Thursday, December 30, 2010

Denmark is a ZIONIST CIA/MOSSAD occupied country..... ZOG.

Why has Denmark become involved in terrorism?

In December 2010 we learn that Danish police have foiled a terror plot.

And the plotters may be linked to the American agent David Headley (Five held for plotting attack on Danish paper)

Headley is accused of traveling to Denmark to scout the building of the Jyllands-Posten newspaper, the newspaper which printed cartoons showing Muhammad as a terrorist. ("In alleged terror plot, a troubling twist"

Headley claimed he worked for the CIA. (HEADLEY INTRODUCED HIMSELF AS A CIA AGENT- aangirfan)

The editor of Jyllands-Posten is Flemming Rose.

Flemming Rose is reported to be a Ukrainian-born Jew who is working for Mossad. (Flemming Rose - A Ukrainian Jew Working for Mossad? - Radio Islam)

In March 2010, we learnt that Herbert Pundik, a top Danish journalist, worked for Mossad. (Respected Danish journalist admits 'I was a Mossad agent'.


Denmark's spy boss is Jakob Scharf.

Reportedly he has Jewish connections. (Website)

According to former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky's book, By Way of Deception:

"The relationship between the Mossad and Danish intelligence is so intimate as to be indecent."

Anders Rasmussen, formerly prime minister of Denmark and currently boss of NATO, has strongly supported Neocon policies.

Rasmussen is a CIA/MOSSAD Bilderberger....

Craig Murray wrote of Rasmussen (NATO Appoints a Vicious Liar as Secretary General):

"An enthusiastic follower of George Bush, like his friend Tony Blair he told outright lies to the Danish people about the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

"He also lied about the content of secret intelligence reports the Danes had on Iraqi WMD...

"A very brave and honourable man, Major Frank Grevil, stepped forward to tell the Danish people that Rasmussen had lied about the content of intelligence reports.

"Rasmussen did not show his famed support for freedom of speech in the case of Major Frank Grevil, who was jailed for telling the Danish people the truth..."

Denmark is a ZIONIST CIA/MOSSAD occupied Entity..... and ZOG.

History shows that there are plenty of Moslems willing to work for the CIA and Mossad, in return for money or sex or drugs.

It is not difficult to recruit Moslem Patsies as 'terrorists'.....look at the obvious inside Job of 9/11....

Friday, December 24, 2010

Secrets of the Federal Reserve

"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes its laws." (Mayer Amschel Rothschild)

97 years ago today was a true day of infamy. One of the darkest traitors in American history, Woodrow Wilson, signed the Federal Reserve Act. Only those today who still benefit from the greatest theft scheme in our history would dare to celebrate the crimes. The real history remains hidden to most. Eustace Mullins should be required reading for all who value truth.

Secrets of the Federal Reserve

by Eustace Mullins

Table of Contents

Introduction by Ezra Pound
Chapter One: Jekyll Island
Chapter Two: The Aldrich Plan
Chapter Three: The Federal Reserve Act
Chapter Four: The Federal Advisory Council
Chapter Five: The House of Rothschild
Chapter Six: The London Connection
Chapter Seven: The Hitler Connection
Chapter Eight: World War One
Chapter Nine: The Agricultural Depression
Chapter Ten: The Money Creators
Chapter Eleven: Lord Montagu Norman
Chapter Twelve: The Great Depression
Chapter Thirteen: The 1930's
Chapter Fourteen: Congressional Expose
Questions and Answers


In 1949, while I was visiting Ezra Pound who was a political prisoner at St. Elizabeth's Hospital, Washington, D.C. Dr. Pound asked me if I had ever heard of the Federal Reserve System. I replied that I had not, as of the age of 25. He then showed me a ten dollar bill marked "Federal Reserve Note" and asked me if I would do some research at the Library of Congress on the Federal Reserve System which had issued this bill. Pound was unable to go to the Library himself, as he was being held without trial as a political prisoner by the United States government. After he was denied broadcasting time in the U.S., Dr. Pound broadcast from Italy in an effort to persuade people of the United States not to enter World War II. Franklin D. Roosevelt had personally ordered Pound's indictment, spurred by the demands of his three personal assistants, Harry Dexter White, Lauchlin Currie, and Alger Hiss, all of whom were subsequently identified as being connected with Communist espionage.

I had no interest in money or banking as a subject, because I was working on a novel. Pound offered to supplement my income by ten dollars a week for a few weeks. My initial research revealed evidence of an international banking group which had secretly planned the writing of the Federal Reserve Act and Congress' enactment of the plan into law. These findings confirmed what Pound had long suspected. He said, "You must work on it as a detective story." I was fortunate in having my research at the Library of Congress directed by a prominent scholar, George Stimpson, founder of the National Press Club, who was described by The New York Times of September 28, 1952: "Beloved by Washington newspapermen as 'our walking Library of Congress', Mr. Stimpson was a highly regarded reference source in the Capitol. Government officials, Congressmen and reporters went to him for information on any subject."

I did research four hours each day at the Library of Congress, and went to St. Elizabeth's Hospital in the afternoon. Pound and I went over the previous day's notes. I then had dinner with George Stimpson at Scholl's Cafeteria while he went over my material, and I then went back to my room to type up the corrected notes. Both Stimpson and Pound made many suggestions in guiding me in a field in which I had no previous experience. When Pound's resources ran low, I applied to the Guggenheim Foundation, Huntington Hartford Foundation, and other foundations to complete my research on the Federal Reserve. Even though my foundation applications were sponsored by the three leading poets of America, Ezra Pound, E.E. Cummings, and Elizabeth Bishop, all of the foundations refused to sponsor this research. I then wrote up my findings to date, and in 1950 began efforts to market this manuscript in New York. Eighteen publishers turned it down without comment, but the nineteenth, Devin Garrity, president of Devin Adair Publishing Company, gave me some friendly advice in his office. "I like your book, but we can't print it," he told me. "Neither can anybody else in New York. Why don't you bring in a prospectus for your novel, and I think we can give you an advance. You may as well forget about getting the Federal Reserve book published. I doubt if it could ever be printed."

This was devastating news, coming after two years of intensive work. I reported back to Pound, and we tried to find a publisher in other parts of the country. After two years of fruitless submissions, the book was published in a small edition in 1952 by two of Pound's disciples, John Kasper and David Horton, using their private funds, under the title Mullins on the Federal Reserve. In 1954, a second edition, with unauthorized alterations, was published in New Jersey, as The Federal Reserve Conspiracy. In 1955, Guido Roeder brought out a German edition in Oberammergau, Germany. The book was seized and the entire edition of 10,000 copies burned by government agents led by Dr. Otto John.

The burning of the book was upheld April 21, 1961 by judge Israel Katz of the Bavarian Supreme Court. The U.S. Government refused to intervene, because U.S. High Commissioner to Germany, James B. Conant (president of Harvard University 1933 to 1953), had approved the initial book burning order. This is the only book which has been burned in Germany since World War II. In 1968 a pirated edition of this book appeared in California. Both the FBI and the U.S. Postal inspectors refused to act, despite numerous complaints from me during the next decade. In 1980 a new German edition appeared. Because the U.S. Government apparently no longer dictated the internal affairs of Germany, the identical book which had been burned in 1955 now circulates in Germany without interference.

I had collaborated on several books with Mr. H.L. Hunt and he suggested that I should continue my long-delayed research on the Federal Reserve and bring out a more definitive version of this book. I had just signed a contract to write the authorized biography of Ezra Pound, and the Federal Reserve book had to be postponed. Mr. Hunt passed away before I could get back to my research, and once again I faced the problem of financing research for the book.

My original book had traced and named the shadowy figures in the United States who planned the Federal Reserve Act. I now discovered that the men whom I exposed in 1952 as the shadowy figures behind the operation of the Federal Reserve System were themselves shadows, the American fronts for the unknown figures who became known as the "London Connection." I found that notwithstanding our successes in the Wars of Independence of 1812 against England, we remained an economic and financial colony of Great Britain. For the first time, we located the original stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks and traced their parent companies to the London Connection.

This research is substantiated by citations and documentation from hundreds of newspapers, periodicals and books and charts showing blood, marriage, and business relationships. More than a thousand issues of The New York Times on microfilm have been checked not only for original information, but verification of statements from other sources.

It is a truism of the writing profession that a writer has only one book within him. This seems applicable in my case, because I am now in the fifth decade of continuous writing on a single subject, the inside story of the Federal Reserve System. This book was from its inception commissioned and guided by Ezra Pound. Four of his protégés have previously been awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, William Butler Yeats for his later poetry, James Joyce for "Ulysses", Ernest Hemingway for "The Sun Also Rises", and T.S. Elliot for "The Waste Land". Pound played a major role in the inspiration and in the editing of these works--which leads us to believe that this present work, also inspired by Pound, represents an ongoing literary tradition.

Although this book in its inception was expected to be a tortuous work on economic and monetary techniques, it soon developed into a story of such universal and dramatic appeal that from the outset, Ezra Pound urged me to write it as a detective story, a genre which was invented by my fellow Virginian, Edgar Allan Poe. I believe that the continuous circulation of this book during the past forty years has not only exonerated Ezra Pound for his much condemned political and monetary statements, but also that it has been, and will continue to be, the ultimate weapon against the powerful conspirators who compelled him to serve thirteen and a half years without trial, as a political prisoner held in an insane asylum a la KGB. His earliest vindication came when the government agents who represented the conspirators refused to allow him to testify in his own defense; the second vindication came in 1958 when these same agents dropped all charges against him, and he walked out of St. Elizabeth's Hospital, a free man once more. His third and final vindication is this work, which documents every aspect of his exposure of the ruthless international financiers to whom Ezra Pound became but one more victim, doomed to serve years as the Man in the Iron Mask, because he had dared to alert his fellow-Americans to their furtive acts of treason against all people of the United States.

In my lectures throughout this nation, and in my appearances on many radio and television programs, I have sounded the toxin that the Federal Reserve System is not Federal; it has no reserves; and it is not a system at all, but rather, a criminal syndicate. From November, 1910, when the conspirators met on Jekyll Island, Georgia, to the present time, the machinations of the Federal Reserve bankers have been shrouded in secrecy. Today, that secrecy has cost the American people a three trillion dollar debt, with annual interest payments to these bankers amounting to some three hundred billion dollars per year, sums which stagger the imagination, and which in themselves are ultimately unpayable. Officials of the Federal Reserve System routinely issue remonstrances to the public, much as the Hindu fakir pipes an insistent tune to the dazed cobra which sways its head before him, not to resolve the situation, but to prevent it from striking him. Such was the soothing letter written by Donald J. Winn, Assistant to the Board of Governors in response to an inquiry by a Congressman, the Honorable Norman D. Shumway, on March 10, 1983. Mr. Winn states that "The Federal Reserve System was established by an act of Congress in 1913 and is not a 'private corporation'." On the next page, Mr. Winn continues, "The stock of the Federal Reserve Banks is held entirely by commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System." He offers no explanation as to why the government has never owned a single share of stock in any Federal Reserve Bank, or why the Federal Reserve System is not a "private corporation" when all of its stock is owned by "private corporations".

American history in the twentieth century has recorded the amazing achievements of the Federal Reserve bankers. First, the outbreak of World War I, which was made possible by the funds available from the new central bank of the United States. Second, the Agricultural Depression of 1920. Third, the Black Friday Crash on Wall Street of October, 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression. Fourth, World War II. Fifth, the conversion of the assets of the United States and its citizens from real property to paper assets from 1945 to the present, transforming a victorious America and foremost world power in 1945 to the world's largest debtor nation in 1990. Today, this nation lies in economic ruins, devastated and destitute, in much the same dire straits in which Germany and Japan found themselves in 1945. Will Americans act to rebuild our nation, as Germany and Japan have done when they faced the identical conditions which we now face--or will we continue to be enslaved by the Babylonian debt money system which was set up by the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 to complete our total destruction? This is the only question which we have to answer, and we do not have much time left to answer it.

Because of the depth and the importance of the information which I had developed at the Library of Congress under the tutelage of Ezra Pound, this work became the happy hunting ground for many other would-be historians, who were unable to research this material for themselves. Over the past four decades, I have become accustomed to seeing this material appear in many other books, invariably attributed to other writers, with my name never mentioned. To add insult to injury, not only my material, but even my title has been appropriated, in a massive, if obtuse, work called "Secrets of the Temple--the Federal Reserve". This heavily advertised book received reviews ranging from incredulous to hilarious. Forbes Magazine advised its readers to read their review and save their money, pointing out that "a reader will discover no secrets" and that "This is one of those books whose fanfares far exceed their merit." This was not accidental, as this overblown whitewash of the Federal Reserve bankers was published by the most famous nonbook publisher in the world.

After my initial shock at discovering that the most influential literary personality of the twentieth century, Ezra Pound, was imprisoned in "the Hellhole" in Washington, I immediately wrote for assistance to a Wall Street financier at whose estate I had frequently been a guest. I reminded him that as a patron of the arts, he could not afford to allow Pound to remain in such inhuman captivity. His reply shocked me even more. He wrote back that "your friend can well stay where he is." It was some years before I was able to understand that, for this investment banker and his colleagues, Ezra Pound would always be "the enemy".

Eustace Mullins
Jackson Hole, Wyoming 1991

PDF version

Also see:
The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve
The Federal Reserve's War Against the Human Race
The Federal Reserve: History and Conspiracy
Jeckyll Island and the Federal Reserve
How and Why International Bankers Made War
The Jefferson of Our Time
The US Income-tax
How the Federal Reserve Runs the US by Stephen Lendman 5 parts
Central Banking - background
The Creature from Jekyll Island mp3
Money Masters - video
The Federal Reserve: The Greatest Scam in History?
What Caused the Great Depression of the 1930's

Banks that hold the controlling stock in the Federal Reserve Corporation:
Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin, Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris, Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam, Lehman Brothers Bank of New York, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, Goldman Sachs Bank of New York....

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

U.S. to world: what's yours may become ours

December , 2010 -- U.S. to world: what's yours may become ours....

Uncle Sam greedily eyes world's critical infrastructure and resources....

Just as Nazi Germany had a list of world resources it planned to take over, including Romania's Ploesti oil fields, Norway's heavy water, and Denmark's shipyards, Hillary Clinton also has a list of world resources considered vital to the United States and obviously subject to seizure. The cable specifically mentions "war fighting facilities."

The secret list follows:

INFO  LOG-00   MFA-00   EEB-00   AF-00    AGRE-00  AIT-00   AMAD-00
AOP-00 AEX-00 AS-00 A-00 ACQ-00 CIAE-00 CIP-00
COME-00 CCOE-00 CPR-00 INL-00 DNI-00 DIM-00 DODE-00
DOEE-00 WHA-00 PERC-00 DS-00 EAP-00 DHSE-00 EUR-00
FBIE-00 VCI-00 FSI-00 OBO-00 TEDE-00 INR-00 IO-00
CAC-00 MED-07 MFLO-00 MMP-00 MOFM-00 MOF-00 M-00
CDC-00 VCIE-00 NEA-00 DCP-00 NRC-00 NSAE-00 ISN-00
OES-00 OIG-00 NIMA-00 PM-00 P-00 ISNE-00 DOHS-00
FMPC-00 IRM-00 SSO-00 SS-00 MR-00 TRSE-00 CBP-00
EPAE-00 SCRS-00 PMB-00 DSCC-00 PRM-00 DRL-00 G-00
ALM-00 SCA-00 SAS-00 FA-00 PMA-00 SWCI-00 /007R

P 182318Z FEB 09
TO PAGE 02 STATE 015113 182333Z

S E C R E T STATE 015113


E.O. 12958: DECL: 1/29/2019

Classified by S/CT DAS, Susan F. Burk,
Reason: 1/4 (B), (D), (E), and (G)
1. (U//FOUO) This is an action request; see Para. 13.
2. (U//FOUO) Under the direction of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) was written to provide the unifying structure
for the integration of critical infrastructure and key resources (CI/KR) protection into a single
national program. The overarching goal of the NIPP is to build a safer, more secure, and more
resilient America by enhancing protection of the nation's CI/KR to prevent, deter, neutralize or
mitigate the effects of deliberate efforts by terrorists to destroy, incapacitate or exploit them;
and to strengthen national preparedness, timely response, and rapid recovery in the event
of an attack, natural disaster or other emergency.
3. (U//FOUO) In addition to a list of critical domestic CI/KR, the NIPP requires compilation
and annual update of a comprehensive inventory of CI/KR that are located outside U.S.
borders and whose loss could critically impact the public health, economic security, and/or national
and homeland security of the United States. DHS in collaboration with State developed the
Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative (CFDI )to identify these critical U.S. foreign dependencies --
foreign CI/KR that may affect systems within the U.S. directly or indirectly. State is coordinating
with DHS to develop the 2009 inventory, and the action request in Para. 13 represents the initial
step in this process.
4. (U//FOUO) The NIPP does not define CI/KR. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD 7)
references definitions in two separate statutes. In the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195(e))
"critical infrastructure" is defined as systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to
the United States the incapacitation or destruction of such systems and assets would have a
debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety,
or any combination of those matters. In the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(9))
"key resources" are defined as publicly or privately controlled resources essential to the minimal
operations of the economy and government.
5. (U//FOUO) The NIPP identifies 18 CI/KR sectors: agriculture and food; defense industrial base;
energy; healthcare and public health; national monuments and icons; banking and finance;
drinking water and water treatment systems; chemical; commercial facilities; dams; emergency
services; commercial nuclear reactors, materials, and waste; information technology; communications;
postal and shipping; transportation and systems; government facilities; and critical manufacturing.
Obviously some of these sectors are more likely to have international components than other sectors.
6. (U//FOUO) Department is surveying posts for their input on critical infrastructure and key resources
within their host country which, if destroyed, disrupted or exploited, would likely have an immediate and
deleterious effect on the United States. We expect posts, after consultation among all sections and
agencies, will in many instances immediately recognize whether such CI/KR exist in their host country.
Posts are not/not being asked to consult with host governments with respect to this request.
7. (U//FOUO) Building upon the initial survey completed in 2008, Department requests each post reassess
and update information about infrastructure and resources in each host country whose loss could
immediately affect the public health, economic security, and/or national and homeland security of the
United States. This reassessment may include suggestions from posts for removing, modifying, or adding
CI/KR to the list developed in 2008 (see the list of CI/KR identified in 2008 in Para. 15 below).
8. (U//FOUO) The following three categories should be considered when determining whether critical foreign
dependencies exist in the host country: 1) direct physical linkages (e.g., pipelines, undersea
telecommunications cables, and assets located in close enough proximity to the U.S. border their
destruction could cause cross-border consequences, such as damage to dams and chemical facilities);
2) sole or predominantly foreign/host-country sourced goods and services (e.g., minerals or chemicals
critical to U.S. industry, a critical finished product manufactured in one or only a small number of countries,
or a telecom hub whose destruction might seriously disrupt global communications); and 3) critical
supply chain nodes (e.g., the Strait of Hormuz and Panama Canal, as well as any ports or shipping
lanes in the host-country critical to the functioning of the global supply chain).
9. (U//FOUO) Although they are important issues, Department is not/not seeking information at this
time on second-order effects (e.g., public morale and confidence, and interdependency effects that
might cascade from a disruption).
10. (U//FOUO) Posts do not need to report government facilities overseas managed by State or war
fighting facilities
managed by other departments or agencies.
11. (U//FOUO) The following general information should be addressed when nominating elements for
inclusion, removal, or modification: -- (U//FOUO) Name and physical location of the asset, system,
or supply chain node. -- (U//FOUO) Post's rationale for including, modifying, or removing an asset,
system, or supply chain node. -- (U//FOUO) Any information Post has regarding conditions in
country causing Post to believe the CI/KR is an active target or especially vulnerable due to natural
circumstances. -- (U//FOUO) Any information Post has regarding CIP activities in country and who/what
agency is responsible for those activities.
12. (U//FOUO) Questions can be directed to Sharri R. Clark in S/CT:;; begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 202-647-1514 end_of_the_skype_highlighting. Alternatively, questions can be directed to S. Gail Robertson
in S/CT:;, begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 202-647-3769 end_of_the_skype_highlighting.
13. (U//FOUO) ACTION REQUEST: Posts are requested to report by March 20, 2009 on CI/KR in their
host country meeting the criteria outlined above and a brief explanation of why posts believes the asset
meets the criteria. Due to the potential sensitivity of assets identified, posts are asked to consider the
necessity of classifying their responses appropriately. Please note the list in its entirety is classified S/NF.
If post determines there are no such CI/KR in its host country, a negative report is requested. Please send
replies to the attention of Sharri R. Clark in S/CT and use the subject line "CI/KR Response for S/CT".
14. (U//FOUO) Posts' assistance with providing input to the first list created in 2008 was invaluable,
and Department appreciates Posts' continuing cooperation.
15. (S//NF) Following is the 2008 Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative (CFDI) list (CI/KR organized by region):
Congo (Kinshasa): Cobalt (Mine and Plant)
Gabon: Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade, synthetic; chemical grade; ferro;
metallurgical grade
Guinea: Bauxite (Mine)
South Africa: BAE Land System OMC, Benoni, South Africa Brown David Gear Industries LTD,
Benoni, South Africa Bushveld Complex (chromite mine) Ferrochromium Manganese -
Battery grade, natural; battery grade, synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade
Palladium Mine and Plant Platinum Mines Rhodium
Australia: Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Brookvale, Australia Southern Cross undersea
cable landing, Sydney, Australia Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade,
synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade Nickel Mines Maybe Faulding Mulgrave Victoria,
Australia: Manufacturing facility for Midazolam injection. Mayne Pharma (fill/finish),
Melbourne, Australia: Sole suppliers of Crotalid Polyvalent Antivenin (CroFab).
China: C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Chom Hom Kok, Hong Kong C2C Cable Network
undersea cable landing Shanghai, China China-US undersea cable landing,
Chongming, China China-US undersea cable landing Shantou, China EAC undersea cable landing
Tseung Kwan O, Hong Kong FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Tong Fuk,
Hong Kong Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators Fluorspar (Mine) Germanium Mine
Graphite Mine Rare Earth Minerals/Elements Tin Mine and Plant Tungsten - Mine and Plant
Polypropylene Filter Material for N-95 Masks Shanghai Port Guangzhou Port Hong Kong Port
Ningbo Port Tianjin Port
Fiji: Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Suva, Fiji
Indonesia: Tin Mine and Plant Straits of Malacca
Japan: C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Chikura, Japan C2C Cable Network undersea
cable landing, Shima, Japan China-US undersea cable, Okinawa, Japan EAC undersea cable
landing Ajigaura, Japan EAC undersea cable landing Shima, Japan FLAG/REACH
North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Wada, Japan FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea
cable landing Wada, Japan Japan-US undersea cable landing, Maruyama, Japan Japan-US
undersea cable landing Kitaibaraki, Japan KJCN undersea cable landing Fukuoka, Japan KJCN
undersea cable landing Kita-Kyushu, Japan Pacific Crossing-1 (PC-1) undersea cable landing
Ajigaura, Japan Pacific Crossing-1 (PC-1) undersea cable landing Shima, Japan Tyco Transpacific
undersea cable landing, Toyohashi, Japan Tyco Transpacific undersea cable landing Emi, Japan Hitachi,
Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators Port of Chiba Port of Kobe Port of Nagoya Port of Yokohama
Iodine Mine Metal Fabrication Machines Titanium Metal (Processed) Biken, Kanonji City,
Japan Hitachi Electrical Power Generators and Components Large AC Generators above 40 MVA
Malaysia: Straits of Malacca
New Zealand: Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Whenuapai, New Zealand
Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Takapuna, New Zealand
Philippines: C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Batangas, Philippines
EAC undersea cable landing Cavite, Philippines
Republic of Korea: C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Pusan, Republic of Korea.
EAC undersea cable landing Shindu-Ri, Republic of Korea FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop
undersea cable landing Pusan, Republic of Korea KJCN undersea cable landing Pusan,
Republic of Korea Hitachi Large Electric Power Transformers 230 - 500 kV Busan Port
Singapore: C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Changi, Singapore EAC undersea cable
landing Changi North, Singapore Port of Singapore Straits of Malacca
Taiwan: C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Fangshan, Taiwan C2C Cable Network
undersea cable landing, Tanshui, Taiwan China-US undersea cable landing Fangshan,
Taiwan EAC undersea cable landing Pa Li, Taiwan FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable
landing Toucheng, Taiwan Kaohsiung Port
EUROPE AND EURASIA Europe (Unspecified): Metal Fabrication Machines: Small number of Turkish
companies (Durma, Baykal, Ermaksan)
Austria: Baxter AG, Vienna, Austria: Immune Globulin Intravenous (IGIV) Octapharma Pharmazeutika,
Vienna, Austria: Immune Globulin Intravenous (IGIV)
Azerbaijan: Sangachal Terminal Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Belarus: Druzhba Oil Pipeline
Belgium: Germanium Mine Baxter SA, Lessines, Belgium: Immune Globulin Intravenous (IGIV)
Glaxo Smith Kline, Rixensart, Belgium: Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Component GlaxoSmithKline
Biologicals SA, Wavre, Belgium: Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Component Port of Antwerp
Denmark: TAT-14 undersea cable landing, Blaabjerg, Denmark Bavarian Nordic (BN),
Hejreskovvej, Kvistgard, Denmark: Smallpox Vaccine Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Bagsvaerd, Denmark: Numerous formulations of insulin Novo Nordisk Insulin Manufacturer:
Global insulin supplies Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark: DTaP
(including D and T components) pediatric version
France: APOLLO undersea cable, Lannion, France FA-1 undersea cable, Plerin, France
TAT-14 undersea cable landing St. Valery, France Sanofi-Aventis Insulin Manufacturer:
Global insulin supplies Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine finishing Alstrom, Hydroelectric Dam Turbines
and Generators Alstrom Electrical Power Generators and Components EMD Pharms Semoy, France:
Cyanokit Injection GlaxoSmithKline, Inc. Evreux, France: Influenza neurominidase inhibitor
RELENZA (Zanamivir) Diagast, Cedex, France: Olympus (impacts blood typing ability)
Genzyme Polyclonals SAS (bulk), Lyon, France: Thymoglobulin Sanofi Pasteur SA, Lyon, France:
Rabies virus vaccine
Georgia: Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline
Germany: TAT-14 undersea cable landing, Nodren, Germany. Atlantic Crossing-1 (AC-1)
undersea cable landing Sylt, Germany BASF Ludwigshafen: World's largest integrated chemical
complex Siemens Erlangen: Essentially irreplaceable production of key chemicals Siemens,
GE, Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators Draeger Safety AG & Co., Luebeck, Germany:
Critical to gas detection capability Junghans Fienwerktechnik Schramberg, Germany:
Critical to the production of mortars TDW-Gasellschaft Wirksysteme, Schroebenhausen, Germany:
Critical to the production of the Patriot Advanced Capability Lethality Enhancement Assembly Siemens,
Large Electric Power Transformers 230 - 500 kV Siemens, GE Electrical Power Generators and Components
Druzhba Oil Pipeline Sanofi Aventis Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Lantus Injection (insulin) Heyl
Chemish-pharmazeutische Fabrik GmbH: Radiogardase (Prussian blue) Hameln Pharmaceuticals, Hameln,
Germany: Pentetate Calcium Trisodium (Ca DTPA) and Pentetate Zinc Trisodium (Zn DTPA) for
contamination with plutonium, americium, and curium IDT Biologika GmbH, Dessau Rossiau, Germany:
BN Small Pox Vaccine. Biotest AG, Dreiech, Germany: Supplier for TANGO
(impacts automated blood typing ability) CSL Behring GmbH, Marburg, Germany:
Antihemophilic factor/von Willebrand factor Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics GmbH, Marburg,
ermany: Rabies virus vaccine Vetter Pharma Fertigung GmbH & Co KG, Ravensburg, Germany (filling):
Rho(D) IGIV Port of Hamburg
Ireland: Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing, Dublin Ireland Genzyme Ireland Ltd. (filling),
Waterford, Ireland: Thymoglobulin
Italy: Glaxo Smith Kline SpA (fill/finish), Parma, Italy: Digibind (used to treat snake bites)
Trans-Med gas pipeline
Netherlands: Atlantic Crossing-1 (AC-1) undersea cable landing Beverwijk,
Netherlands TAT-14 undersea cable landing, Katwijk, Netherlands Rotterdam Port
Norway: Cobalt Nickel Mine
Poland: Druzhba Oil Pipeline
Russia: Novorossiysk Export Terminal
Primorsk Export Terminal. Nadym Gas Pipeline Junction: The most critical gas facility in the world
Uranium Nickel Mine: Used in certain types of stainless steel and superalloys Palladium
Mine and Plant Rhodium
Spain: Strait of Gibraltar Instituto Grifols, SA, Barcelona, Spain: Immune Globulin Intravenous (IGIV)
Maghreb-Europe (GME) gas pipeline, Algeria
Sweden: Recip AB Sweden: Thyrosafe (potassium iodine)
Switzerland: Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc. Basel, Switzerland: Tamiflu (oseltamivir) Berna Biotech, Berne,
Switzerland: Typhoid vaccine CSL Behring AG, Berne, Switzerland: Immune Globulin Intravenous (IGIV)
Turkey: Metal Fabrication Machines: Small number of Turkish companies (Durma, Baykal, Ermaksan)
Bosporus Strait Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline
Ukraine: Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade, synthetic; chemical grade; ferro;
metallurgical grade
United Kingdom: Goonhilly Teleport, Goonhilly Downs, United Kingdom Madley Teleport, Stone Street,
Madley, United Kingdom Martelsham Teleport, Ipswich, United Kingdom APOLLO undersea cable landing
Bude, Cornwall Station, United Kingdom Atlantic Crossing-1 (AC-1) undersea cable landing Whitesands
Bay FA-1 undersea cable landing Skewjack, Cornwall Station Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing,
Southport, United Kingdom TAT-14 undersea cable landing Bude, Cornwall Station, United Kingdom
Tyco Transatlantic undersea cable landing, Highbridge, United Kingdom Tyco Transatlantic undersea
cable landing, Pottington, United Kingdom. Yellow/Atlantic Crossing-2 (AC-2)
undersea cable landing Bude, United Kingdom Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine finishing BAE Systems
(Operations) Ltd., Presont, Lancashire, United Kingdom: Critical to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
BAE Systems Operations Ltd., Southway, Plymouth Devon, United Kingdom: Critical to extended range
guided munitions BAE Systems RO Defense, Chorley, United Kingdom: Critical to the Joint Standoff
Weapon (JSOW) AGM-154C (Unitary Variant) MacTaggart Scott, Loanhead, Edinburgh, Lothian, Scotland,
United Kingdom: Critical to the Ship Submersible Nuclear (SSN)
Djibouti: Bab al-Mendeb: Shipping lane is a critical supply chain node
Egypt: 'Ayn Sukhnah-SuMEd Receiving Import Terminal 'Sidi Kurayr-SuMed Offloading Export Terminal
Suez Canal Iran: Strait of Hormuz Khark (Kharg) Island Sea Island Export Terminal Khark Island T-Jetty
Iraq: Al-Basrah Oil Terminal
Israel: Rafael Ordnance Systems Division, Haifa, Israel: Critical to Sensor Fused Weapons (SFW),
Wind Corrected Munitions Dispensers (WCMD), Tail Kits, and batteries
Kuwait: Mina' al Ahmadi Export Terminal
Morocco: Strait of Gibraltar Maghreb-Europe (GME) gas pipeline, Morocco
Oman: Strait of Hormuz
Qatar: Ras Laffan Industrial Center: By 2012 Qatar will be the largest source of imported LNG to U.S.
Saudi Arabia: Abqaiq Processing Center: Largest crude oil processing and stabilization plant in the
world Al Ju'aymah Export Terminal: Part of the Ras Tanura complex As Saffaniyah Processing
Center Qatif Pipeline Junction Ras at Tanaqib Processing Center Ras Tanura Export Terminal
Shaybah Central Gas-oil Separation Plant Tunisia: Trans-Med Gas Pipeline
United Arab Emirates (UAE): Das Island Export Terminal Jabal Zannah Export
Terminal Strait of Hormuz
Yemen: Bab al-Mendeb: Shipping lane is a critical supply chain node
Kazakhstan: Ferrochromium Khromtau Complex, Kempersai, (Chromite Mine)
India: Orissa (chromite mines) and Karnataka (chromite mines) Generamedix Gujurat, India:
Chemotherapy agents, including florouracil and methotrexate
Argentina: Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine finishing
Bermuda: GlobeNet (formerly Bermuda US-1 (BUS-1) undersea cable landing Devonshire, Bermuda
Brazil: Americas-II undersea cable landing Fortaleza, Brazil GlobeNet undersea cable landing
Fortaleza, Brazil GlobeNet undersea cable landing Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Iron Ore from Rio Tinto Mine
Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade, synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical
grade Niobium (Columbium), Araxa, Minas Gerais State (mine) Ouvidor and Catalao I, Goias State:
Chile: Iodine Mine
Canada: Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing Halifax , Nova Scotia, Canada James Bay
Power Project, Quebec: monumental hydroelectric power development Mica Dam, British Columbia:
Failure would impact the Columbia River Basin. Hydro Quebec, Quebec: Critical irreplaceable
source of power to portions of Northeast U. S. Robert Moses/Robert H. Saunders Power, Ontario:
Part of the St. Lawrence Power Project, between Barnhart Island, New York, and Cornwall, Ontario
Seven Mile Dam, British Columbia: Concrete gravity dam between two other hydropower dams along
the Pend d'Oreille River Pickering Nuclear Power Plant, Ontario, Canada Chalk River Nuclear Facility,
Ontario: Largest supplier of medical radioisotopes in the world Hydrofluoric Acid Production Facility,
Allied Signal, Amherstburg, Ontario Enbridge Pipeline Alliance Pipeline: Natural gas transmission from
Canada Maritime and Northeast Pipeline: Natural gas transmission from Canada Transcanada Gas:
Natural gas transmission from Canada Alexandria Bay POE, Ontario: Northern border crossing
Ambassador Bridge POE, Ontario: Northern border crossing Blaine POE, British Columbia:
Northern border crossing Blaine Washington Rail Crossing, British Columbia Blue Water Bridge
POE, Ontario: Northern border crossing Champlain POE, Quebec: Northern border crossing CPR
Tunnel Rail Crossing, Ontario (Michigan Central Rail Crossing) International Bridge Rail Crossing,
Ontario International Railway Bridge Rail Crossing Lewiston-Queenstown POE, Ontario: Northern
border crossing Peace Bridge POE, Ontario: Northern border crossing Pembina POE, Manitoba:
Northern border crossing North Portal Rail Crossing, Saskatchewan St. Claire Tunnel Rail Crossing,
Ontario Waneta Dam, British Columbia: Earthfill/concrete hydropower dam Darlington Nuclear
Power Plant, Ontario, Canada. E-ONE Moli Energy, Maple Ridge, Canada: Critical to production
of various military application electronics General Dynamics Land Systems - Canada, London
Ontario, Canada: Critical to the production of the Stryker/USMC LAV Vehicle Integration
Raytheon Systems Canada Ltd. ELCAN Optical Technologies Division, Midland, Ontario,
Canada: Critical to the production of the AGM-130 Missile Thales Optronique Canada, Inc.,
Montreal, Quebec: Critical optical systems for ground combat vehicles Germanium Mine
Graphite Mine Iron Ore Mine Nickel Mine Niobec Mine, Quebec, Canada: Niobium Cangene,
Winnipeg, Manitoba: Plasma Sanofi Pasteur Ltd., Toronto, Canada: Polio virus vaccine
GlaxoSmithKile Biologicals, North America, Quebec, Canada: Pre-pandemic influenza
French Guiana: Americas-II undersea cable landing Cayenne, French Guiana
Martinique: Americas-II undersea cable landing Le Lamentin, Martinique
Mexico: FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Tijuana, Mexico
Pan-American Crossing (PAC) undersea cable landing Mazatlan, Mexico Amistad
International Dam: On the Rio Grande near Del Rio, Texas and Ciudad Acuna,
Coahuila, Mexico Anzalduas Dam: Diversion dam south of Mission, Texas, operated
jointly by the U.S. and Mexico for flood control Falcon International Dam: Upstream of Roma,
Texas and Miguel Aleman, Tamaulipas, Mexico Retamal Dam: Diversion dam south of Weslaco,
Texas, operated jointly by the U.S. and Mexico for flood control GE Hydroelectric Dam Turbines
and Generators: Main source for a large portion of larger components Bridge of the Americas:
Southern border crossing Brownsville POE: Southern border crossing Calexico East POE:
Southern border crossing Columbia Solidarity Bridge: Southern border crossing Kansas
City Southern de Mexico (KCSM) Rail Line, (Mexico) Nogales POE: Southern border crossing
Laredo Rail Crossing Eagle Pass Rail Crossing Otay Mesa Crossing: Southern border crossing
Pharr International Bridge: Southern border crossing World Trade Bridge: Southern border
crossing Ysleta Zaragosa Bridge: Southern border crossing Hydrofluoric Acid Production
Facility Graphite Mine GE Electrical Power Generators and Components General Electric,
Large Electric Power Transformers 230 - 500 kV
Netherlands Antilles: Americas-II undersea cable landing Willemstad, Netherlands Antilles.
Panama: FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Fort Amador, Panama Panama Canal
Peru: Tin Mine and Plant
Trinidad and Tobago: Americas-II undersea cable landing Port of Spain Atlantic LNG:
Provides 70% of U.S. natural gas import needs
Venezuela: Americas-II undersea cable landing Camuri, Venezuela GlobeNet undersea cable landing,
Punta Gorda, Venezuela GlobeNet undersea cable landing Catia La Mar, Venezuela GlobeNet
undersea cable landing Manonga, Venezuela [END TEXT OF LIST]
16. (U//FOUO) Minimize considered. CLINTON


Sunday, December 5, 2010

New Language for Middle East Peace

Peace Requires Justice

New Language for Middle East Peace


The recent passage by Israel's Knesset of a law requiring either a two-thirds Knesset majority or approval by an unprecedented national referendum before Israel can "cede" any land in expanded East Jerusalem to a Palestinian state or any land in the Golan Heights to Syria has been widely recognized as making any "two-state solution", as well as any Israeli-Syrian peace, even more inconceivable than was previously the case. It also highlights the need for a concerted effort by politicians, negotiators and commentators to adopt a new “language of peace”.

The words which people use, often unconsciously, can have a critical impact upon the thoughts and attitudes of those who speak and write, as well as those who listen and read. Dangerously misleading terminology remains a major obstacle to Israeli-Palestinian peace.

It is normal practice for parties to a dispute to use terminology which favors them. In this regard, Israel has been spectacularly successful in imposing its terminology not simply on Israeli consciousness and American usage but even on many Arab parties and commentators. It has done so not simply in obvious ways like use of the terms “terrorism”, “security”, “Eretz Israel” or “Judea and Samaria” but also in more subtle ways which have had and continue to have a profound negative impact on perceptions of legal realities and other matters of substance.

Commentators on all sides speak of Israel's "ceding" territory occupied in 1967 to the Palestinians. The word suggests a transfer of land by its legitimate owner. Unless there are reciprocal exchanges of territory in a final peace agreement, the issue of Israel's "ceding" territory to Palestine does not arise. Israel can withdraw from occupied Palestinian territory or hand over administrative control of such territory, but to "cede" property one must first possess legal title to it. Israel can no more cede title to occupied Palestinian lands than a squatter can cede title to an apartment which he has illegally occupied. In reality, it is Israel which continues to insist that Palestine cede to Israel indisputably Palestinian lands forming part of the meager 22% remnant of historical Palestine which Israel did not conquer until 1967.

There is also much talk of “concessions” -- "painful", "far-reaching" or otherwise -- being demanded from Israel. The word suggests the surrender of some legitimate right or position. In fact, while Israel demands numerous concessions from Palestine, Palestine is not seeking any concessions from Israel. What it has long insisted upon is “compliance” – compliance with agreements already signed, compliance with international law and compliance with relevant United Nations resolutions – nothing more and nothing less. Compliance is not a concession. It is an obligation, both legally and morally, and it is essential if peace is ever to be achieved.

It is not only the Western-embraced Fatah which insists on nothing more and nothing less than compliance. The Western-shunned Hamas, winners of the most recent Palestinian elections, now publicly proclaims the same position. At a December 1 press conference, Ismael Haniyeh stated: "We accept a Palestinian state on the borders of 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital, the release of Palestinian prisoners and the resolution of the issue of refugees."

The Palestinian territories conquered by Israel in 1967 are frequently referred to as “disputed”. They are not. They are “occupied” -- and illegally so, since the status of "perpetual belligerent occupation" which Israel has been seeking to impose over the past 43 years does not exist in international law. While sovereignty over expanded East Jerusalem, which Israel has formally annexed, is explicitly contested, none of the world’s other 194 sovereign states has recognized Israel’s sovereignty claim and Palestinian sovereignty over the Gaza Strip and the rest of the West Bank is, in both literal and legal senses, uncontested (even if not yet universally “recognized”).

Israel has never even purported to annex these territories, knowing that doing so would raise awkward questions about the rights (or lack of them) of the indigenous population living there. Jordan renounced all claims to the West Bank in favor of the Palestinians in July 1988. While Egypt administered the Gaza Strip for 19 years, it never asserted sovereignty over it. Since November 15, 1988, when Palestinian independence and statehood were formally proclaimed, the only state asserting sovereignty over those portions of historical Palestine which Israel occupied in 1967 (aside from expanded East Jerusalem) has been the State of Palestine, a state which, even though it continues to operate within its own territory through a hobbled Trojan Horse named the “Palestinian Authority”, meets all the customary international law criteria for sovereign statehood and is already recognized as a state by over 100 other sovereign states.

Misleading language has been particularly destructive with respect to Jerusalem. For years, Israeli politicians have repeated like a mantra that “Jerusalem must remain united under Israeli sovereignty.” Understandably, Israelis have come to believe that Israel currently possesses sovereignty over Jerusalem. It does not. It possesses only administrative control. While a country can acquire administrative control by force of arms, it can acquire sovereignty (the state-level equivalent of title or ownership) only with the consent of the international community.

The position of the international community regarding Jerusalem, which the 1947 UN partition plan envisioned as an internationally administered city legally separate from the two contemplated states, is clear and categorical: Israel is in belligerent occupation of East Jerusalem and has only de facto authority over West Jerusalem. The refusal of the international community (even including the United States) to recognize West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, supported by the maintenance of all embassies accredited to Israel in Tel Aviv, vividly demonstrates the refusal of the international community, pending an agreed solution to the status of Jerusalem, to concede that any part of the city is Israel’s sovereign territory.

There can be no question of Israel relinquishing or transferring sovereignty over any part of Jerusalem for the simple reason that Israel currently possesses no such sovereignty. Indeed, the only ways that Israel might ever acquire sovereignty over any part of Jerusalem are by agreeing with Palestine on a fair basis for either sharing or dividing sovereignty over the city (or doing a bit of both) which is recognized as fair and accepted by the international community or by agreeing with the Palestinians to transform all of historical Palestine in a single, fully democratic state with equal rights for all who live there, in which case the Jerusalem conundrum, as well as most of the other perennial roadblocks to peace intrinsic to any potential "two-state solution", would cease to pose any problem.

This legal reality is of fundamental intellectual and psychological importance for Israeli public opinion. There is a world of difference for an Israeli leader between being perceived as the man who achieved Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem for the first time in 2000 years and being perceived as the man who relinquished some measure of Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem. It could be a life-or-death distinction.

One word which has been too rarely used in connection with the “peace process” (and which should be invoked more often) is “justice”. For obvious reasons, it is never used by Israeli or American politicians as a component of the “peace” which they envision. Yet a true and lasting “peace”, as opposed to a mere temporary cessation of hostilities, is inconceivable unless some measure of justice is both achieved and perceived, by both sides, to have been achieved.

Israel is not generously contemplating ceding its own land to Palestine but insisting that Palestine cede indisputably Palestinian lands to Israel. Palestine is not seeking concessions from Israel, only compliance. The Palestinian territories conquered in 1967 are not disputed, simply illegally occupied. The only ways Israel might ever acquire sovereignty over any part of Jerusalem are by agreeing to share or divide the city with Palestine or by accepting a democratic one-state solution. Any true peace requires some measure of justice.

It is high time for all involved to recognize and speak clearly about these fundamental realities. The clarity of thought necessary to achieve either a decent two-state solution or a democratic one-state solution would be greatly enhanced by clarity of language, by taking care to use terminology which both reflects reality and facilitates, rather than hinders, the achievement of both peace and some measure of justice.

John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel, is author of "The World According to Whitbeck".

Wednesday, November 10, 2010


Turkish President, Abdullah Gul, alleged 'agent of the CIA'.

Some people believe that the CIA has stopped supporting the Turkish generals, because the Turkish generals have become too nationalistic.

Some people believe that the CIA has switched its support to the moderate Islamic AKP party, one of whose leaders is Abdullah Gul.

Apparently the CIA wants to use certain Moslems to gain control of the natural resources of Central Asia....

David Cameron and Abdullah Gul, November 2010.

On 8 November 2010, Turkey's President Gül said that Turkey is playing an active role in shaping the New World Order.

(President Gül: Turkey plays active role in shaping new world order)

Gül was speaking at London's Chatham House, said to be a front for the security services. (Chatham House: MI6 Front And Corporate Think-Tank)

Chatham House, also known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs, is the sister organisation of the US Council on Foreign Relations.

Chatham House has presented Gül with its prestigious Chatham House Prize.

During his speech Gül suggested that the Cold War era world system was yet to be replaced by a new and effective system.

Gül suggested that the new order will be accomplished in the next decade.

Gül said that this new order must focus on the whole world and reject a Euro-centric understanding of history and international affairs.

Gül said that the new order must be a multicultural one where a single power's hegemony is absent.

Gül had a meeting with British Prime Minister David Cameron, a staunch supporter of Turkey’s accession into the EU.

On plans to build a NATO-wide missile defense system, Gül dismissed claims that the planned shield is designed to protect Israel from a possible Iranian missile attack.

Gul studied for two years in London and Exeter in the United Kingdom.

Gul is an Honorary Knight Grand Cross of the Civil Division of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath

Fethullah Gulen is the founder of the Fethullah or Gulen movement, which most suspect is linked to the CIA.

Gul and his AKP party are linked to the 'moderate Islamic' Fethullah Gulen sect, which some suspect is linked to the CIA.

Fethullah is named after Fethullah Gulen, the founder of the group.

On 10 February 2010, Dikran Ego wrote (Turkey) :

"Many ... fear that what is happening now is the AKP government, together with the followers of the Fethullah-sect, who have taken positions in all governmental and military institutions, has begun to break down a competing power structure in order to establish its own position and take full control of the state.

"The question is whether the AKP government will deal and eliminate the (military generals')terrorist network 'Ergenekon' ... to establish its own 'Ergenekon' based on 'islamofascist' ideologies."
(Government Sponsored Terror Squad Killing Assyrians, Other Minorities in Turkey )

Fethullah is seen by most as being the CIA. (Fethullah Gülen's Web Site.) Former CIA operative Graham Fuller reportedly helped Fethullah Gulen obtain permanent residency status in the USA. (Has the Universal Caliphate Emerged from Pennsylvania? Is the CIA ...)

Why would Fuller support Gul, who reportedly wants a 'modern and moderate' grouping of Moslem countries, allegedly as part of a New World Order?

The answer reportedly comes from the transcripts of investigative reporter Sibil Edmonds. (Has the Universal Caliphate Emerged from Pennsylvania? Is the CIA ...)

Reportedly, during the Clinton administration, the CIA began to fund Gulen and his movement "with millions derived from drug trafficking – including the revenues amassed by Turkish underworld figures (bubas) from the flow of heroin from Afghanistan through northern Iran to Turkey." (Has the Universal Caliphate Emerged from Pennsylvania? Is the CIA ...)

Gulen set up madrassahs (Islamic schools) and cemaats (Muslim communities) throughout the Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmernistan and newly-formed Russian republics "in order to gain control of the vast oil and natural gas reserves of these developing countries."

Abdullah Gul, Turkey’s first Islamist President, is said to be a fan of Gulen, along with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. (Has the Universal Caliphate Emerged from Pennsylvania? Is the CIA ...)

Turkey, under the AKP, has taken a more pro-Iran and more anti-Israel approach.

This might not worry Obama and Brzezinski, who reportedly want Iran as an ally against Russia and China.

Turkey's AKP party worries Israel which sees Turkey being friendly to Syria.

The Gulen movement has been outlawed in Russia, perhaps because it is seen as being a tool of the CIA.

The CIA allegedly believes that the Gulen movement "will succeed in uniting the Muslims of Central Asia and, thereby, gain control of the natural resources of these countries for the so-called 'good' of the American people." (Has the Universal Caliphate Emerged from Pennsylvania? Is the CIA ...)

Monday, November 8, 2010

"Military Incompetence: Why the American Military Doesn't Win..."

"Gross Military Incompetence: Why the American Military Doesn't Win..."

The Iran hostages rescue operation in 1980....and the collisions of US helicopters with US transport and refueling aircraft in the Iranian desert is a prime example of Gross incompetence too....

Interesting article you cite on the performance of the US military in Grenada. I don't usually comment on military matters, but as I served in the 82nd during this time I thought I'd add my $.02. I have to say that the Washington Monthly article and your commentary on the US military is spot on in every detail, except that the original plan of attack involved the Rangers parachuting in to take the runway so the 82nd could then airland its troops in, with my battalion, the 2/325 AIF, being the first one in. I did not participate in the invasion as I was on emergency leave when it happened, but I heard all the stories after-wards and they corroborate much of what was in that article.

It was amazing the number of casualties my unit experienced considering how badly outnumbered and outgunned the Cubans were. A captain and platoon sergeant from my battalion were both killed when they foolishly walked solo up a hill to try and locate the enemy...and succeeded in doing so. Our brigade HQ was hit by an A-10 strike that was called in by a lieutenant to take out a sniper resulting in one dead and at least 11 injured—proving the old adage that there is nothing more dangerous than a 2nd Lt with a compass and a map. Despite their small number the Cubans seemed to be everywhere, and our Recon platoon alone was ambushed twice albeit with no casualties.

My jeep took a bullet during one of these ambushes, and given the huge numbers of medals they handed out afterwards, I'm surprised I didn't get a Purple Heart or Bronze Star for my jeep's ordeal, even though I wasn't there. As it was, they gave Bronze Stars to all the company kiss-asses who showed up for the party, and some other medal for everyone else.

I heard a lot of stories of objectionable behavior and outright war crimes just from my company alone. In one case, a Cuban prisoner was stripped bare-chested and tied face down to the hood of a jeep and driven around like a hunter's trophy. The hood of a jeep can get pretty hot even in winter let alone in the hot Caribbean sun. I heard reports of soldiers shooting cattle and stealing cars for sport, as well as blowing up houses with LAW rockets and killing fish with grenades—though some of these attacks were by request of locals hoping for compensation.

In my opinion, the 82nd at that time was just a dog and pony show where incompetent and disinterested careerist officers stopped to get their tickets punched with the necessary Airborne experience needed for future promotions to field grade officer positions. We spent most of our time cleaning the barracks and picking up cigarette butts rather than training for war, and most of our officers and NCOs were utterly clueless and incompetent. That there were always cigarette butts to pick up showed the general attitude of officers and NCOs to the men, as we never dropped our own butts knowing someone else would have to pick them up....
Typical of this breed was one of my captains who was a West Point grad and remarkable ass-kisser even by 82nd Airborne standards (or "cheesedog" as we called them, from the practice of eating the "from under cheese" from under their superior's foreskins). This clown would have us run by the commanding general's headquarters during our morning PT and demand we let the general know we were there by shouting with bogus enthusiasm. We finally broke him of the habit by laughing uproariously instead.

The captain was with the unit for 6 months when he requested a display of our weapons for inspection. I was a TOW anti-tank gunner in Combat Support Company which included the TOWs, 4.2 inch mortars and the Recon platoon. We lined up our TOWs "dress right dress" or in a neat row and this putz walks over to my TOW and asks his XO, "is this a TOW?"

Of course, let me not spare our Air Force friends, who routinely dropped us in the trees on jumps, or Marine Corps Anglico which called in a barrage of 155mm artillery fire during a training exercise just 300 yards from their position on the very edge of a fire zone just as we were driving by in our jeeps, How none of us were killed or injured is a mystery as the explosions were close enough and loud enough to cause me ear pain for a few weeks after-wards.

Based on my experience in an allegedly "elite" unit I'd have to say the US military is an overrated farce. Thank God we didn't have to say "Hooah" back in those days as I think I'd have gone postal if they forced me to mouth such a bloody moronic, mealy-mouthed affirmative. As it was our required "All the Way, Sir!" was bad enough....
Coming back to the 1983 invasion of Grenada, it would be a good idea to compare it with the 1979 taking of the Tadzh-Bek Palace by 520 lightly armed Soviet officers and soldiers against a defending force of 2500 heavily armed defenders. You can read all about this operation in this article:

And just in case anybody would suspect the author of this article of being some kind of commie-groupie, here is a short bio:

LESTER W. GRAU, a Vietnam War veteran and retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, is an analyst for the Foreign Military Studies Office at the Army's Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth. He is also the editor and translator of The Bear Went Over the Mountain: Soviet Combat Tactics in Afghanistan and The Other Side of the Mountain: Mujaheddin Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War....

Saturday, November 6, 2010

Israelization of the United States....and the ugly Americanization of ISRAEL....

The "Special Relationship" Comes Home

Israelization of the United States....and the ugly Americanization of ISRAEL....


The images of the American armada plowing through the deserts of Iraq, bombing military and civilian targets, laying siege to Iraqi cities, targeting Iraqi leaders, shooting civilians, blinded by sandstorms, stalled, ambushed, shocked by the Iraqi resistance, facing suicide attacks, suggests an eerie but inescapable comparison. Is this America's West Bank? Is this the Israelization of United States--heading to its logical conclusion?

Most Americans have been taught by their captive media to interpret what happens today in the Middle East in terms of what happened yesterday. The clock of history in this region always starts with the most recent "suicide" attack mounted by Palestinians against "peaceful," "innocent" Israeli "civilians." If, somehow, these Americans could be persuaded to take the long view, they might begin to understand that the war against Iraq is perhaps the culmination of a process that had been long in the making: the Israelization of United States.

The founding fathers of Zionism understood clearly that their colonial project had no chance of succeeding without the patronage of a great power. The Zionists tried but failed to persuade the Ottoman Caliph to open up Palestine to Jewish colonization; he declined their inducements. Then, the British found themselves in a tight spot in the midst of World War I. They sought Jewish help in accelerating US entry into the war. In return for their help, the Zionists got the vital support they wanted. In the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917, the British promised "to use their best endeavour" (what charming language) to facilitate the creation of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine.

The British occupied Palestine in December 1917 and immediately opened it up to Jewish immigration. At the end of the war, according to the terms of a secret agreement, the British and French vivisected the Arab territories of the Ottoman Empire to splinter Arab unity. Syria was carved up four ways: Lebanon, to create a Maronite-dominated state; Jordan, to reward one of the sons of the collaborating Sharif Hussein; a French-controlled Syria; and the British mandate of Palestine, the future Israel. Soon, the Jews of Europe came pouring into British-occupied Palestine, setting up a parallel government with their own military.

The die was cast for the Palestinians. They were no match for the combined Zionist and British forces; and there was no help from weak Arab "states," hamstrung by imperialist control. Still the Palestinians fought to save their homeland. When the British stopped the Jewish im-migration, the Zionists mounted a terrorist campaign. The British lost nerve and passed the buck to the United Nations, or, effectively, to the United States, which now dominated that august body. Motivated in part by anti-Semitism and still strong Christian sentiments, but also swayed by a determined Jewish campaign, United States pushed a partition plan that strongly favored the Jews. The Palestinians rejected the partition plan. They and other Arabs mounted a feeble resistance, but were routed by the Zionists. Close to a million Palestinians were expelled from their homes, and never allowed to return.

It should be understood that the creation of Israel did not--at least in the early years--advance America's strategic interests. At the time, United States and Britain exercised firm--and very profitable--control over the oil resources of the Gulf through a clutch of weak and pliant monarchies. The emergence of radical governments in Egypt in 1952, and, later, Syria, only deepened the dependence of the oil-rich Arab monarchies on Western powers. When the Iranian nationalists sought to nationalize their oil in 1952, the Americans and British organized a coup, and reinstated the deposed King. In other words, the British and Americans were firmly in control of the region--without any help from Israel. A "special relationship" with the Israeli interloper could only undermine this control by inflaming Arab nationalist sentiments.

The record of American assistance to Israel shows that the special re-lationship did not develop until the late 1960s. US aid flows to Israel remained well below $100 million annually until 1965, and, more importantly, very little of this was for military hardware. The aid flows doubled in 1966, increased six fold in 1971, and five fold again in 1974 when it rose to $2.6 billion, going up to $5 billion in more recent years. Further, this aid was disbursed mostly in the form of grants, and nearly all of it was spent on military hardware. Indeed, these terms indicate a very "special relationship," not available to any other country.

Most commentators, especially those on the left, attribute the emer-gence of this special relationship to Israel's stunning 1967 victory over Egypt, Syria and Jordan. They argue that this victory convinced the US that Israel could serve as a vital ally and a counterpoise to Arab nationalism and Soviet ambitions in the region. But this explanation is both one-sided and simplistic. It completely ignores the part Israel played in initiating this relationship, deepening it, and making it irreversible.

If the special relationship was the product of an Israeli victory over Arabs, US should have embraced Israel as a vital ally after its first victory over Arab armies in 1948, or after 1956 when it seized the entire Sinai in a lightning strike. Why did US have to wait until 1967, after Israel had humiliated the leading nationalist states and Soviet allies in the region. Presumably, the Arab defeat should have reduced Israel's usefulness to the US. In addition, the doubling of American aid flows to Israel in 1966 as well as the cover-up of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty--a reconnaissance ship--off the Sinai coast, indicate that a special relationship had begun to develop well before the 1967 war.

If America's special relationship with Israel was slow to develop, in large part, this was because Israel was doing quite well without it. At least in the 1950s, the British were still the paramount power in the Persian Gulf, a position it would yield only slowly to United States. In addition, Israel entered into a very fruitful military relationship with France, which supplied not only heavy arms and combat aircraft but collaborated on its nuclear weapons program. Israel was quite confident of its military superiority over its Arab adversaries even in these early years. Apparently, the British and the French too knew about this, since they persuaded Israel to invade Sinai in 1956 as part of their campaign to regain control of the Suez canal. This confidence was well-placed. Within a few days, Israel had taken the Sinai from the Egyptians.

If the war of 1967 produced stunning Israeli victories, it also drove Israel to look for a new partner. First, since it had started the war against French advice, President De Gaulle suspended all arms shipments to Israel. In order to make good the loss, Israel turned to the US, which had the added advantage of being the world leader in military technology. At the same time, Egypt and Syria would seek to rebuild their decimated military by pursuing an even closer relationship with Soviet Union. Given the logic of the Cold War, this forced the US to develop Israel as a counterweight against the growing Soviet influence in the region. The conditions were now ripe for the growth of a special relationship between Israel and the US.

This Israeli decision to realign itself with the US was pregnant with consequences. Israel would have to persuade Americans that their vital interests in the region--protecting their oil supplies, rolling back Arab nationalism, and containing Soviet influence--could be best served by building up Israel, militarily and economically, as the regional hegemon. This would not be an easy task since American support for Israel was certain to alienate the Arab world. And Americans knew this.

The Israelis undertook this task with seriousness. In casting itself as the regional hegemon, Israel was playing a high-risk, high-stakes game that could succeed only if it was supported and financed by the US. Also, Israel could not build a new strategy on a special relationship that Americans would be free to reverse. In order to make this an enduring relationship, Israel would bolster it at two levels.

At the grass-roots level, it worked to build a strong, emotional American identification with Israel. This was pursued in a variety of ways. Most importantly, American consciousness was saturated with guilt over Jewish suffering. In his book, The Holocaust Industry, Norman Finkelstein has shown that the sacralization of the holocaust began only after 1967, and how the guilt this produced has been used to silence Israel's critics. Americans now feared that criticism of Israel would be seen as anti-Semitism. As a result, few dared to criticize Israel in public.

Israel was also portrayed as a democracy, constantly under attack from Palestinians and Arabs. Two explanations of Arab hatred of Israel were offered. It was a species of anti-Semitism. Like its older European cousin, Arab anti-Semitism was unprovoked; it had no causes. Alternatively, unable to modernize, the Arabs hated Israel because it was the only country in the region that was both free and prosperous.

At the political level, organized American Jewry amplified its efforts to increase the pro-Israeli bias of American politics. While individual Jews continued to play a distinguished role in liberal and left causes, nearly all the major Jewish organizations now worked feverishly to put pressure on the media, the Congress and the Presidency to offer unconditional support to Israel. In several states, Jewish money, votes and media tilted elections towards the most pro-Israeli candidates. In addition, Jewish organizations worked more effectively to defeat candidates who took positions even mildly critical of Israel. This is documented in Paul Findley's book, They Dare to Speak Out.

Once Israel's special relationship with the US was in place, it would acquire its own logic of success. This logic worked through several channels. First, as Jewish organizations worked to shape US policies towards Israel, they would improve their tactics, and their initial victories would bring more Jewish support and, in time, more success. This logic even worked to turn temporary reverses to Israel's advantage. People who argue that the US special relationship with Israel was prompted by its victory in 1967 should also note that its near-defeat in 1973 led, the following year, to a more than five-fold increase in the US aid package to Israel to $2.6 billion. Egypt took this message to heart, deciding that it would be futile to challenge this special relationship any further. In 1978, it signed a separate peace with Israel, after US promised to sweeten the deal with an annual aid package of $2 billion. It's chief rival eliminated, Israel's hegemony over the Middle East was now more secure.

Iran's Islamist revolution in 1979 added new strength to Israel's special relationship with the US. The overthrow of the Iranian monarchy, the second pillar of American hegemony in the Middle East, increased Israel's leverage over US policies. In addition, the accession to power of Islamists raised the bogey of the Islamic threat to the West. The Israeli lobby, especially its Middle East experts, had been making the case for some time that the Islamist movements in the Middle East opposed the US per se, and not merely its policies towards Israel. The alarm caused by the Iranian Revolution gave strength to this interpretation.

The end of the Cold War in 1990 stripped the special relationship of its old rationale. Israel would now have to invent a new one to continue to sell itself as a strategic asset. It would now market itself as the barrier, the break-water, against the rising tide of Islamic fundamentalism. For many years, the chief opposition to the corrupt and repressive regimes in the Arab world, whether dictatorships or monarchies, had taken Islamist forms. Pro-Israeli apologists in the media and academia--mostly Jewish neoconservatives and Middle East experts--argued that the West now faced a new Islamic threat, global in its scope, which hated the freedoms, secular values and prosperity of the West. Bernard Lewis, the "doyen" of Middle East experts and a passionate Zionist, solemnly intoned in 1993 that this was nothing less than a "clash of civilizations." This was a clever move, but also a necessary one, to convert Israel's conflict with the Arabs into a new Crusade, the war of the West (read: United States) against Islam. It was clever move also because it had support from Christian fundamentalists, who were now a strong force in the Republican party.

The new Crusaders worked in tandem with Islamic extremists in the al-Qaida camp who also wanted to provoke a war between Islam and the US. Every time Osama's men struck at American targets, it was exploited by the pro-Israeli lobby to promote the Clash thesis. When the nineteen hijackers struck on September 11, 2001, they could not have chosen a better time. The man at America's helm was a born-again Christian, an isolationist, elected by right-wing Christians, with a cabinet that took its advice on foreign policy mostly from Jewish neoconservatives. The neoconservative's plan for a new Crusade had been ready long before 9-11. They had the President's ears after 9-11, and the President bought into their plan.

In no time, George Bush had been converted into a new Crusader. He described Ariel Sharon as a "man of peace," after embracing every one of his extremist positions on the Palestinians: reoccupation of West Bank, repudiation of Oslo, removal of Arafat, and dismantling of the Palestinian authority. He laid out his binary doctrine--you are with us or against-us--and prepared for pre-emptive wars against the "axis of evil."

The new Crusade is now underway. The world's only superpower, commanding one-third of the world's output, and nearly one-half its military expenditure, has entered Iraq to effect "regime-change," to bring democracy to a people it has emasculated with bombs and sanctions for twelve years. In its new Crusade, United States stands at the head of a numerous "coalition of the willing," now including forty-five countries. But Israel is missing from this long list, even though a team of colonial administrators, handpicked by Paul Wolfowtz, has already arrived in Kuwait City to take over Baghdad. That is a trick no magician could imitate. The Israelization of the United States is complete....

The Israelization of America
by James Brooks
December 7, 2002

US officials recently announced the somewhat jarring news that Israeli security forces will be training American soldiers in the techniques of urban warfare. Apparently Israel's illegal thirty-five year occupation of Palestine has enabled it to perfect tactics that our troops will need in a 'possible' war on Iraq.

Most informed Americans will receive this news with a sense of both foreboding and dislocation. The brutal tactics of the Israeli "Defense" Forces have been denounced for decades by human rights groups, the United Nations, and scores of foreign governments. Is this how we want our own troops to fight? Our sense of dislocation (even "topsy-turvy") in greeting this news traces to something else; the fact that Israel has always been our client, not the other way around. Why are the Israelis now teaching us?

Is this really something new, or is it merely an unusually explicit lesson in the continuing education of American power by the Israeli vanguard? Who has been learning from whom in this "special relationship"?

From Covert Crimes to Points of Pride

Over the past half century, Israel's organized terror against Palestinian civilians has moved from the relatively secret operations of special Israeli army and paramilitary units to globally televised depredations wrought with helicopter gunships, state-of-the-art tanks, and F-16 fighters. In the process, massacres like those perpetrated in the old days by Israeli army units at Deir Yassin and Qibya have been dwarfed, in terms of casualties, scope, and property damage, by today's daily and indiscriminate destruction in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Crimes that Israel once felt compelled to hide from the world are now on full display, vigorously defended by the Israeli government.

Fifty years ago, America also felt the need to conduct most of its international crimes far from public view. Interventions in the affairs of uncooperative nations (invariably conducted to "fight communism") were mostly secretive, CIA-led actions that made surreptitious use of special military units, typically called "American advisors" (Honduras, Guatemala, Iran, and Cuba provide a few relevant examples).

Now, emboldened by the demise of its only global counterweight, the Soviet Union, and encouraged by Israel's success in using conventional military forces in a public and illegal campaign against civilians, the US is increasingly eschewing the old "secret war" model in favor of direct and open military intervention with American troops. Witness Somalia, Haiti, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan during the past ten years.

Pre-emptive Action

Israel has long been criticized for taking pre-emptive military action against its perceived enemies. Two well-known examples are its surprise attack against a nearly-completed Iraqi nuclear power plant and its protracted, illegal and bloody occupation of southern Lebanon. Despite worldwide criticism of these and many other blatant violations of international law, Israel continued, and continues, undaunted.

The Clinton administration was noted for its fawning support of Israel's occupation, and for abandoning a long-standing US commitment (on paper only, of course) to return Palestine to its pre-1967 borders. Clinton also took a big page out of Israel's book on international relations, when he insisted, against strenuous objections from the United Nations, that the US has the right to launch pre-emptive strikes, and that NATO had the right to wage war on Yugoslavia without UN approval. This year, the Bush administration dropped all pretense of maintaining security with deterrence and adopted the illegal Israeli standard of pre-emptive strikes as official US policy.

Militarization of Politics

Our politicians have also learned much by example from our close and "special" relationship with the government of Israel. For decades, our pols have used cant, dissimulation and fraud to excuse Israel's most egregious crimes. In the process, much has been learned about how to turn acts of wanton destruction into a noble defense of freedom. Israel's willingness to keep 'pushing the envelope' of state terror has been invaluable in this process, training both American pols and media in the arts of propaganda required to justify ever-larger crimes.

Meanwhile, the American populace has been steadily learning to accept Israel's gross violations of human rights, international law, and common decency as
"necessary for peace and security", justified by "Israel's right to defend herself". This lesson in moral decay and desensitization is proving handy indeed, as the current US administration seeks to extend American hegemony in the Middle East by a new war of occupation.

The Terror Card

Following the tragedy of 9/11, Israel immediately recast its thirty-five-year occupation of Palestine as an essential front in the "war on terror". To extract maximum political advantage from our loss and grief, Israeli politicians like Ariel Sharon suggested, with typical touches of arrogance and self-satisfaction, that, finally, Americans know how Israelis have felt for years. We face a common and implacable enemy, they lectured us, leaving unspoken the message that we Americans had better develop some backbone and put our shoulder to the anti-terror wheel.

Of course, our politicians did not really require Israel's instruction to convert our tragedy into their political windfall. However, they quickly employed several rhetorical devices that, before 9/11, were most often found in Israel's political toolbox (domestic and foreign). Suddenly, all kinds of international and domestic issues were redefined as being part of the "war on terror", requiring new and drastic solutions that were, of course, necessary for "security", and often highly profitable for favored corporate interests.

No doubt our leaders saw major advantages to this radical simplification of world affairs. First, they could dispense with even the pretense of negotiation, because "you cannot negotiate with terrorists". They could neatly sidestep, or simply dispose of, human rights limitations imposed by law and the Constitution, because "terrorists have no respect for the rule of law". The "terror card" also enabled them to bulldoze public opposition to new and highly intrusive government surveillance, and so on.

Remote Funding

Just as Israel depends on billions of dollars annually from a compliant US government to maintain its military occupation and indifference to UN resolutions and international law, America's power axis also thrives on a steady flow of wealth from a similarly remote and supine source – the American people. And just as Israel makes it a point to occasionally disobey the orders of its US sponsors, so American politicians at the pinnacle of power pointedly disregard the many voices of the people that call for justice and peace. During consideration of the recent Congressional resolution supporting war on Iraq, Democracy Now reported that citizen messages to Congressional offices of both chambers and both sides of the aisle were running 10 to 1 against the resolution. Naturally, both the House and Senate passed the measure by overwhelming margins. The reply to the American public was clear; "We watch our push-polls. Pay your taxes and shut up."

Injustice at Home

Even within its own pre-1967 borders, Israel's human rights record is abysmal. Twenty percent of Israel's population is now comprised of non-Jewish Arabs who, by law, are systematically rendered second-class citizens in their own homeland. Special hells in Israel's complex legal and social caste system are reserved for Bedouins and African Jews. Israel's stubborn insistence on the primacy of the "Jewish state" and its institutionalized discrimination against non-Jews have set poor examples for America, where Israel is routinely hailed as a shining example of "Western democracy". We cannot quantify the debasing effects of this mass fantasy, but we can see that while America's own system of minority repression becomes increasingly severe, the public is told that pride in America's "liberty and equality for all" is at an all-time high.


Israel's long war of attrition against the Palestinians has proven to America's power elite that it is possible to indefinitely occupy the land of another people, even in the face of nearly global opposition – if you're backed by enough raw power. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip constitute a kind of open-air laboratory and lecture hall, in which Israel demonstrates the advantages of occupation to its dutiful American pupil. These advantages include a dirt-cheap labor pool that can be turned on and off at will, the ability to emasculate and/or decapitate any effort at self-rule within the occupied lands, the utility of occupation as an object lesson and divisive thorn-in-the-side of neighboring enemies, and so on. Israel has also demonstrated the usefulness of sustained occupation for increasing a nation's overall military might. The constant war-footing, and the need for violent repression of a restive and disenfranchised people, create never-ending opportunities for the purchase and use of the latest military equipment, and for the containment of domestic politics.

One Lesson Not Learned?

While American power has in general been a very attentive student of Israeli policy and practice, there is one crucial lesson at the back of Israel's textbook that remains unlearned: Israel's approach will never create peace or achieve a just solution. Of course, that suits its purposes. The point of Israeli strategy is to grind the Palestinians into dust until they just blow away, and the last shreds of Palestine can be swept up into Greater Israel, always the goal of the military Zionists and their Laborite alter egos.

Unless forced to do otherwise, Israel, driven by a tragic and fundamentally racist ideology, will fight on for a hundred years to dispose of the "Palestinian problem". But American attempts to apply the localized Israeli model (designed to acquire land the size of Rhode Island) to a "global war on terror" are rewriting the definition of "over-reach". By following Israel's lead (which is constitutionally averse to just solutions) in the "war on terror", we ensure that the war will never be won and will never end. Increasingly, we suspect that our leaders may understand this lesson, too. And they're getting ready to send another 14 billion dollars in shiny red apples (disguised as new loan guarantees and military aid) to their beloved teachers in Jerusalem.