life in prison for a series of letter bombs he sent to universities and airlines from the late 1970s to the mid-1990s.

Previous Stories:

* Anders Behring Breivik’s “Manifesto Video”: Knights Templar 2083

* A 32 Year Old Freemason, Christian, Conservative and Nationalist Arrested for Oslo Bombing and Shootings

Exchanged a few words

Some online newspapers have already compared Kaczynskis manifest with the 1,511-page document Breivik posted on the Internet shortly before the terrorist attack.

Now it turns out that the Northern man simply copied large parts of the text.

But where Kaczynski reviews the enemy as “leftism” and “leftist,” Breivik use the words “Multiculturalism” and “Cultural Communism.”

– This must be a way of version 2.0 of the Unabomber Manifesto, says Aage Borchgrevink, advisor to the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, to NRK.no

Kaczynski writes:

“When we speak of leftist in this article we garden in mind Mainly Socialists, Collectivist, ’politically correct’ types, feminists, gay and disability Activists, Animal Rights Activists and the like.”

With a few changes in wording, type Breivik the same:

“When we speak of cultural Marxists in this article we garden in mind Mainly Individuals WHO support Multiculturalism; Socialists, Collectivist, ’politically correct’ types, feminists, gay and disability Activists, Animal Rights Activists, Environmentalist, etc.”

Breivik has especially been inspired by the Kaczynskis theory that the left is suffering from a crippling inferiority complex.

“The two psychological Tendencies That underlie modern leftism we call” feelings of inferiority ’and’ oversocialization, ’”writes Kaczynski.

“The two psychological Tendencies That underlie cultural Marxists we call ’feelings of inferiority’ and ’over-socialisation,” repeats Breivik – without quoting.

Again, he has replaced “leftism” with “cultural Marxists”. Apart from paraphrasing from American to British English is the wording is identical.

Cultural chauvinism

According to a source Document.no talked with Breivik has in several places replaced Kaczynskis use of “black” with the word “Muslim”.

In a explanation about affirmative action, for example, Kaczynski writes:

“Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. More over, much leftist behavior is not Rationally Calculated to Be of benefit to the people WHOM the leftist claim to Be Trying to help. For example, if one believe That Affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense two demand Affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms?”

Here Breivik not only replace “leftist” with “cultural Marxist”, but also “black people” with “Muslim”:

“Hostility is too prominent a component of cultural Marxist Behaviour, so is the drive for power. More over, much cultural Marxist Behaviour is not Rationally Calculated to Be of benefit to the people WHOM They claim to Be Trying to help. For example, if one believe That Affirmative action is good for Muslims, does it make sense two demand Affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? ”

Aage Borchgrevink is not surprised that Breivik wrote Muslim rather than black or dark-skinned.

Source: 

« Previous Page — Next Page »