xymphora

Wednesday, May 14, 2008:

1. Kosher meth: what's Amy Winehouse going to do for her supply now?
2. Leonid Rozhetskin: still dead.
3. Be very careful of this famous report in the New York Times (naturally) on how the Pentagon was financially and logistically behind the so-called 'objective' analysts on the Iraq war who pontificated in the mainstream media (see also here and here). It shouldn't be a surprise that the Pentagon has its own pro-war propaganda department. The NYT studiously avoids discussing the most important advocates of the war and its conduct, the neocons, paid for out of think tanks financed by the Jewish Billionaires. The Times is part of the neocon campaign to whitewash the fact that the attack on Iraq was, fundamentally, a War For The Jews. The whitewash is intended to clean up the reputation of the neocons by shifting the entire blame for the war onto the Pentagon. The neocons will then be free to begin a new campaign of advocacy and lying to lead to More Wars For The Jews under President McCain.
4. A very rare instance, using coded wording, of the real reason why Obama beat Clinton. It will be interesting to see if American racists who would never vote for a black man will vote for Obama in order to avoid the stark horror of being forced to fight More Wars For The Jews. It is an amazing election: if American racists can do the right thing, which would have a long-term massive effect on racial attitudes in the United States (not to mention elsewhere), they could avoid the disaster of More Wars For The Jews. Otherwise, the United States is completely fucked.
   
5. Israel's 60th has turned into a PR disaster, with the plight of the Palestinians, for the first time ever, making it into the mainstream media. Rick Salutin reflects on the mythical nature of the ScareJew (my emphasis in red):
   

   "Something that struck me was the fairly narrow notion of Jewish experience outside Israel, in the Diaspora, that was implied. A Toronto prof. quoted in The Post, said: 'Everything they do to us ... strengthens our deep-seated perception that fuels our identity of being a persecuted people.' This rings true to me not as how things are, but as how many Canadian Jews see them. I have friends and relations, often wealthy and accomplished people, who feel anti-Semitism is always imminent, though they've rarely or never experienced it. It shapes their attitude toward Israel as the only refuge for Jews, and makes them less willing to hear criticisms of it than most Israelis are. It seems to me irrational and I wish I understood it better.
   
   When we were kids in the 1950s, we studied a book called Sufferance is the Badge, based on Shylock's line, 'Sufferance is the badge of all our tribe.' It interpreted Jewish history as a tale of torment. But that was in the shadow of the Holocaust. When I was married in my 20s, my mother-in-law did a painting in her art class that showed religious Jews clutching Torah scrolls as they fled. Their beards and prayer shawls streamed behind. My father-in-law, a manufacturer, called it caustically, The Jews Running. I think he meant it was sentimentalized and overstated, and he wasn't buying that version of our past, at least not outright.
   
   All this resonated in the aftermath of Hitler, and was helpful in raising support for the fragile state of Israel. But, at bottom and for understandable reasons, it distorted two millennia of Jewish history that were rich and complex. Almost all Jewish literary and intellectual accomplishment occurred in the Diaspora. There were golden ages of relative integration, along with expulsions and pogroms. That's a big chunk of time. Crisis comes and goes in all collective and individual lives. Jews prayed for a return to Zion, but only in the messianic future that God alone would bring about. Anyone who tried to 'force the end,' was considered a heretic. They didn't just make do in the Diaspora; they settled in and often thrived.
   
   It seems to me that a more nuanced, positive view of the Diaspora might open many Jews to a different relationship to Israel, in which they felt freer to offer criticism. It would also correspond better to their real lives. And it would fit the increasingly diasporic nature of a globalized world."

   
   When I get around to finishing my 'A psycho-sexual history . . . ' I'll have an entirely new spin on the mythology of the ScareJew. Good as Salutin is, he is still pushing the standard mythology.
6. The Americans - no doubt through Abrams, blood dripping from his enormous fangs, glistening in the moonlight - tired to pull another trick in Lebanon, having their stooge government pick a fight with Hezbollah in an attempt to dismantle the communications system that allowed Hezbollah to so easily beat Israel in the shitty little county's last illegal attack on the people of Lebanon. Once the communications system was gone, the shitty little country would no doubt try again. The people of Lebanon are no doubt wondering why their own government would be behind an attempt to dismantle the communications network that prevented half their country from being taken by Israel. Hezbollah immediately put on a demonstration of strength so compelling that even the Lebanese army was impressed, to the extent that it is attempting to broker a peace between the powerless central government and Hezbollah. Another embarrassing defeat for the Americans, oddly paralleling a similar defeat in Iraq, where the Americans have for the second time been bailed out by Iran from a hopeless attempt at sicking its stooge Iraqi government on the Shi'ite militias in Baghdad. Neocons notwithstanding, the Americans and Iranians are headed to a de facto power sharing arrangement in both Lebanon and Iraq (although portraying Hezbollah as merely being a stooge of Iran is unfair to Hezbollah). The Iranian-American liaison has become so obvious that it has become a political issue in Iran! Real American interests are to cooperate with Iran; More Wars For The Jews Party interests are the opposite. It is a stark contrast.
   

Obama built up his insurmountable lead over Clinton because he was the only candidate for the No More Wars For The Jews Party. Clinton had been able to build a tiny bit of momentum after Pennsylvania. Why then did she court disaster by reminding the voters of North Carolina and Indiana that she was the candidate for the More Wars For The Jews Party by raising the issue of the obliteration of Iran? Suddenly, Americans were reminded of why Obama built up his big lead. Obama jumped on her mistake, and pointed out that diplomacy is always better than nuclear obliteration (this is a key change in American policy, recognized even by the American intelligentsia, but one completely unacceptable to the Jewish Billionaires, who realize that diplomacy means that Israel would have to negotiate away the territory it illegally has stolen, and intends to steal). Americans don't want to fight More Wars For The Jews, and Americans who wouldn't vote for a black man voted for Obama because they correctly saw him as the only escape from the utter ruination of their country under the weight of More, and More, and More, and More Wars For The Jews. The only plausible reason why Clinton blundered so badly is that the Jewish Billionaires who own her told her to. 'Obliterate' comes directly from her Jewish braintrust.

The Jewish Billionaires are really starting to throw their weight around by promising to obliterate the Democratic party if they don't get their More Wars For The Jews candidate:

"In a heated phone call with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi late last month, Hillary Clinton supporter Harvey Weinstein threatened to cut off campaign money to congressional Democrats unless Pelosi embraced a new plan by the movie mogul to finance a revote of the Democratic presidential primaries in Florida and Michigan, according to three officials who were briefed on the contents of the conversation."

and:

"Hillary Clinton’s campaign aides admitted Thursday they were consulted by their big donors before the group sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi containing a veiled threat that she would risk their financial support unless she reversed her view that superdelegates should follow the will of voters."

The Clinton's have 'lent' their campaign millions. This is serious money from them, but petty cash for the Jewish Billionaires (about what they spend in a week on bullets so the IDF can shoot Palestinian children in the face), who no doubt will quietly write a check if Hillary continues to spout More Wars For The Jews propaganda. They really do own her. Americans know it, which is why a black man really does have a chance to be President.

Friday, May 8, 2008:

1. Uruknet continues to have trouble with Google News (there is a link to a complaint form to fill out). It is funny how a corporation can make its billions based on strict adherence to objectivity - let the algorithms do the work - and then immediately fall into a culture of decadence once the money and power pile up. The math has been replaced by Zionism (if you don't think it is Zionism, see here). How long will it be before the stock market notices?
2. Luis Posada Carriles is publicly celebrated in Miami. I know there are people in the American government who are concerned about how much this case makes a mockery of America's purported following of Bibi Netanyahu's 'war on terror'.
3. More work is required on Lev.
4. "There are plenty of worthy arguments to be made correlating the rise of business school culture with the decline of the our economy." I remember I used to have a debate with a co-worker about whether getting an MBA made you dumber, or whether only dumb people decided to get MBAs. We never did figure it out.
   
5. Hillary Clinton's ghoulish campaign: she's staying in, hoping someone will shoot Obama in the head.
   

The neocons have spent the last months licking their wounds, and are now ready to retake their rightful place running American foreign and military policy solely for the interests of the Israeli Settler Movement, either under President McCain, or, however unlikely, President Clinton. The time has come to lie about the Wars For The Jews, in order to prep the way for more Wars For The Jews. There are three main neocon lies about the Judeo-American Holocaust on the people of Iraq and other peoples of the Middle East:

1. The bad intelligence about Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction is entirely the fault of the CIA (and even better, that the faulty American intelligence gathering means that current American intelligence concerning Iran is to be ignored in favor of more Israeli-neocon lies);
2. The conduct of the occupation of Iraq has been a total failure only because the American Establishment failed to follow the wonderful advice of the neocons; and
   
3. The Pentagon signed on to the complete program of Wars For The Jews, only the first part of which was the Judeo-American Holocaust on the people of Iraq.

The first lie is so preposterous I hardly need deal with it, other than to point out the leaning on the CIA by Dick Cheney until the CIA came out with the required results, with all the qualifications swept under the rug by the neocons. Jim Lobe neatly deals with the second lie.

Unfortunately, and again demonstrating the dangers of the silliness which I like to call 'Iran talk' (btw, Iran is now in less danger of attack from the United States than it has been during the entire Bush Administration, and a big collateral advantage of the 'Iran talk' is that it has forced Iran closer to Russia, China, and India), Gareth Porter swallows the third lie hook, line and sinker, thus helping Feith spin his propaganda message. Obviously, the neocons want to continue their program of Wars For The Jews, and want it to appear that the Pentagon is completely in agreement with the campaign. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Pentagon is in the business of fighting wars, and was enthusiastic about the attack on Iraq, but has shown no appetite for more wars unless and until the United States stabilizes its occupation of Iraq. Senior American military officials are worried about permanent long-term damage to the American military unless something is done to provide some respite from the constant, and hopeless, war effort.

Note how Porter carries the water for Feith. Wolfowitz wrote a program of Wars For The Jews, extending to just about every potential dead Muslim in the Middle East, for Rumsfeld. Read Porter carefully. The only connection to the Pentagon generals Shelton, Meyers and Abizaid is through the say-so of Feith. You may remember the recent story of how Feith tricked Meyers into thinking Feith was supporting the Geneva Conventions, when he was actually completely undermining them, to the great peril of American soldiers from now until the end of time (of course Feith doesn't care about the plight of soldiers of a foreign country, his loyalty extending only to his own country of Israel). There is no evidence, other than from Feith, that the Pentagon ever agreed to the full program of Wars For The Jews, and the idea that it would is both preposterous on the face of it, and contradicted by the statements of senior Pentagon officials. Unfortunately, the 'Iran talkers' like Feith's lies, and so work to spread them. Porter should be ashamed of himself.

Reflections on the 'suicide' of Deborah Jeane Palfrey:

1. It is heartening that no reputable commentator on this matter, or even most of the disreputable writers in the mainstream press, accepts this as a real suicide.
2. Both she and her former employee, Brandy Britton, allegedly hung themselves, an unusual way for females to commit suicide. She was found in an aluminum shed attached to her mother's mobile home. You need something to attach a rope to, enough space for the rope to hang to a noose, and enough space for something to stand on which you then kick away. Was there enough height? She was, according to the additions to the letter to her mother, and if you accept the genuineness of the letter (see below), alive to the idea of botching it. Would she feel confident that the shed roof would support her weight? I also find it odd that she would kill herself in a place where her mother was likely to be the one who discovered her.
3. The suicide notes are convincing, but they would be. The full extent of forensic document examination apparently consisted in asking mother and sister if that was her handwriting. The authorities had seized a lot of material from her as part of their criminal investigation, material which would presumably include examples of her distinctive handwriting - watch for hip ads in the new 'Palfrey' typeface - and personal information which would allow them to create plausible letters, down to the passive-aggressive tone of the letter to her sister. Note the use of the term 'exit strategy', common coin these days in Washington political and military circles, but an odd way to describe leaving your own life.
4. I've spent a lot of time describing what she had to do to stay alive, and she didn't do any of it. Publishing the phone lists was baffling. It angered official Washington, but didn't contain enough material to prove she could seriously threaten the elites if she had to. The court ran over her like a steamroller (while carefully avoiding the issue of who her clients were), and she was left all alone, with no obvious structure in place to release the damning information should she mysteriously pass away. Failure to pay attention to the details led directly to her death. It is likely that official Washington decided she was bluffing all along - it is one thing to have big name clients, but another to have a paper trail that proves it - and decided to kill her as a warning to the 'service industry' that blackmail will not be tolerated, at least not that kind of blackmail.
5. Dan Moldea, one of my least favorite writers on things conspiratorial, is the sole source for the idea that she was open to the idea of suicide rather than going to jail. Neither her mother nor her condo manager thought she was in the least bit suicidal. Even though the letter to her mother was dated a week before she died, she had been ensuring with staff at the condo just before she died that the condo fees would continue to be paid while she was in prison. The United States is a country where you can make a pretty good living with a juicy story, and she had one of the juiciest stories around.
   

Timeline: April 24, suicide note; April 28, forward-looking conversations with building manager and condo staff; May 1, 'suicide'.

I receive an enormous amount of criticism for my use of the phrases 'wars for the Jews' and 'Jew-controlled media'. Most of it is malicious, either covert Zionists reacting to the truth, or 'progressives' trying to prove their own purity by slurring others. Ironically, the worst offenders are those who are really anti-Semites themselves, or at least those who would be so described by Zionists. Who are you trying to kid?

I also receive well-meaning criticism. This takes a number of forms. Some people genuinely believe that these terms are wrong, or at least misleading. Some feel that this frankness is a tactical error, causing a reaction in the wider community which will not lead to peace. Others feel that truth-telling leads to an unnecessary ostracism in the 'mainstream' community, and that this blog would have a wider reach if I could just learn to live with lying a little! Perhaps the most telling, and saddest, aspect of this issue is that the only real discussion of these problems in the entire internet takes place in the comments section to this blog. Otherwise, you have to fight through the competing fogs of the bullshit of the neo-Nazis and the bullshit of the slurring 'progressives' trying to prove something to themselves.

This takes us to a consideration of what blogging is really all about, and the necessity to tell the truth above all. There hasn't been anything like blogging since people nailed anonymous political screeds to the doors of churches. In the modern era, we lost the ability to tell each other the truth until blogging came along (which is why the Zionists, amongst others, are hell bent on censoring the internet). The catch is that you have to be scrupulous in telling the truth, no matter how unpopular. I have a very elitist attitude towards the truth. Only a small number of people are going to get it. Trying to lie to appeal to a wider audience will not only fail, it will be counterproductive. If I want to read lies, I read the mainstream press, or the mainstream blogs. I'm a lowly meme producer, influencing the world, in my tiny way, by striking the sparks of truth. The fire comes much later.

The truth, which is very simple, very obvious, and yet so very hard to accept, is that the diaspora Jewish communities in the English-speaking world, even the most assimilated members of those communities, hold a consistently irrational attitude towards the idea of Jewishness, and the institution of the State of Israel, and the concept of Greater Israel, in representing and protecting Jewishness. Although nothing could be more obvious, this simple truth appears to be impossible to accept for many people, even though it forms the basis of the current problems in the Middle East. The problem extends far beyond the advocates of the Settler Movement, the Zionists, or the neocons, which is why I continue to insist on the importance of telling the truth in using the terms 'wars for the Jews' and 'Jew-controlled media'.

I still have an obligation to explain myself. This is the first of two parts, the second of which will be called 'A Psycho-Sexual History of the Wars for the Jews'.

The government of Dubai, respecting requests for a boycott of international pariah Lev Leviev, is refusing to let him peddle his blood diamonds, the profit of which is used to buy Palestinian blood, in Dubai. The call for boycotts works. Lev isn't the only offender. We should be calling for boycotts of the businesses of all Jewish Billionaires, unless and until they can prove that all their charitable contributions go to Palestinian relief. Fat chance! We know where their blood money is flowing.

From an interview by Philippe Gohier, John Mearsheimer responding to a question on the chances of a peace agreement with the Palestinians:

"All this talk about a possible peace agreement and a possible settlement in the near future is not serious. It's all designed for public relations purposes. Israelis are not interested in giving the Golan Heights back and reaching a peace accord with the Syrians, and they're not interested in withdrawing from the West Bank and allowing the Palestinians to create a viable state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip."

Any analysis that grants Israel or its American supporters any credit for decency or even common sense is fatally flawed. The only thing that can possibly lead to an agreement is a situation where it is apparent that Israel has no choice whatsoever but to agree to peace. Even then, the insanity of ethnic apocalyptic supremacism may make an agreement impossible. Whenever you see rumors like the recent ones about Olmert considering peace with Syria remember one thing: they are lying to you to create the appearance of rationality which is not there.

We have no evidence whatsoever, but Grossman was a senior American diplomatic official spanning both Democrat and Republican administrations. Sibel Edmonds may be proven right in the long run. By the way, the Philip Giraldi story, that the latest Israeli spy case was discovered as a result of a leak from the Israeli government (!), is quite obvious bullshit - professional courtesy from the CIA to the Mossad? - proven by the fact that the supposed reason for the leak, derailing the disinfo campaign against Syria regarding a Syrian nuke program, can't be true, as the disinfo campaign continues at full speed. Giraldi (my emphasis in red):

"Israeli sources are reporting that the FBI investigation of the Ben-Ami Kadish spy case resulted from a leak coming from inside the government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The information on Kadish and on a number of other Americans who have spied for Israel was provided to the FBI anonymously, leading to the Bureau’s opening of a full investigation. One source reports that the National Security Agency was provided with Yosef Yagur’s current phone number and address and was able to obtain corroborating information on the case by tapping the phone. Yagur, who is now retired and living in Israel, was Kadish’s case officer, handling the cases of both him and Jonathan Pollard. Before the anonymous leak of information, the FBI had no idea that Kadish had been a spy for Israel. Now it is investigating a number of US citizens, including an individual who held very senior security positions in the Clinton and Bush White Houses."

This is questionable. The grand jury investigation, the source of the story, started in 2005. Olmert didn't start leading the Israeli government until 2006! How could Olmert's leak have lead to the opening of the investigation, which arose out of the grand jury investigation? Why would the Olmert government, with full access to the Jew-controlled American media, be trying to get the information out by leaking it to a secret grand jury investigation, the most convoluted way possible, and one not guaranteed of success? Another aside: there appears to be disinfo floating around that the FBI tapped Yagur's phone. How is that possible? Yagur has been living in Israel for years. Isn't it far more likely that the FBI overheard the conversation when they tapped Kadish's American phone? Watch out for a huge campaign of Zionist spin around this story, which really is deeply frightening to World Jewry.

There are a lot of shenanigans going on from the Zionists:

1. The aforementioned propaganda attack through the Jew-controlled American Congress and the Jew-controlled American media concerning the mythical Syrian nuclear installation, 'proven' by some lousy pictures of a . . . building;
   
2. Israeli air attacks on Lebanon;
3. A wild story that Olmert wants to trade the Golan for 'peace', as if the Israelis ever really wanted 'peace', or as if Syria actually constituted a threat to Israel (it is actually Israel that is a threat to Syrian peace). This is probably a distraction from the threat that peace might break out with Hamas, an utter disaster for Zionism.
   

Apart from Zionist conspiracy theories (some of which may be true, particularly the idea that a goal of American authorities was to block Bush's anticipated pardon of Pollard), the main interest of the latest Israeli spy scandal comes from reading between the lines. Ben-Ami Kadish, the latest alleged spy, was arrested after he foolishly discussed the problem on the phone with his Israeli handler, identified as Yosef Yagur, and Yagur, who must not be a very good spy, even more foolishly instructed him on what to tell the FBI. The Americans were already tapping phone lines by this point, and seemed to be approaching the conspiracy from both ends, having spooked Kadish enough to confide in Yagur. The lines were being tapped as part of a Manhattan grand jury investigation - a Manhattan grand jury? what did Eliot Spitzer know? - which had apparently been investigating espionage against the United States. Grand juries don't empanel themselves, so some American officials must have decided that Israeli spying needed to be investigated. You have to wonder whether there are special non-Jewish teams of lawyers and staff, as even one American Jew associated with any investigation could not possibly be trusted not to tip off Israel.

Speaking of 'dual loyalty', you can gather a slight indication of the mentality by Kadish's response to the FBI:

"Kadish initially lied to authorities and said he never spoke with Yagur, the feds said. But when confronted with his alleged crimes, Kadish told FBI Special Agent Lance Ashworth he didn't do it for money - he did it because he thought it 'would help Israel.'"

Dual loyalists think that helping Israel is a complete defense to the charges, the mindset being that there is no difference between Israeli and American interests. We have had a big dose of that thinking during the neocon era, where the Wars For The Jews were consistently held to be in American interests.

The official Israeli story is that Pollard was an isolated case, the only spy, and nothing similar has happened since. This is laughable, as we have seen numerous instances of Israeli spying, including the rather massive operation which was spying on the September 11 hijackers in the months before September 11. Since American authorities have caught the Israelis in a lie about the uniqueness of Pollard, they can now start to question the wider issue of Israeli spy operations against the United States, operations which have been going on for decades.

Stewart Ain asks the big question (my emphasis in red):

"The government alleged that the Israeli agent instructed Kadish which documents to retrieve.

There is speculation that the Manhattan grand jury may be seeking to learn the identity of an American administration official who told the agent which documents Kadish should obtain."

The grand jury is trying to identify 'Mega', the high level Israeli spy who was (is?) also a high level American official, and who would have directed the local handler to the documents that were interesting to the Israeli military. 'Mega' has sometimes been identified as numerous people, including Paul Wolfowitz, although the role is more likely to have been played by a series of officials, spanning both American political parties. If this grand jury investigation makes any progress, it will blow the Israeli-American relationship to smithereens.

Some people will believe anything other than the obvious (my emphasis in red):

"It’s clear that a sizable chunk of those questioned after they voted lied to the pollsters. The exit polls showed a 5 point margin for Hillary. In the end the margin was approximately twice that."

So lemme get this straight: people who voted for Hillary were so embarrassed by that fact that they lied to exit pollsters and claimed they voted for Obama? Does that make any sense? Or does it make more sense that Pennsylvania, a state which makes heavy use of unverifiable computer touch-screen voting, was the victim of vote fraud? The difference between five percent and ten percent is the difference between Hillary having to drop out and Hillary staying in to help McCain win in November, a goal shared by both the Republicans (who own the computer voting machine companies) and Hillary (so she can run again in 2012).

Another article on the War on Charity, part of Bibi Netanyahu's 'War on Terror'. The logic of government prosecutions, such as it is:

1. American charity sends money to Palestine to keep Palestinian children from starving (due to the complete mockery by Israel of its obligations as an occupying power);
2. The government of Palestine is Hamas;
3. Hamas thus 'controls' the charities that operate in Palestine;
   
4. Hamas is a terrorist group;
5. Therefore, the American charity is supporting terrorism.

It's a shockingly bad argument, and the courts don't buy it either, which is why the American government prosecutors lose. The fact that losing doesn't stop them from the continued harassment just proves the bad faith behind the prosecutions. The point of the exercise is to brutalize Palestinians. I really don't know how the prosecutors sleep at night.

The assassination (or here) of Riad Hamad reminds me of the assassination of Philip Merrill. These stories are amusing in a macabre kind of way, with impossible suicide scenarios immediately described by clownish police officials as suicides. It is not enough just to kill yourself; the victim has to earn style points by putting himself into physically impossible positions before somehow arranging for the self-destruction. The classic case is still the death of Roberto Calvi, where the police, years after the fact, finally managed to figure out that it was impossible for Calvi to have killed himself in the position in which his body was found.

It is the ultimate anti-Semitic act - the pure distilled essence of real anti-Semitism - to feed a starving Palestinian child, as allowing that child to live and grow up just fuels the 'demographic problem' facing World Jewry in the Middle East. Hamad had described a campaign of government harassment against his charitable work. The trial - or travesty of a trial - of the American government against the food-providing charity the Holy Land Foundation, where the Holy Land Foundation was deemed to be a funder of 'terrorism', ended in a mistrial late last year. In the case of the suicided Riad Hamad, it appears that some group has decided that it is necessary to take the law into its own hands if this 'terrorism' of feeding the starving is to end.

The first concerted American government attack against Islamic charities in the United States, including the Holy Land Foundation, following an article written by Daniel Pipes and Steven Emerson calling for a crack-down on the 'terrorism' funded by such charities, occurred in the week preceding September 10, 2001 (Sami Al-Arian, mentioned specifically in the article, is still being persecuted by the American government). A suspicious person might see the timing as part of a plan.

Predictable pathetic attempt from the Ottawa Citizen (owned by what type of Billionaire?) to explain why the Toronto 18 case is completely falling apart. Always remember that the entire point of all these cases is to convince people living in Western democracies that they share with Israel an imminent danger from 'Islamofascists'. Thus we should all sign on to Bibi Netanyahu's 'war on terror' - I keep stressing whose war this is as we can never forget that it was invented in an Israeli think tank in the late 80s - and allow Israel to kill Arabs and steal their land and water. Hundreds of years of the development of the protection of human rights, including the presumption of innocence and the need to have a smidgen of evidence before we ruin lives, is all to be thrown out the door so the highest representatives of the Tribe can have their fun.

To sum up the Toronto 18 case, there were 17 young Muslim men, who liked to play paintball in the woods, one older guy (the Osama bin Laden figure), and two agents provocateurs. The charges have now been dropped against the older guy, leaving the paintballers and the government agents. One of the government agents, a controversial fellow (always remembering 'innocent until proven guilty'!), claims to have been paid a considerable amount of money for his efforts, and the other, an agricultural engineer, appears to have come up with the fertilizer which constitutes the entire basis of the terrorism case. It is well past the time to let all these victims of injustice go, and start disciplining - preferably by firing - the police and prosecutors involved in this travesty. Those officials who leaked information to the public in order to try the case by innuendo should be tracked down and prosecuted.

It is about time that Canadians, and others, discover who their real enemies are. One of the many reasons I am so hard on Zionism is that it constitutes a serious threat to everybody in the world, whether through wars or the destruction of civil rights. To give just another example: the single main threat to free speech in the West concerns efforts by Zionists to stop discussion of the many wrongs committed by Israel. People who continue to rely on political correctness to dodge the real issues here are morally responsible for the real harm that is being done to real people.

An excellent collection of some of the quotes from American 'experts' which were intended to sell the attack on Iraq to the American people, collected by Victor Navasky, and presented by thepeoplesvoice.org. Remember these morons, and others like Max Boot and Mark Steyn, when they try to lie Americans into the next war.