Iranian Monarchists Praise the Shah’s Brutal Rule on the Anniversary of his Death

Kurt Nimmo

On July 27, 1980, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi finally succumbed to cancer in Cairo, Egypt. In 1953, he was installed as the dictator of Iran after the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. 

There are a few tributes to the brutal dictator posted on social media ahead of this anniversary. Most are nostalgic for the good old days when the Shah ruled with an iron fist and unleashed his notorious and brutal SAVAK secret police on Iranians opposed to his rule. 

SPQR@SPQR73844943

 · Jul 27, 2019

Replying to @JZarif

•`Tribute to His Imperial Majesty`•

~Silently one by one
In the infinite meadows of Heaven
Blossomed the lovely Stars
Xerexcis, Darius,
Mohammad Reza Shah of Iran
The final breath into the distant night
Chase away the darkness of the [`The Messanger`]
O you Emperors of the

SPQR@SPQR73844943

O Emperors of the mightiest light
Shahanshah
Spirit of the blest
The Gurdian of children of light
The Aryan Faith
Captain of the hosts of the Lord
Oh King of Heavenly hosts, by the power of God
He who sees God
He who is like God
He who is the Knight of Heaven
Emperor of Gods.

47

1:14 AM - Jul 27, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

20 people are talking about this

As the corporate media dwells on the mullahs, it doesn’t bother to explain how the Islamic Republic of Iran came to be and why. It’s basically ignored. For those interested, a few links follow.

SAVAK is listed on this page as number six of “10 of the Most Brutal Secret Police Forces in History,” right up there with the Gestapo, the Stasi, and the Khmer Rouge’s Santebal. 

It took a couple decades after the revolution for The New York Times to publish an expose on the Shah’s torture. Years of Torture in Iran Comes to Light.

In 2009, The Inquisitor nominated the Shah “Despot of the Week.” 

The Shah and his family amassed a huge fortune—estimated at $20 billion in 1979—said at that time to be “a staggering sum that would probably exceed or at least equal the wealth of any of the other royal families of Middle East Oil-producing states.” 

“By 1977 [two years before the Revolution] the sheer scale of corruption had reached a boiling point… Even conservative estimates indicate that such [bureaucratic] corruption involved at least a billion dollars between 1973 and 1976,” according to research by IPFS. 

Americans wonder why Iranians chant “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” Soon after the Revolution, students began compiling an archive of memos, titled “Documents from the US Espionage Den, Iran Embassy—CIA Station 1979.” The documents reveal in detail how the CIA collaborated with SAVAK. 

Ya’acov Nimrodi, Israel’s military attaché to Iran prior to the Revolution, admitted Mossad helped build-up and fine-tune SAVAK. In the book The Iran Contra Connection: Secret Teams and Covert Operations in the Reagan Era, Johnathan Marshall, Peter Dale Scott, and Jane Hunter write that Nimrodi was “the Mossad agent who could properly boast of having ‘built’ SAVAK into an efficient if brutal intelligence service.”

There is much more to the story we’re not told as the media continues to demonize the current government of Iran. The rule of the Shi’a theocracy is a direct result of meddling by the United States, Britain, and Israel. The Iranian parliament (the Majlis) elected Mohammad Mosaddegh and his National Front was popular with the Iranian people. 

The trouble began when Mosaddegh declared Iran’s oil belonged to the people, not the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. 

Israel's Role In 9/11

FBI evidence supports prior knowledge or complicity

PHILIP GIRALDI

The tale of 9/11 will just not go away, largely because it is clear to anyone who reads the lengthy 9/11 Commission Report that many issues that should have been subject to inquiry were ignored for what would appear to be political reasons. The George W. Bush Administration quite obviously did not want to assume any blame for what had happened and that bias also extended to providing cover for U.S. “allies,” most particularly Saudi Arabia and Israel. Those who have sought the truth about 9/11 have been persistent in their attempts to find out information that was suppressed but they have been blocked repeatedly in spite of numerous FOIA requests.

Now, eighteen years after the event, there has been something like a breakthrough, penetrating the wall of silence erected by the government. FBI reports on the possible Israeli role in 9/11 were released on May 7th and they serve to support speculation by myself and other former intelligence officers that Israel, at a minimum, had detailed prior knowledge of what was to take place. More than that, Israeli intelligence officers working in the United States might well have enabled certain aspects of the conspiracy.

To recount some of what is already known and suspected, one should first examine the 2016 release of a heavily edited and redacted 28 pages long annex to the 9/11 Commission Report that explored the Saudi Arabian role in the terrorist attack . The section concluded that the Saudi government may have played a direct role in 9/11 by assisting two of the hijackers, including a dry run exercise intended to learn how to get into a plane’s cockpit. There was also considerable evidence suggesting that wealthy Saudis and even members of the Royal Family had been supporting and funding al-Qaeda.

But far exceeding the Saudi role is the involvement of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, which was not subject to any serious inquiry or investigation by U.S. intelligence or police agencies. Israel, in spite of obvious involvement in 9/11, was not included in the 9/11 Commission Report despite the existence of an enormous Israeli intelligence operation freely working in the United States that was known to the FBI. Some of those Mossad officers were notably filmed celebrating as the Twin Towers were burning and collapsing.

In the year 2001 Israel was running a massive spying operation through a number of cover companies in New Jersey, Florida and also on the west coast that served as spying mechanisms for Mossad officers. The effort was supported by the Mossad Station in Washington D.C. and included a large number of volunteers, the so-called “art students” who traveled around the U.S. selling various products at malls and outdoor markets. The FBI was aware of the numerous Israeli students who were routinely overstaying their visas and some in the Bureau certainly believed that they were assisting their country’s intelligence service in some way, but it proved difficult to actually link the students to undercover operations, so they were regarded as a minor nuisance and were normally left to the tender mercies of the inspectors at the Bureau of Customs and Immigration.

American law enforcement was also painfully aware that the Israelis were running more sophisticated intelligence operations inside the United States, many of which were focused on Washington’s military capabilities and intentions. Some specialized intelligence units concentrated on obtaining military and dual use technology. It was also known that Israeli spies had penetrated the phone systems of the U.S. government, to include those at the White House.

In its annual classified counterespionage review, the FBI invariably places Israel at the top for “friendly” countries that spy on the U.S. In fact, the pre-9/11 Bureau did its best to stay on top of the problem, but it rarely received any political support from the Justice Department and White House if an espionage case involved Israelis. By one estimate, more than 100 such cases were not prosecuted for political reasons. Any Israeli caught in flagrante would most often be quietly deported and most Americans who were helping Israel were let off with a slap on the wrist.

But the hands-off attitude towards Israel shifted dramatically when, on September 11, 2001, a New Jersey housewife saw something from the window of her apartment building, which overlooked the World Trade Center. She watched as the buildings burned and crumbled but also noted something strange. Three young men were kneeling on the roof of a white transit van parked by the water’s edge, making a movie in which they featured themselves high fiving and laughing in front of the catastrophic scene unfolding behind them. The woman wrote down the license plate number of the van and called the police, who responded quickly and soon both the local force and the FBI began looking for the vehicle, which was subsequently seen by other witnesses in various locations along the New Jersey waterfront, its occupants “celebrating and filming.”

The license plate number revealed that the van belonged to a New Jersey registered company called Urban Moving Systems. At 4 p.m. the vehicle was spotted and pulled over. Five men between the ages of 22 and 27 years old emerged and were detained at gunpoint and handcuffed. They were all Israelis. One of them had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock and another had two foreign passports. Bomb sniffing dogs reacted to the smell of explosives in the van, which had very little actual moving equipment inside.

According to the initial police report, the driver identified as Sivan Kurzberg, stated “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.” The four other passengers were Sivan’s brother Paul, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari. The men were detained at the Bergen County jail in New Jersey before being transferred the FBI’s Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which handles allegations of spying.

After the arrest, the FBI obtained a warrant to search Urban Moving System’s Weehawken, N.J., offices. Papers and computers were seized. The company owner Dominick Suter, also an Israeli, answered FBI questions but when a follow-up interview was set up a few days later it was learned that he had fled the country for Israel, putting both his business and home up for sale. The office space and warehouse were abandoned. It was later learned that Suter has been associated with at least fourteen businesses in the United States, mostly in New Jersey and New York but also in Florida. Suter and his wife Omit Levinson Suter were the owners of 1 Stop Cleaner located in Wellington Florida and Dominick was also associated with Basia McDonnell, described as a Polish “holocaust survivor,” as a business partner in yet another business called Value Ad. Florida was a main focus for the Israeli intelligence operation in the U.S. that was directed against Arabs.

The five Israelis were among 140 Israelis arrested after 9/11, most of whom had military backgrounds, including some who were trained in “intelligence.” The five were held in Brooklyn, initially on charges relating to visa fraud. FBI interrogators questioned them for more than two months. Several were held in solitary confinement so they could not communicate with each other and two of them were given repeated polygraph exams, which they failed when claiming that they were nothing more than students working summer jobs. The two men that the FBI focused on most intensively were believed to be Mossad staff officers and the other three were volunteers helping with surveillance.

The Israelis were not exactly cooperative, but the FBI concluded from documents obtained at their office in Weehawken that they were targeting Arabs in New York and New Jersey, most particularly in the Paterson N.J. area, which has the second largest Muslim population in the U.S. They were particularly interested in local groups possibly linked to Hamas and Hezbollah as well as in charities that might be used for fund raising. The FBI also concluded that the Israelis had actually monitored the activities of at least two of the 9/11 hijackers.

To be sure, working on an intelligence operation does not necessarily imply participation in either the planning or execution of something like 9/11, but there are Israeli fingerprints all over the place, with cover companies and intelligence personnel often intersecting with locations frequented by the hijackers.

Apart from the interrogations of the five men from Weehawken, the U.S. government has apparently never sought to find out what else the Israelis might have known or were up to in September 2011. There are a lot of dots that might well have been connected once upon a time, but the trail has grown cold. Police records in New Jersey and New York where the men were held have disappeared and FBI interrogation reports have been inaccessible. Media coverage of the case also died, though the five were referred to in the press as the “dancing Israelis” and by some, more disparagingly, as the “dancing Shlomos.”

Inevitably, the George W. Bush White House intervened. After 71 days in detention, the five Israelis were released from prison by Attorney General John Ashcroft, put on a plane, and deported. Two of the men later spoke about their unpleasant experience in America on an Israeli talk show, one explaining that their filming the fall of the Twin Towers was to “document the event.” In 2004 the five men sued the United States government for damages, alleging “that their detention was illegal and that their civil rights were violated, suffering racial slurs, physical violence, religious discrimination, rough interrogations, deprivation of sleep, and many other offenses.” They were represented by Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, who in the previous year had founded the Shurat HaDin Israel Law Center which seeks to bankrupt groups that Israel considers to be “terrorists.” Shurat HaDin is closely tied to the Israeli government.

Now it is just possible that the Urban Moving Israelis were indeed uninvolved in 9/11 but nevertheless working for Mossad, which the Israeli government even subsequently admitted, but the new evidence suggests that the Israelis almost certainly had considerable prior knowledge and were likely involved in what developed. The new information reveals that minutes after the first plane struck the World Trade Center, five Israelis had taken up position in the parking lot of the Doric Apartment Complex in Union City, New Jersey, where they took pictures and filmed the attacks while also celebrating the fall of the towers and “high fiving.” One eyewitness interviewed by the Bureau had seen the Israelis’ van circling the building parking at 8:00 a.m. that day, more than 40 minutes prior to the attack, indicating prior knowledge of what was about to happen.

The eyewitness testimony is supported by copies of photos taken by the men that the FBI seized. The photo reproductions were obtained via a FOIA request made by a private citizen and are of poor quality, deliberately made so by the FBI to conceal faces and other details. They constitute only 14 of over seventy photos taken by the Israelis. Nevertheless, they clearly demonstrate that a celebration was going on. One photo, intriguingly, shows Sivan Kurzberg holding a lit lighter in front of the Manhattan Skyline on September 10th, one day before 9/11. It was apparently taken at the Doric Complex on a reconnoitering visit made on that day and suggests that Kurzberg was simulating the attack on the towers on the following day.

Why would the Israelis do it? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described 9/11 initially as “a good thing.” He was later quoted as saying somewhat more expansively “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” To be sure, 9/11 was a gift to Israel and it is a gift that keeps on giving. America is at war in a number of Muslim countries and its troops blanket the Middle East, to include a base in Israel dedicated to the defense of that country. It is all a result of the Global War on Terror and the GWOT started with 9/11. And just maybe it was a fire that was ignited by Israel.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

New Zealand terrorist attack: The Israel connection (2)

The corporate press is correct that Brenton Tarrant and Anders Behring Breivik follow the practices of the anti-Islam xenophobic current on the rise in Europe, North America and now Oceania, but the key element they deliberately avoid mentioning is the strong collective affinity for the Zionist regime of terrorists involved in the killing of worshippers in mosques in New Zealand’s Christchurch on March 15.

These were the remarks of Max Parry, an independent geopolitical analyst for OffGuardian in his article, titled: “New Zealand terrorist attack: The Israel connection”.

Mossad seemed to have developed a habit of revealing themselves in light of the infamous arrest of five of its agents in Secaucus, New Jersey, the US, on the morning of September 11th, 2001 by the FBI who were tipped off that a group of men were observed suspiciously dancing and celebrating while watching the WTC towers ablaze and collapsing across the Hudson River.

The “dancing Israelis” were found with $5,000 in cash which raised suspicions while their vehicle was traced to a shady moving company called Urban Moving Systems that was suspected to be a front for an intelligence operation after their headquarters was abandoned and its owner, Dominick Suter, immediately fled to Israel following their apprehension. During their two month detention, the CIA intervened and halted the probe while the agents were subsequently deported in a deal with the Israeli government for overstaying their visas but not before it was confirmed that at least two of the men were intelligence officers and no ordinary moving company employees.

The world was briefly reminded of this mysterious case when Donald Trump as a presidential candidate in 2016 made the wild exaggeration that on 9/11 he had personally observed “thousands of Muslims” celebrating the destruction of the Twin Towers across the river in New Jersey. It is obvious that Trump mixed up two different reports from 9/11, one of Reuters footage widely circulated by major networks of a small group of Arabs in Bayt al-Moqaddas celebrating the attacks and the reports about the Israelis arrested in New Jersey who were initially believed to have been of “Middle Eastern appearance” and descent.

One wonders if Trump would accurately recall his other observations that morning now that he is in the service of his Saudi and Israeli masters. Needless to say, this widely suppressed story which should have been front-page news led many to rightly suspect there was prior knowledge and even direct involvement among Israeli intelligence in the 9/11 attacks, along with a trove of other evidence.

The New Jersey cell was also in possession of foreign passports. Mossad has typically used fake passports, including that of Australians and Kiwis, regularly for its clandestine operations and carrying out assassinations like the 2010 targeted killing of Hamas official Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai which one of the spies apprehended in New Zealand, Zev Barkan, was involved in. After the arrest of the two spooks in New Zealand in 2004, the government imposed diplomatic sanctions against Israel and temporarily severed high-level contacts between the two countries in what became a significant diplomatic rift. WikiLeaks diplomatic cables revealed that the U.S. was not at all pleased.

Relations had returned to normal between the countries until December 2016 when along with Malaysia, Senegal, Venezuela and others, New Zealand co-sponsored the controversial United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 which condemned Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories during the last months of the Obama administration. The same motion briefly became mired in the Trump-Russia investigation when former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about lobbying activities related to the resolution during the transition between administrations on behalf of Israel.

The Trump White House has since proven to be the most fanatically Zionist presidency since the foundation of the Jewish state in 1948. Over the years, New Zealand has shown a willingness to stand up to Jerusalem and its brazen disregard for international law that other nations could learn from. Despite being a small nation, it has played an important role in pro-Palestinian activism and the prospect of Palestinian statehood just as it did in protesting South African Apartheid in the 1980s.

In 2018, when New Zealand-born popular musician Lorde canceled a concert in Tel Aviv in solidarity with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, she became the target of vicious Zionist smear campaign which saw right-wing Trumpist Rabbi Schmuley Boteach take out a full-page ad in The Washington Post denouncing her as a bigot while a $13,000 lawsuit was filed by the Mossad-linked Shurat HaDin lawfare NGO. Meanwhile, unlike Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Jacinda Ardern has been critical of the Trump administration’s move of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, stating it undermines the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

New Zealand’s relatively even-handed foreign policy has likely rattled the Zionists and their far right Islamophobic counterparts in the West and it is possible that it is viewed as a threat to the interests of Israel and the US. The feasibly manufactured terrorist attack against New Zealand has greatly disrupted the small country, a state which in 2018 had its lowest homicide rate in 40 years and averages well below 100 murders per year, making this attack an extremely rare occurrence for the peaceful country.

In light of the attacks on the mosques in Christchurch, it could now end up acquiring the police state model of the US and Israel as part of the global ‘War on Terror.’ The country immediately issued a ban on semiautomatic weapons following the tragedy in a disturbing rollback of civil liberties while engaging in an unprecedented censorship effort to criminalize sharing and possession of Tarrant’s manifesto and video. Prior to Breivik’s perpetration of the attacks in Norway, there had been significant political tensions between Oslo and Jerusalem in the months leading up to the violence due to Norway’s intent to recognize a Palestinian state and the circumstances in relations between New Zealand and Israel prior to Christchurch is eerily reminiscent.

Israel has a storied history of being a state sponsor of international terrorism as well as the use of ‘false flag’ operations to achieve its political objectives, most notably in the 1954 Lavon Affair, codenamed Operation Susannah, where the Aman branch of its military intelligence services recruited Egyptian nationals to commit bombings to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood in order to maintain desired British military presence in Egypt.

It continues such cloak-and-dagger tactics to this day with the use of terror proxies such as the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK) and MKO to undermine Iran, as well as the arming and funding of al-Qaeda affiliated Syrian jihadist groups against the Assad government. If it is willing to co-sponsor radical Islamists with its ally Saudi Arabia to attack their mutual regional enemies, now that the ruling Likud Party has made strange bedfellows with far right Islamophobes in the West it is within the realm of possibility it would continue to do the same especially when the victims are Arab or Muslim.

Regardless of whether or not there turns out to be any Mossad fingerprints discovered on the Christchurch shootings, if the world is serious about confronting the emerging far right internationally it must be willing to accurately diagnose the phenomenon. One of its most distinctive attributes is its Christian Zionism and a shared belief that the Bible gives Israel evidential right to Palestinian land and that Jews are inherently non-indigenous to Europe.

The ever-expanding colonization of the West Bank and Gaza has solidified Israel’s nationalist foundations, especially now that Arabic has been removed as a second official language and the passing of the 2018 Nationality Law defining Israel as an ethno-nationalist state with Arabs officially second-class citizens. If Israel did not directly participate in the 9/11 attacks by infiltrating the al-Qaeda cell in Hamburg, Germany and directing the airplane hijackings as many legitimately suspect, it has certainly facilitated the U.S. wars in the Middle East against its regional enemies and now it is nurturing the Islamophobic far right in the West hostile to the flood of displaced refugees fleeing them.

Israeli policy has principally benefited from all this but one can only expect the hasbaric retaliation of ‘anti-Semitism’ smears like those against UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota for pointing this out. In the meantime, the Russiagate hoax has deflected attention away from Jerusalem toward Moscow in regards to foreign cultivation of the growing far right nationalist movement in the West. One hopes the recent bust of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report will put some of the distraction to rest and shift the speculation toward Israel where it belongs.

Finally, the political confusion of zealots like Tarrant needs to be addressed as entirely predictable instead of as unintended consequences of the War on Terror and the financial crisis. Recently, 2020 Democratic US Presidential candidate Andrew Yang became the subject of establishment-led smears simply for acknowledging verifiable facts about declining birth-rates of white Americans where he was vilified as adjoining with the views of those like Tarrant. Yet these statistics designated by race that Yang recognized are expressions of the results of class conflict while genuine anger is being misdirected toward immigrants instead of capital and its never-ending changes in labor demands.

This is the cycle which must be broken if this holy war between the West and Islam stirred up by Zionists or what the orientialist Samuel Huntington called the ‘clash of civilizations’ is to end. If not, we cannot only expect the U.S. empire to continue its downward slide and its fear of a multipolar world to culminate in an internecine that will turn the whole world into a tragedy like Christchurch.

‘ISRAEL’ DID 9/11, NOT MUSLIMS, AND ANYONE WHO THINKS OTHERWISE 17 YEARS ON IS AN IDIOT

by Jonathan Azaziah

It’s been 17 years. 17 long, hard and savagely bloody years that have left tens of millions murdered, maimed and displaced in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Yemen, occupied Palestine, Lebanon, Mali, Nigeria and occupied Kashmir. GWOT, the Global War on Terror, has raped the world. And it’s all because of what happened at the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on this day, September 11th, in 2001. T.H.E.Y. — The Hebrews Enslaving You — told you, the Goyim, i.e. the 99% majority here on this beautiful little sphere of blue and green called Earth, that Muslims did it. That’s right. Those damn Muslamics. Hating ‘Murica for its freedom. Being all towel-headed and terroristy! Moozlemicals bypassed the half-trillion dollar air defense system of the US in the most closely-guarded, maximum-security airspace in the world all to trigger an unending war on the Islamicate. Makes perfect sense. Right? I mean… Seriously? Like… for real, for real? YOU HAVE TO GOT TO BE KIDDING ME.

At this stage, 17 years in, with all the evidence from engineers, architects, professors, intelligence whistleblowers, military analysts, heads of state and more, if you don’t know that the official 9/11 story is the biggest pile of bullshit this side of Wagyu farms in Japan, you’re an idiot. Simple and plain. A total moron. We’re talking planetary stupidity here. Because two planes can’t pulverize three buildings–we call that the STMT… Shlomo’s Talmudic Mathematical Theorem. Jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to melt steel. The “hijackers” weren’t capable of flying a single-engine Cesna, let alone 757s and 767s. On this point, let’s also note that some of the “hijackers” are actually still alive. Passports ain’t flame-retardant. NORAD doesn’t stand down on its own. F-16 interceptors don’t stand down on their own either. Osama Bin Laden was a longstanding agent of the CIA who denied having anything to do with 9/11 in his last actual interview and pointed the finger at the very people we’ll be discussing herein. He also died from health-related issues, not a Seal Team 6 raid. And more. So much more. You get the gist of it.

Those of you who know this though and have seen the light–and there are more of you than the mainstream media cares to admit–and who are just looking for that missing piece; that… WHO… Then we’re going to call a dradle a dradle, a menorah a menorah and a six-pointed star a six-pointed and drill it into your head the way that the Sanhedrin drills Christ-hatred into the heads of yeshiva students. You picking up what I’m putting down? Here. These are just SOME– you read that right, SOME–of the names that the Monsters don’t want you to call out when you’re discussing 9/11:

1. Benjamin Netanyahu (real name: Mileikowsky) – 24 hours after the 9/11 attacks, he said that they were “very good” then said later that, “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” Godfather of GWOT with his think tank, the Jonathan Institute, and his book, “Terrorism: How the West Can Win”. Inaugurated the 100-year war against what he called “militant Islam” and revealed as much in June 2012. Previously worked in a nuclear smuggling ring called Project Pinto. War criminal.

2. Ehud Barak (real name: Brog) – Traveled to the United States and spent about 6 months preceding 9/11 as a chief consultant for Electronic Data Systems and SCP Partners, a shadowy Mossad-run company that does big business with firms that created advanced niche specialty metals and complex metal products for defense industries in the fields of energy, aerospace, infrastructure and chemicals. Among these products are nano-composite explosives laced with thermite, used to blow up the Twin Towers. Barak was on the BBC minutes after American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 hit the WTC to literally announce the “clash of civilizations” and call for attacks on Iraq, Iran, Libya and Afghanistan. War criminal.

3. Ehud Olmert – Was in New York the very night before the attacks to make the final preparations. Connected to Menachem Atzmon of ICTS. War criminal.

4. & 5. Menachem Atzmon and Ezra Harel – Owners of International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS), which ran the security at the Boston and Newark airports as well as “all the international aviation gateways in the USA” according to its own website. Affiliated with Shin Bet, Mossad and Aman.

6. Shimon Peres (real name: Szymon Perski) – Godfather of the usurping Zionist entity’s illegal nuclear program, arms industry, spy services and false flag operations (he was numero uno in the Lavon Affair aka Operation Susannah). Pioneered the facility at the illegitimate ‘Israeli’ regime’s WMD base at Dimona on occupied Palestinian land in Al-Naqab that produces the thermite used in the 9/11 horror. SPC Partners is the distributor, and it was Peres who brought the transaction to Barak. War criminal.

7. Isser Harel (real name: Halperin) – Founder of the Mossad. Masterminded the operation with his old students Avraham Bendor and Peter Zvi Malkin, as well as ‘Israeli’ tycoon and Mossad-connected arms peddler Shaul Eisenberg, to obtain the blueprints for the WTC in an exchange facilitated by Port Authority Executive Director Stephen Berger.

8. Mordechai “Motti” Hod (real name: Fein) – ‘Israeli’ occupation Air Force Major General and architect of the USS Liberty Massacre. From “Kibbutz Degania”, built on ethnically cleansed Palestinian village Umm Jouniyeh, where his friend Moshe Dayan, the notorious one-eyed genocidal maniac, also called “home”. Using his connections at ‘Israeli’ airline El Al (a known front for Zionist intelligence operatives) and ‘Israel’ Aerospace Industries (IAI)–where he was chief for years–as well as his experience in executing false flags and attacking aircraft filled with innocent people (Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114), he was the military point man for Peres as well as Mossad and Shin Bet on 9/11. War criminal.

9. Michael Chertoff – Second Secretary of Homeland Security and prior to that, chief of the criminal division of the Justice Department from 2001-2003. Son of Rabbi Gershon Baruch Chertoff, the final rabbinical scholar in a long line from Russia, and Livia Eisen, protege of Isser Harel, first hostess of El Al and founding female operative of Mossad. Orchestrated the capture of more than 1,100 Muslim citizens, tourists and immigrants, falsely labeling them as suspects connected to the September 11th attacks, while blocking the efforts of the FBI to investigate the hundreds of Mossad spies detained in relation to the event, specifically one Special Agent Michael Dick who was digging into ‘Israeli’-owned ZIM; supervising the destruction and confiscation of evidence that would have linked ‘Israel’ and the US to the attacks like videotapes, eyewitness accounts, written testimonies and debris from Ground Zero; and quietly killing every last charge against all of the ‘Israelis’ in custody before sending them back to the Zio-Tumor. Would later found the Chertoff Group and lead consulting efforts for a company called Rapiscan and make hundreds of millions of dollars from ‘Israeli’-occupation-style, unhealthy, irradiating body scanning at US airports.

10-14. Yaron Shmuel, Omer Marmari, Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, and Oded Ellner – Mossad spies who have come to be known as “the five dancing ‘Israelis'”. After being detained on the fateful September day and having their bodies as well as their van testing positive for explosives, they shockingly proclaimed that, “We’re here to document the event.”

15. Dominick Otto Suter – Mossadnik owner of ‘Israeli’ intelligence front Urban Moving Systems where the five dancing ‘Israelis’ worked. He was their overseer and the chief of a Mossad operation to gather intelligence on various Arab organizations in the Tri-State Area.

16. Morris Kahn – ‘Israeli’ owner and founder of Amdocs, which collects processing data for 90% of the phone calls, emails and text messages in America, including several agencies of the US ZOG. A close confidant of Isser Harel. At least 60 Israeli spies, all of whom were operatives in the fields of military intelligence and explosive ordinance were detained on 9/11, and more than 140 Israeli spies were detained shortly before the events. A large swathe of them worked at Amdocs.

17. Kenneth Bialkin – Head of the America-‘Israel’ Friendship League (tied to Aman) and well-known member of the ADL and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. Senior partner of devilish, mega-influential law firm Skadden Arps that controlled all 9/11-related litigation.

18. Sheila Birnbaum – The special mediator for the aforementioned litigation and old-time partner in Skadden Arps who reports to none other than Bialkin.

19. Alvin Hellerstein – The judge on all of the cases run by Skadden Arps and a fanatical Zionist who attends the same temple as Birnbaum and Bialkin.

20. Amnon Shoham – Co-founder of Cedar Fund, which poured tons of cash into Guardium, a “data security” company that worked closely with B’nai B’rith operative Michael Goff at P-Tech and “chosenite” CIA stalwart James Schlesinger’s MITRE to subvert various American security apparatuses on 9/11. A Talipon of substantial influence with his hands in at least a dozen different start-ups having a global impact, Shoham worked at–WHERE ELSE BUT–Skadden Arps on public offerings, mergers and acquisitions involving high technology companies prior to his venture capitalist endeavors.

21. Gal Israely – Cedar Fund’s other co-founder. Also a Talpion connected to a plethora of high-tech start-ups. Prior to partnering up with Amnon Shoham and pouring cash into ‘Israeli’ intelligence assets like Guardium, he was Managing Director in the High Tech Investment Banking group of Bear Stearns–which was involved in a gigantic put options scam with AIG CEO Maurice Greenberg, Swiss Re Insurance and Michael Bloomberg (who became mayor of NY following the 9/11 attacks). Cozy, ain’t it?

22. Yuval Cohen – Founder and senior partner of Stage One Ventures, the second funder of Guardium. Was recruited into the Tapliot program at the usurping Zionist entity’s Hebrew University.

23. Yadin Kaufman – Founding partner of Veritas Ventures Partners, the third and final funder of Guardium. Not only a Talpion but a Mossadnik with deep ties to the Interdisciplinary Center of Mossad in “Herzliya” and well-connected in New York City where he is a member of the bar and a frequenter of events held by Skadden Arps and the other high-powered 9/11 (il)legal player, Stroock Stroock Lavan.

24. Kenneth Feinberg – Set up the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund and forced the 9/11 victims’ families to wave their right to sue the government for criminal negligence in exchange for a little over a million shekels–I mean dollars– apiece. Holofraud swindler. Kennedy assassination profiteer. His wife, Dede, is the former president of the Jewish Federation in DC and a major bankroller of Jewish causes through Congregation Beth El of Montgomery County in Bethesda, Maryland, dropping monies on everything from ‘Israeli’ bonds to ‘Israeli’ charities (ethnic cleansing fronts) to ‘Israeli’ start-ups (Talpiot). Worked hand-in-glove with Birnbaum, Bialkin and Hellerstein to put the litigation to bed.

25. “Lucky” Larry Silverstein – Mr. Pull It. Friend of every last ‘Israeli’ premier of the last three decades who has phone conversations with Netanyahu every Sunday. United Jewish Appeal bigwig. Co-owned the Twin Towers with Haganah terrorist and IOF Golani Brigades commando Frank Lowy. His buddies Lewis Eisenberg and Ronald Lauder, prominent Jewish Lobby chieftains themselves, privatized the WTC for the first time in history and helped him get the lease. Collected 7 billion dollars from the insurance settlement thanks to his other tribalist pal Michael Mukasey, who would help Chertoff save the ‘Israeli’ spies and later become the Bush regime’s Attorney General, solidifying in court that everything was “kosher”.

26. Rabbi Dov Zakheim – Pentagon Comptroller who disappeared $3.3 trillion and sent it to the usurping Zionist entity to pay for new warplanes that would be used in the slaughter of Palestinian and Lebanese innocents. Head honcho of Systems Planning Corporation (SPC) that manufactured the FTS (flight termination system) equipped under the fuselages of the planes that hit the WTC. Co-author of Rebuilding America’s Defenses, the mission statement of the neocon cabal that wanted a “New Pearl Harbor”, ran the Bush White House and called itself PNAC–where, for the record, every policy wonk involved in the barbaric wars launched in the name of 9/11 gathered and became signatories to Zakheim’s ravings. His Tridata Corporation covered up the domineering ‘Israeli’ role in the WTC false flag of ’93, which was considered to be a test run for the “real thing” 8 years alter. War criminal and arguably the architect of the whole September 11th shebang.

Know what all these people have in common? And I do mean ALL of them. Figure it out yet? Yeah. They ain’t Muslims. They don’t go to the masjid to do Salat. They’re Jews. They go to the synagogue–Synagogue of Satan, that is. They all have ties to ‘Israel’, either as dual-citizens, committed Zionist fundraisers or both. This is only the tip of the iceBERG too. These are the criminals who brought down the World Trade Center and blew up the Pentagon. These are the terrorists. These are the conspirators. These are the designers. These are the murderers of 2,996 Americans on Septembers 11th, 2001. Not the Islamic Republic of Iran. Not the accursed House of Saud. Not Al-Qaeda. Not Muslims. Got it? One more time: NOTTTTTTTT Muslims. But Jews, Global Zionism and the artificial Halakhic-Talmudic regime butchering, occupying, colonizing and putrefying Palestine. We cannot stop the cycle of unrelenting imperialism until we speak with certainty why the wheels are spinning in the first place. 9/11 was a Jewish-Zionist job. 17 years on, it’s beyond overdue that everyone says it. 9/11 is Jewry’s crime. Not the Ummah’s. Not Islam’s. And anyone who thinks or says otherwise is an idiot.

How the foreign-backed conspiracy to overthrow Asad is failing in Syria

by Crescent-Online.net

October, 2012 What has upset foreign conspirators the most is the resilience of the Asad regime. It has lasted 21 months of incessant attacks from inside and out and there are no signs that it is about to collapse. Dubai, Crescent- online October 11, 2012, 00:00 EST The only certainty in war is its uncertainty. As any general, no matter how brilliant, would testify, the best-laid plans are quickly rendered useless by the vagaries of war. This is even more so in internal conflicts where there are far too many variables to make accurate predictions or plans. This thesis is best illustrated by events unfolding in Syria, especially over the last four months. The conspiracy against Bashar al-Asad's regime was hatched in February 2011 in a Paris cafe. The conspirators included in addition to some members of the Syrian opposition, Jeffrey Feltman, an American arch-Zionist, Dan Shapiro, US ambassador to Israel, Bandar bin Sultan, then Saudi Security chief and currently the kingdom's intelligence chief, as well as a representative of Saad Hariri, the playboy and former Lebanese prime minister. According to this plan, the uprising was to be launched in Deraa, a small town in the middle of nowhere. Deraa was chosen because of its proximity to the Jordanian border from where weapons were to be smuggled in. Both the conspirators and Syrian opposition groups were misled by the ease with which Colonel Muammar Qaddafi was overthrown in Libya. It was assumed that like Qaddafi, Asad too would be disposed of in a matter of months if not weeks. The tiny Emirate of Qatar also quickly signed on. Flushed with billions of gas dollars, Qatar is punching way above its weight in regional politics. Initially, Turkey, the most important regional player, was reluctant to jump into the fray. The Turks thought because of their importance, they could persuade Asad to do what they wanted him to do. In May 2011, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu visited Damascus and in a meeting with President Bashar al-Asad, gave him what was essentially a list of demands. Asad gave him a polite hearing but was not going to accept foreign dictation. When Asad refused to comply with Turkish demands, perhaps drawn out with Saudi help (the Saudis cannot stand the Asad clan or the Alawites although for the record Asad is not Alawite but Sunni although that is neither here or there), the Turks took offense and joined the anti-Asad alliance. Weapons started to flood into Syria from Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. The French, Americans, British, and Turks also provided logistical support as well as intelligence. The Saudis and Qataris offered to buy any senior civilian or military Syrian official willing to defect. There have been few takers. Brigadier Manaf Tlas is the highest ranking military officer to defect. The foreign conspirators faced another problem. The Syrian National Council they cobbled together out of exiled Syrians has no support inside Syria. Further, Syrian opposition groups inside the country detest these rank opportunists whose only ambition seems to be to get their hands on as much foreign cash as possible while people inside the country die. What has upset foreign conspirators the most is the resilience of the Asad regime. It has lasted 21 months of incessant attacks from inside and out and there are no signs that it is about to collapse. Instead, the foreign conspirators are beginning to panic. Saudi King Abdullah in particular is greatly worried. As the crisis drags on, he feels it will make life more difficult for him in the kingdom where the succession battle is already intensifying with the first generation of Saudi royals heading to their graves. He has mooted a Yemeni-style transition in Syria. He would be content with Tlas taking over from Asad. This is the other version of the Davutoglu plan whereby he said on October 7 that Turkey would accept Farouk el-Sharaa replacing Asad. These proposals clearly point to the fact that the military option, a la Libya, is not viable in Syria. There are other worries as well. The influx of a large number of foreign mercenaries into Syria is causing great concern for the Saudis, Jordanians and Americans. The Americans have already had a blowback in Benghazi when ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by a Libyan terrorist outfit that was trained and armed by NATO to overthrow Qaddafi. There is also disagreement on how to proceed. A meeting between the intelligence chiefs of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France and the US in Turkey last month failed to produce a clear plan of action. This was followed on October 10 by a meeting between Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan and the Qatari Emir, Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani in Doha, Qatar. This too failed to produce any tangible result because Qatar wants to intensify the war in Syria while the Saudis want a face-saving way out. Of course, Qatar has no army to speak of; it can only provide soccer players that only know how to swing in a night club but cannot handle guns. While the Saudis are getting cold feet, Qatar continues to punch above its weight. Next week it is convening another meeting of Syrian opposition groups to try and unite them. It may be easier to convince the mice to work with cats that Syrian opposition groups to work together. As Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institution in Doha said: "It's all a bit of a mess." Yes, indeed, it is, and all of their own making. They have nobody but themselves to blame. Those playing with fire are likely to get their fingers burnt.

Zionism needs the Israeli Jews to feel frightened: Alan Hart - Interview

By Kourosh Ziabari

Alan Hart is an indispensable name in journalism. Unquestionably, he has been one of the most influential British journalists with an expertise in the Middle East affairs. A former BBC Panorama presenter, Hart was a close friend of Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat. During his fruitful career, Hart interviewed several prominent leaders including Saudi Arabia's King Faisal, Jordan's King Hussein and Egyptian Presidents Nasser and Sadat.

He was a media correspondent for the Independent Television Network and has covered the Vietnam War and Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well.

He is a vocal critic of Israel and its expansionistic policies and has repeatedly reprimanded the Arab leaders for their implicit complicity with Israel in its suppression of the Palestinian nation.

Alan Hart joined me in an exclusive, in-depth interview to explore the prospect of Israel-Palestinian conflict, the roots of Zionist lobby's influence over the U.S. Congress, the 9/11 conspiracy theories and the possibility of a U.S.-directed military strike against Iran. 

Kourosh Ziabari: In your recent article "Zionism and Peace are Incompatible" you reach a point where you state "if it is the case that American presidents are frightened of provoking Israel, the conclusion would have to be that the Zionist state is a monster beyond control and that all efforts for peace are doomed to failure." Is it really the case that Israel possesses an uncontrollable, disproportionate power which enables it to violate the international law and enjoy immunity from being held accountable before the international community? What's the source of this unwarrantable power and influence? 

Alan Hart: Let's start with Reality Number One. There are two sets of rules for the behavior of nations, one for all the countries of the world minus Israel, the other exclusively for Israel. This double-standard is the mother and father of Arab and other Muslim hurt, humiliation and anger. Put another way, this double-standard is the best recruiting sergeant for violent Islamic fundamentalism.

In the story of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel as I tell it fully documented in my latest book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, the moment when the major powers created the double-standard can be more or less pinpointed. In the immediate aftermath of the 1967 war, and because it was a war of Israeli aggression not self-defense, the major powers, through the UN Security Council, should have said to Israel something like the following: "You are not to build any settlements on newly occupied Arab land. If you do, you'll be demonstrating your contempt for international law. In this event the international community will declare Israel to be an outlaw state and subject it to sanctions." 

If something like that riot act had been read to Israel, there probably would have been peace many, many years ago. For background let me briefly explain why.  

The pragmatic Arafat was reluctantly reconciled to the reality of Israel's existence inside its pre-1967 borders as far back as 1969. In his gun and olive branch address to the UN General Assembly on 13 November 1974 he said so by obvious implication. Thereafter he put his credibility with his leadership colleagues and his people, and his life, on the line to get a mandate for unthinkable compromise with Israel. He got the mandate at the end of 1979 when the Palestine National Council, then the highest decision-making body on the Palestinian side, voted by 296 votes to 4 to endorse his two-state policy - a solution which any rational Israeli government and people would have accepted with relief. What Arafat needed thereafter was an Israeli partner for peace. He eventually got a probable one, Yitzhak Rabin, but he was assassinated by a Zionist fanatic who knew exactly what he was doing - killing the peace process. The more it became clear that Israel's leaders were not interested in a genuine two-state solution for which Arafat had prepared the ground on his side, the more his credibility with his own people suffered. 

Eisenhower was the first and the last American president to contain Zionism. After Israel had secretly colluded with France and Britain in the 1956 invasion of Eygpt to overthrow Nasser and take back the Suez Canal which he had nationalized, Israel's leaders tried to insist on conditions for Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai. Eisenhower confronted them by going over the heads of Congress in an address to the nation. In the course of it he said this: 

"Israel insists on firm guarantees as a condition to withdrawing its forces of invasion. If we agree that armed attack can properly achieve the purposes of the assailant, then I fear we will have turned back the clock of international order. We will have countenanced the use of force as a means of settling international differences and gaining national advantage... If the UN once admits that international disputes can be settled using force, then we will have destroyed the very foundation of the organization and our best hope for establishing a real world order."  

As I note in a chapter of my book titled Goodbye to the Security Council's Integrity, after the 1967 war there simply was not the Eisenhower-like political will to oblige Israel to behave like a normal state - i.e. in accordance with international law and its obligations as a member of the UN. 

What, really, explains this lack of political will - in 1967 and still today?

I used to believe the short answer was the stranglehold on American policy for the Middle East of the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress. There's no mystery about the prime source of the lobby's power. It's money to fund election campaigns. If you were an American and announced that you were going to run for Congress or any other significant public office, you'd be approached by the lobby. It would tell you the policy position on Israel and then offer you a choice. If you supported Israel, you would receive all the campaign funding you needed to defeat your opponent. If you were not interested, the funding would go to your opponent to enable him or her to defeat you. That's an over-simplification of how the system works but it's also the essence of the reality. 

Incidentally, I do NOT blame the Zionist lobby for playing the game the way it does. It is only playing according to The System's rules. I blame America's pork-barrel system of politics which puts what passes for democracy up for sale to the highest bidders. It just so happens that the Zionist lobby in association with its Christian fundamentalist allies is one of the highest bidders, if not the highest. If I had the opportunity to advise an American president, I would say to him or her: "The best thing you could do for your country is to give it some real democracy by putting an end to your corrupt, pork-barrel politics." 

Today, and as I indicated in my recent article from you quoted, Zionism and Peace Are Incompatible, I am beginning to think that the awesome influence of the Zionist lobby may not be the complete explanation of the lack of political will. Because it is obviously not in America's own best interests to go on supporting Israel right or wrong and making enemies of 1.4 billion Muslims by so doing, the question I am asking myself is this: Could it be that all American presidents are frightened of confronting Zionism because they know there is nothing nuclear-armed Israeli leaders would not do if they were seriously pressed to make peace on terms which they believed in their own deluded minds would put Israel's security at risk? 

That question was provoked by my recall of a statement made to me in a BBC Panorama interview by Golda Meir when she was prime minister. At a point I interrupted her to say: "I just want to be sure that I understand what you're saying… You are saying that in a doomsday situation Israel would be prepared to take the region and the world down with it?" Without the shortest of pauses for reflection, and in the gravel voice that could charm or intimidate American presidents according to need, she replied: "Yes! That's exactly what I am saying." 

In those days Panorama, the BBC's flagship current affairs program, was transmitted on a Monday evening at 8.10pm. By 10.0pm, The Times, then a seriously good newspaper not the Murdoch product it is today, had changed its lead editorial to quote what Golda had said to me. It then added its own opinion. "We had better believe her." 

Exactly what I am saying comes down to this. Even if an American president was free to read the riot act to Israel, if only to best protect America's own real interests, it does not follow that its leaders would say: "Okay. We'll do what you want." In my view it's possible, even probable, that they would say: "Mr. President, go to hell. If you push us too far, we'll create mayhem in the region." 

KZ: The pro-Palestinian journalist and activist Jeffrey Blankfort told me in a recent interview about the efforts made by the previous United State presidents to hold back the influence of Israel and Zionist lobby over the U.S. Congress. He cited the confrontation of George Bush Sr. with the Zionist network in 1991 and 1992 when he denied Israel its request for $10 billion in loan guarantees; however, Mr. Bush was eventually forced to surrender and endorse the loan. Will the same fate await President Obama who is said to be determined to put forward a proposal for the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders in the Security Council? 

AH: About President Obama let me first of all say this. I do not believe as many of his anti-Zionist critics do that he came into office as a Zionist stooge, programmed to do Zionism's bidding. If that was the case, why would he have challenged Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby over the settlements and set himself up to be humiliated? My view is that Obama meant well but was too naïve and inexperienced for the job and was therefore bound to become a prisoner of the Zionist lobby. I also think it is impossible for any new, first term president to be completely aware of the full extent of the Zionist lobby's stranglehold on Congress until he is in the Oval Office trying to get things done. 

As I write in Is Peace Possible?, the Epilogue of Volume Three of the American edition of my book, I think there was a reason why Obama moved so quickly to try to get a Middle East peace process going. 

He knew something that all American presidents know about when serious initiatives for peace can and cannot be taken. I know what that something is because a president told me a few months after events had denied him a second term in office. Any American president has only two windows of opportunity to break or try to break the Zionist lobby's stranglehold on Congress on matters to do with Israel/Palestine.  

The first window is during the first nine months of his first term because after that the soliciting of funds for the mid-term elections begins. Presidents don't have to worry on their own account about funds for the mid-term elections, but with their approach no president can do or say anything that would cost his party seats in Congress. The second window of opportunity is the last year of his second term if he has one. In that year, because he can't run for a third term, no president has a personal need for election campaign funds or organized votes. 

As things are there's a question mark over whether Obama will get a second term, but with the mid-term elections are out of the way, he might have one more opportunity to put some real pressure on Israel - if he has the will. There has been talk of a Palestinian and presumably wider Arab initiative to have the Security Council recognize Palestinian independence on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. If such a resolution does find its way to the Security Council, Obama could do what American Presidents always do when resolutions are not to Israel's liking - veto it. But he could also say and do nothing and effectively let the resolution pass. What then? 

In Ha'aretz on 20 October, Israeli commentator Aluf Benn offered this answer. A Security Council decision to recognize Palestinian independence on the West Bank and Gaza "would deem Israel an invader and occupier, paving the way for measures against Israel." In Aluff Benn's view the international movement to boycott Israel would "gain massive encouragement when Europe, China and India turn their backs on Israel and erode the last remnants of its legitimacy. Gradually the Israeli public will also feel the diplomatic and economic stranglehold." 

My guess is that such a resolution will not find its way to the Security Council because the Arab regimes are too frightened of offending Zionism too much; but if it does, Obama will have his last chance to demonstrate that, as it relates to American efforts for peace in the Middle East, his "Yes, we can" has not become "No, we can't." 

KZ. Arab leaders have shown signs that they're willing to renormalize their ties with Israel. Politicians in some of the Arab states have openly negotiated with high-ranking Israeli officials and invited them to their events. What are the benefits of this renormalization for the Arab leaders while anger and hatred against the Israeli regime is growing in the Arab world on a daily basis? How can the Arab leaders disregard the crowds of people who storm into streets en masse to protest the aggressive and belligerent policies of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza? 

AH: Most Arabs quietly despise their leaders but I'm not aware that they have stormed into the streets to protest against Israel's policies. I would re-phrase what I think is the essence of your question in this way: "Do Arab leaders care about what happens to the occupied and oppressed Palestinians?" 

My short answer is "No". My longer answer is this.The real history of the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel invites the conclusion that the Arab regimes, more by default than design in my view, betrayed the Palestinians. And there's no mystery about the nature of this betrayal. 

When the Palestine file was closed by Israel's 1948 victory on the battlefield and the armistice agreements, the divided and impotent Arab regimes secretly shared the same hope as the Zionists and the major powers. It was that the file would remain closed for ever. The Palestinians were supposed to accept their lot as the sacrificial lamb on the altar of political expediency. 

Nor is there any mystery about why the Arab regimes were at one with the Zionists and the major powers in hoping that there would never be a regeneration of Palestinian nationalism. They all knew that if there was, there would one day have to be a confrontation with Zionism; and nobody wanted that.  

When Yasser Arafat, Abu Jihad and a few others lit the slow burning fire of the regeneration, it was the security services of Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon which took the lead in trying to put it out. 

Fast forward to 1982, Before Sharon sent the IDF all the way to Beirut to exterminate the PLO's leadership and destroy its infrastructure, [Persian] Gulf Arab leaders met in secret, without advisers present, in order to agree a message to the Reagan administration. The message was to the effect that they would not intervene in any way when Sharon made his move. After that message was sent, one of the Arab leaders present, Oman's Sultan Qaboos, said to Arafat: "Be careful. You are going to ask for our help and it will not come."  

And let me add this. Last year I had a private conversation in London with a major royal from the Arab world. I said to him, "Nothing is going to change in the Arab world until your regimes are more frightened of their own masses than they are of offending Zionism and America". He replied, "You're right." I also said to him, "If the Zionists do resort to a final round of ethnic cleaning to close the Palestine file, Arab leaders, behind closed doors, will give thanks and celebrate." His reply was the same, "You're right." 

KZ. You've implied in your article "Obama speaks at the UN… Goodbye to peace" that if the Arab and Muslim leaders were effectively united against the United States whose ultimate objective is to consolidate and empower the quisling government of Mahmoud Abbas, Israel couldn't have succeeded in imposing its expansionistic wills on the Palestinian nation and its chances for legitimizing a Greater Israel which goes beyond the borders of 1967 would have been insignificant; however, we don't find such a solidarity among the Muslim and Arab leaders. except in the streets, as you put it. So what will be the fate of Palestinian nation? Should they surrender into what Israel has foreseen for them, that is displacement, homelessness and destruction? 

A: My point has never been that Arab and other Muslim leaders have to be "against" the U.S. The main difference at leadership level between the Jews and the Arabs is that the Jews know how to play the game of international politics and the Arabs don't. Put another way, Zionism's key players know how to play the cards they were dealt and Arab leaders don't. 

Zionism's five main cards were and are the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust for blackmail purposes; money (virtually unlimited funds) and the influence it buys; the organized Jewish vote in close American election races; overwhelming military superiority; and, more generally speaking, breathtakingly, brilliant organization and coordination.  

The Arabs had, and still have an ace that would have trumped all of Zionism's cards: OIL. 

Imagine what would have happened in the immediate aftermath of the 1967 war if Arab leaders had put their act together and sent one of their number secretly to Washington DC to say something very like the following to President Johnson behind closed doors: "If you don't get Israel back behind its pre-war borders, we'll turn off the oil taps."

If Johnson had believed that Arab leaders were united and serious, he would have replied with something very like the following: "I can't guarantee swift action on Jerusalem but give me two or three weeks for the rest." 

If the Zionists had been in the Arab position, that is how they would have played their hand. And that is not pure speculation on my part. Over the years I have been told so by a number of Israeli leaders including former Directors of Military Intelligence. 

The main point is that if Johnson had believed that Arab leaders were united and serious, they would not have had to turn off the oil taps. A secret, credible threat to do so would have been enough to cause Johnson or any president to put America's own best interests first. 

Against that background the question to be asked today is something like this: What, in theory, could Arab leaders still do to give themselves a reasonable chance of countering Zionism's influence on American policy for the Middle East?  

Prefaced by a summary statement of all the initiatives the Arabs including the Palestinians have taken for peace. They could threaten to 

- Sever their diplomatic relations with the U.S.

- Withdraw their financial support for America's broken economy

- Turn off the oil taps 

Will Arab leaders ever learn how to play their cards if only to best protect their own longer term, real interests? 

I think not, and that takes me to the second part of your question - What will be the fate of the Palestinian nation and should the Palestinians surrender to Zionism's will?  

The main point is that the occupied and oppressed Palestinians, the masses, are not going to surrender to Zionism's will and accept crumbs from its table; the crumbs being three or four Bantustans on maximum 40% of the West Bank, which would not come even close to satisfying the Palestinians' minimum demand and need for some justice but which they could call a state if they wished. It's not totally impossible that under pressure from the Arab regimes and America, a quisling Palestinian leadership will seek to do such a deal with Israel, but it would be rejected by the masses; and probably the quisling Palestinian leader would be assassinated. 

The question arising is what will Zionism's in-Israel leaders do when they conclude that with bombs and bullets and repressive measure of all kinds they cannot break the will of the occupied and oppressed Palestinians to continue their struggle? My guess is that they will create a pretext to drive the Palestinians off the West Bank and into Jordan or wherever. If that happens, the West Bank will be soaked in blood, mostly Palestinian blood, and honest reporters will describe it as a Zionist holocaust. 

It's because I truly fear that is the most likely scenario that I think the priority of the international community should stopping the final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine. 

KZ: A growing number of internet writers and technical experts in America and many other countries believe that Israel was behind or implicated in the 9/11 attacks. Do you think this conspiracy theory is credible and, if you do, in what ways did 9/11 benefit Israel? 

A: In my view the starting point for any serious and honest discussion of 9/11 has to be this question: Did the impact of the planes and the heat of their burning fuel bring the Twin Towers down? If the answer is "Yes", there's no need for conspiracy theories. If the answer is "No", the speculative question has to be - Who did it and how and why? 

My answer is "No". In my analysis there's enough evidence - visual, technical and scientific, and from eye-witnesses including fire fighters - to invite the conclusion that the Twin Towers, like Building Seven, were pre-wired for controlled demolition with nanothermite, the highest-tech military explosive. 

For context, the first observation I'd like to offer is that the mainstream Western media's complicity in suppressing even questions and debate about what really happened on 9/11 is consistent. What I mean is that for the past 63 years - from the creation of the Zionist state of Israel mainly by terrorism and ethnic cleansing to the present the mainstream media have been complicit in the suppression of the truth about the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel. Put another way, the mainstream media have been content to peddle Zionism's propaganda lies. The two biggest lies can be summed up in a very few words. 

The first is that poor little Israel has lived in constant danger of annihilation, the "driving into the sea" of its Jews. The truth, as I document in detail through the three volumes of the American edition of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is that Israel's existence has never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab force. Zionism's assertion to the contrary was the cover that allowed Israel to get away where it mattered most - in the Western world and America especially - with presenting its aggression as self defense and itself as the victim when it was and is the oppressor. 

The second is that Israel "never had Arab partners for peace" That is complete nonsense. I've already mentioned Arafat's pragmatism and work for peace to make the point, but here's another example. From almost the moment he came to power in 1951, Eygpt's President Nasser wanted an accommodation with Israel. He had secret exchanges with Israel's foreign minister, Moshe Sharret, who was in my view the only completely sane Israeli leader of his time. For wanting to make peace with Nasser and the Arabs, Sharett was destroyed by Israel's founding father and first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion 

Prior to 9/11, the best single example of the mainstream media's complicity in the suppression of the truth as it relates to conflict in the Middle East is Israel's attack on the American spy ship, the USS Liberty, on 8th June 1967, the 4^th day of the 6-Day war. (I was the first Western correspondent to the banks of the Suez Canal with the advancing Israelis, so I was in the Sinai desert at the time). That attack killed 37 Americans and seriously wounded more than 90 others. If things had gone according to the plan of the man who ordered that attack, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, the Liberty would have been sunk with all hands on board, leaving nobody to tell the story of what really happened… If it had been an Arab/Muslim attack on an American vessel, it's reasonable to speculate that America would have resorted to a military strike, if not war, on the country or countries it held responsible. What did President Johnson do? Out of fear of offending the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress, he ordered a cover-up which remains in force to this day. And the mainstream media went along with it, as it still does. 

Now to my summary thoughts on the possible, probable involvement of Israel's Mossad in 9/11. I will offer you two scenarios - A or B. 

In scenario A it's not impossible that 9/11 started out as an Arab/Muslim idea. But even if this was the case, Mossad would have had an inside track very quickly. From almost the moment of the Zionist state's birth, Mossad put great effort into placing agents inside every Arab regime, every Arab military and security establishment and every Arab/Muslim liberation movement and terrorist group. Many of Mossad's best and most effective agents were Moroccan and other North African Jews because they could pose most perfectly as Arabs. In a moment I'll tell you the short story of Mossad's penetration of the Abu Nidal terrorist group. 

In Scenario A the question is: Did Mossad tell anybody? My speculation is that it told some in the CIA and a few of Zionism's neo-con associates, Jews and non-Jews, including Vice President Cheney I call him the real Doctor Strangelove and the likes of Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle. In this scenario Mossad could have asked, "What do we do about this?" And the answer could have been something like, "We'll use it for the Pearl Harbor-like pretext we need." 

In this scenario, 9/11, even if it started out as an Arab/Muslim idea, was a joint Israeli/Mossad and American/neo-con conspiracy. 

For background here's a very short story about Mossad's penetration of the Abu Nidal terrorist group. Abu Nidal was a member of Arafat's Fatah but he broke with it when Arafat had come to terms with the reality of Israel's existence and was preparing the ground on his side for compromise with Israel. The Abu Nidal group, based mainly in Iraq, was responsible for the assassinations, mainly in Europe, of more than 20 of Arafat's emissaries who were telling Western governments behind closed doors that the Fatah-dominated PLO was serious about compromise with Israel. An investigation by Arafat and Abu Iyad, Fatah's counter intelligence chief, subsequently revealed that Abu Nidal was an alcoholic - he consumed between one and two bottles of whisky a day, and for much of most days he was drunk, not sober. His number two was running the show and targeting those to be assassinated and directing the killing. Abu Nidal's number two was a Mossad agent.  

It was, in fact, two Palestinian students in London who were activated by the Abu Nidal group to assassinate Israeli ambassador Argov. It was that assassination attempt in 1982 that gave Israeli Prime Minister Begin and Defense Minister Sharon the pretext they needed to launch their invasion of Lebanon all the way to Beirut, for the purpose of exterminating the entire leadership of the PLO and destroying its infrastructure… Ambassador Argov survived and quite some time after the event, he indicated that he suspected Israel's involvement (he could only have meant targeting) in the attempt to kill him. 

Scenario B has to be considered because it's a fact that some of the Arab/Muslim plotters, actual or alleged, were under surveillance by various Western intelligence agencies for years before 9/11. The agencies who were tracking them as possible/probable terrorists included those of America, Germany and Israel. 

In this scenario it's not impossible that the idea for 9/11 was put into the heads of possible/probable Arab/Muslim terrorists by Mossad agents. 

In this scenario, Mossad was actually running the show with key American neo-cons fixing things in America to make sure the attack was successful. From all that happened on the day, I'm not convinced that President Bush was in the pre-9/11 fixing loop. I think Cheney was most probably in control of the American executive oversight of what was essentially a Mossad false flag operation. Who else, for example, could have authorized the blocking of President Bush's electronic communications with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld for a critical period? 

Question: How did 9/11 serve the interests of the lunatic right in Israel and its neo-con associates in America? 

In their view Saddam Hussein represented the only foreseeable potential Arab challenge to Greater Israel's continued military domination of the whole Arab world. He had to be removed. By falsely claiming that Iraq was implicated in the 9/11 attack, Zionism and its neo-con associates in America set the stage for President Bush to be conned into going to war. 

Zionism's intention to get rid of Saddam Hussein was not, in fact, a secret. In 1996, under the chairmanship of Richard Perle, widely known in informed circles as the "Prince of Darkness", American Zionism presented a policy document with the title A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing The Realm.  

It urged incoming Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to have no second thoughts about making a clean break with the Rabin policy of negotiating with the PLO and trading land for peace. Israel's claim to all the land it occupied was "legitimate and noble", the policy paper said. "Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights is a solid basis for the future."After the clean break Israel would be free to shape its "strategic environment". What would that involve? Among other things, "re-establishing the principle of pre-emption (pre-emptive strikes)... focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq... weakening, containing and even rolling back Syria, Hizbollah and Iran." 

In fact the commitment of Zionism's in-America fixers and their neo-con associates to getting rid of Saddam Hussein goes back further than 1996. They were angry when President Bush the First refused to complete the job when he assembled a coalition to eject Iraq from Kuwait. After that Zionism's in-America fixers and their neo-con associates needed two things: 

A president who was dumb enough to buy their ideas - they got that with George "Dubya" Bush; and 

A "Pearl Harbour" like event to trigger the action. They got that with 9/11. 

But there was much more to it. 9/11 was a win-win for Zionism in another way.  

Predictably it provoked a rising tide of Islamophobia throughout the Western world and across America especially. In the minds of uninformed and ignorant Americans (i.e. most Americans), that in turn gave added credibility to the Zionist state's claim to be America's only true and reliable ally in the whole of the Arab and wider Muslim world. 

As I say in the Dear America introduction to the American edition of Volume 1 of my book, when Americans asked "Why do they hate us?", they were more or less all Arabs and Muslims everywhere. And I asked this question: What would Americans have learned if, instead of rushing to declare his war on global terrorism, President Bush had caused the Why-do-they-hate-us question to be addressed seriously? 

The short answer I give in my Dear America Introduction - the long answer is in the three volumes of my book - begins with the statement that the overwhelming majority of all Arabs and Muslims everywhere do NOT hate America or Americans. What almost all Arabs and Muslims everywhere DO hate is American foreign policy - its double standards in general and, in particular, its unconditional support for an Israel which ignores UN resolutions, demonstrates its contempt for international law and human rights conventions and resorts to state terrorism… A related truth is that for decades very many Arabs and other Muslims would, if they could, have migrated to America to enjoy a better life there. Today, however, the number of Arabs and other Muslims who would opt for American residence and citizenship if they could is greatly reduced because of the fact, sad but true, that the monster of Islamophobia is on the prowl across the Land of the Free and licking its lips. 

KZ: Over the past five years and since the escalation of international controversy over Iran's nuclear program, Israel has repeatedly threatened Iran with an imminent military strike and supported the imposition of financial sanctions against the country over its nuclear activities. Will Israel eventually attack Iran? What will be the consequences of such an attack for the Middle East?

AH: I do not believe that Iran is developing nuclear weapons but, for the sake of argument, let's assume that I am wrong and that in the not too distant future it does possess some. Does anybody seriously think it would launch a nuclear first strike on Israel? Of course it would not. If it did, the whole of Iran would be devastated by a retaliatory response. No Iranian leadership is ever going to invite such a catastrophe. Unless Zionism's leaders are completely out of their minds, they know this. So why, really, are they playing up the alleged Iranian nuclear threat?

I think they are doing so for three reasons.

One is to deflect attention from their crimes, in part to reduce the prospect of real pressure on them to be serious about peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could just about accept.

Another is what might be called a strategic consideration. Israel's leaders know that if Iran did posses nuclear weapons, their freedom to go on imposing their will on the region would be greatly restricted.

But most of all there is Zionism's need for Israeli Jews to feel frightened.

A good explanation of why was provided by Ira Cherna in a Truthout post in November 2009. It was headlined Israel's Pathology. Cherna asked - How can it be that pathological feelings of fear, weakness and victimization are "comforting" to very many Israelis? His answer was the following:

"For starters, they automatically put Jews on the side of innocence. Who can blame the weak victim for the violence? All the trouble, it seems, is started by the other side... And if all the trouble is started by the other side, then all the fault must lie with the other side. Weakness and victimization seem to prove that ‘We're moral.' Obviously, it's our enemies who are immoral and thus to blame for all our problems. So Israelis have no reason even to consider changing any of their policies or behaviors."

Will Israel eventually attack Iran?

Where Zionism is concerned nothing is impossible, but I prefer to think that even Israel's leaders, despite their rhetoric, are not that mad. As I'm sure you know, there have been reports that Obama sent messengers to Israel to tell its leaders that attacking Iran was not an option. That suggests to me there won't be an attack on Iran on his watch. But what if Obama doesn't get a second term? If the Republican and Tea Party lunatics come to power in the 2012 American elections, I imagine that all bets will be off. In a worst case scenario there's a Mossad nuclear false flag operation in America which is blamed on Iran. Within minutes if not seconds of it happening, the cry goes up, "Bomb the bastards!" The only thing then to be decided would be whether the U.S. should give Israel the greenlight or do the job itself.

What would be the consequences of an attack on Iran?

Short answer, catastrophe for the region - sustained conflict and instability; huge damage to American and other Western interests throughout the Arab and wider Muslim world; and quite possibly the collapse of what remains of the global economy, this because Iran has the ability to disrupt oil exports from the Gulf and provoke a worldwide oil crisis.

It's also not impossible that an attack on Iran would encourage its leadership, any leadership, to acquire nuclear weapons.  

KZ: What's your prediction for the future of Israel's political entity? Will it continue to survive or will it terminate in a destiny like that of the apartheid regime of South Africa or the Soviet Union?  

AH: I personally think Zionism's colonial enterprise is doomed. In my analysis there was a pre-condition for the survival of the Zionist, not Jewish state. When it closed the Palestine file in 1948/49, it had to keep the file closed, prevent a re-generation of Palestinian nationalism. It has failed to do that.

That fact takes us to the real threat to Israel's existence. It is not Hamas, Hizbollah, Iran or any combination of Arab and other Muslim force. The real threat is the demographic time-bomb of occupation.

In occupation of the West Bank, Israel has three options:

1. Formally annexing it and granting all of its citizens equal rights, this to enable Israel to go on claiming that it is a democracy. The problem with this option s that it would bring about an end of the Zionist state by political means because, in due course, the Arab citizens of Greater Israel would outnumber and outvote its Jewish citizens.

2. Formally annexing the West Bank but denying Greater Israel's Arab citizens (the majority in the making) equal rights. In this scenario Greater Israel would have to treat its Arab citizens even worse than the black majority in South Africa was treated by the apartheid regime. And that would not be acceptable to many Jews of the world and, perhaps, a significant number of Israeli Jews. It would also present the governments of the international community with no choice, at some point, but to declare Greater Israel a pariah state and impose sanctions on it.

3. Resort to a final round of ethnic cleansing - provoking an all-out confrontation with the Palestinians to give the IDF and the armed settlers the pretext to drive the Palestinians off the West Bank and into Jordan or wherever, in the name of self-defense, of course. If the Palestinians refused to flee, there would be, as I said earlier, a bloodbath. A Zionist holocaust.

As things are today it's my view that, at a point, Israel's leaders will go for the third option.

When they do there will such outrage in the world that governments including the one in Washington DC will have to say to Israel, "Enough is enough!" And the Zionist state will then be subjected to diplomatic isolation and crippling sanctions, with serious efforts to call and hold its political and military leaders to account for their crimes.

How will Israel's leaders respond?

As Golda Meir said, in a doomsday situation they will be prepared to take the region and possibly the world down with them.

If you asked me if I really believe that's how the story of the struggle for Palestine could end, I would answer "Yes", and this is why.

Zionism is not only Jewish nationalism which created a state for some Jews in the Arab heartland mainly by terrorism and ethnic cleansing. Zionism is a pathological mindset. And what the deluded Zionist mind actually thinks is this: "The world has always hated Jews and always will." In other words, the pathological Jewish mindset assumes that Holocaust II (shorthand for another great turning against Jews) is inevitable.

In the shadow of the Nazi holocaust, that way of thinking led Zionism's leaders into believing there was nothing they should not do to preserve Israel as a refuge of last resort for all Jews when the world turned against them again.

And the end, mad, Zionist logic speaks for itself. "If the world won't let us do whatever we believe to be necessary to preserve Israel as a refuge of last resort for all Jews, our enterprise is doomed, but we won't go down alone."

- Kourosh Ziabari is an Iranian freelance journalist and media correspondent. He has interviewed political commentator and linguist Noam Chomsky, member of New Zealand parliament Keith Locke, Australian politician Ian Cohen, member of German Parliament Ruprecht Polenz, former Mexican President Vicente Fox, former U.S. National Security Council advisor Peter D. Feaver, Nobel Prize laureate in Physics Wolfgang Ketterle, Nobel Prize laureate in Chemistry Kurt Wüthrich, Nobel Prize laureate in biology Robin Warren, famous German political prisoner Ernst Zündel, Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff, American author Stephen Kinzer, syndicated journalist Eric Margolis, former assistant of the U.S. Department of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, American-Palestinian journalist Ramzy Baroud and the former President of the American Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Sid Ganis.