|Written by Kalle Lasn|
| Friday, 11 July 2008
The history of America is the one story every kid knows. It’s a story of fierce individualism and heroic personal sacrifice in the service of a dream. A story of early settlers hungry and cold, carving a home out of the wilderness. Of visionary leaders fighting for democracy and justice, and never wavering. Of a populace prepared to defend those ideals to the death. It’s the story of a revolution (an American art form as endemic as baseball or jazz) beating back British Imperialism and launching a new colony into the industrial age on its own terms.
It’s a story of America triumphant. A story of its rise after World War II to become the richest and most powerful country in the history of the world, “the land of the free and home of the brave,” an inspiring model for the whole world to emulate.
That’s the official history, the one that is taught in school and the one our media and culture reinforce in myriad ways every day.
The unofficial history of the United States is quite different. It begins the same way — in the revolutionary cauldron of colonial America — but then it takes a turn. A bitplayer in the official history becomes critically important to the way the unofficial history unfolds. This player turns out to be not only the provocateur of the revolution, but in the end its saboteur. This player lies at the heart of America’s defining theme: the difference between a country that pretends to be free and a country that truly is free.
That player is the corporation.
The United States of America was born of a revolt not just against British monarchs and the British parliament but against British corporations. We tend to think of corporations as fairly recent phenomena, the legacy of the Rockefellers and Carnegies. In fact, the corporate presence in prerevolutionary America was almost as conspicuous as it is today. There were far fewer corporations then, but they were enormously powerful: the Massachusetts Bay Company, the Hudson’s Bay Company, the British East India Company. Colonials feared these chartered entities. They recognized the way British kings and their cronies used them as robotic arms to control the affairs of the colonies, to pinch staples from remote breadbaskets and bring them home to the motherland. The colonials resisted. When the British East India Company imposed duties on its incoming tea (telling the locals they could buy the tea or lump it, because the company had a virtual monopoly on tea distribution in the colonies), radical patriots demonstrated. Colonial merchants agreed not to sell East India Company tea. Many East India Company ships were turned back at port. And, on one fateful day in Boston, 342 chests of tea ended up in the salt chuck. The Boston Tea Party was one of young America’s finest hours. It sparked enormous revolutionary excitement. The people were beginning to understand their own strength, and to see their own self-determination not just as possible but inevitable. The Declaration of Independence, in 1776, freed Americans not only from Britain but also from the tyranny of British corporations, and for a hundred years after the document’s signing, Americans remained deeply suspicious of corporate power. They were careful about the way they granted corporate charters, and about the powers granted therein. Early American charters were created literally by the people, for the people as a legal convenience. Corporations were “artificial, invisible, intangible,” mere financial tools. They were chartered by individual states, not the federal government, which meant they could be kept under close local scrutiny. They were automatically dissolved if they engaged in activities that violated their charter. Limits were placed on how big and powerful companies could become. Even railroad magnate J. P. Morgan, the consummate capitalist, understood that corporations must never become so big that they “inhibit freedom to the point where efficiency [is] endangered.” The two hundred or so corporations operating in the US by the year 1800 were each kept on fairly short leashes. They weren’t allowed to participate in the political process. They couldn’t buy stock in other corporations. And if one of them acted improperly, the consequences were severe. In 1832, President Andrew Jackson vetoed a motion to extend the charter of the corrupt and tyrannical Second Bank of the United States, and was widely applauded for doing so. That same year the state of Pennsylvania revoked the charters of ten banks for operating contrary to the public interest. Even the enormous industry trusts, formed to protect member corporations from external competitors and provide barriers to entry, eventually proved no match for the state. By the mid-1800s, antitrust legislation was widely in place.
In the early history of America, the corporation played an important but subordinate role. The people — not the corporations — were in control. So what happened? How did corporations gain power and eventually start exercising more control than the individuals who created them? The shift began in the last third of the nineteenth century — the start of a great period of struggle between corporations and civil society. The turning point was the Civil War. Corporations made huge profits from procurement contracts and took advantage of the disorder and corruption of the times to buy legislatures, judges and even presidents. Corporations became the masters and keepers of business. President Abraham Lincoln foresaw terrible trouble. Shortly before his death, he warned that “corporations have been enthroned . . . . An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people . . . until wealth is aggregated in a few hands . . . and the republic is destroyed.”
President Lincoln’s warning went unheeded. Corporations continued to gain power and influence. They had the laws governing their creation amended. State charters could no longer be revoked. Corporate profits could no longer be limited. Corporate economic activity could be restrained only by the courts, and in hundreds of cases judges granted corporations minor legal victories, conceding rights and privileges they did not have before.
Then came a legal event that would not be understood for decades (and remains baffling even today), an event that would change the course of American history. In Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific Railroad, a dispute over a railbed route, the US Supreme Court deemed that a private corporation was a “natural person” under the US Constitution and therefore entitled to protection under the Bill of Rights. Suddenly, corporations enjoyed all the rights and sovereignty previously enjoyed only by the people, including the right to free speech.
This 1886 decision ostensibly gave corporations the same powers as private citizens. But considering their vast financial resources, corporations thereafter actually had far more power than any private citizen. They could defend and exploit their rights and freedoms more vigorously than any individual and therefore they were more free. In a single legal stroke, the whole intent of the American Constitution — that all citizens have one vote, and exercise an equal voice in public debates — had been undermined. Sixty years after it was inked, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas concluded of Santa Clara that it “could not be supported by history, logic or reason.” One of the great legal blunders of the nineteenth century changed the whole idea of democratic government.
Post-Santa Clara America became a very different place. By 1919, corporations employed more than 80 percent of the workforce and produced most of America’s wealth. Corporate trusts had become too powerful to legally challenge. The courts consistently favored their interests. Employees found themselves without recourse if, for example they were injured on the job (if you worked for a corporation, you voluntarily assumed the risk, was the courts’ position). Railroad and mining companies were enabled to annex vast tracts of land at minimal expense.
Gradually, many of the original ideals of the American Revolution were simply quashed. Both during and after the Civil War, America was increasingly being ruled by a coalition of government and business interests. The shift amounted to a kind of coup d’état — not a sudden military takeover but a gradual subversion and takeover of the institutions of state power. Except for a temporary setback during Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal (the 1930s), the US has since been governed as a corporate state.
In the post-World War II era, corporations continued to gain power. They merged, consolidated, restructured and metamorphosed into ever larger and more complex units of resource extraction, production, distribution and marketing, to the point where many of them became economically more powerful than many countries. In 1997, fifty-one of the world’s hundred largest economies were corporations, not countries. The top five hundred corporations controlled forty-two percent of the world’s wealth. Today corporations freely buy each other’s stocks and shares. They lobby legislators and bankroll elections. They manage our broadcast airwaves, set our industrial, economic and cultural agendas, and grow as big and powerful as they damn well please. Every day, scenes that would have seemed surreal, impossible, undemocratic twenty years ago play out with nary a squeak of dissent from a stunned and inured populace.
At Morain Valley Community College in Palos Hills, Illinois, a student named Jennifer Beatty stages a protest against corporate sponsorship in her school by locking herself to the metal mesh curtains of the multimillion-dollar “McDonald’s Student Center” that serves as the physical and nutritional focal point of her college. She is arrested and expelled.
At Greenbrier High School in Evans, Georgia, a student named Mike Cameron wears a Pepsi T-shirt on the day — dubbed “Coke Day” — when corporate flacks from Coca-Cola jet in from Atlanta to visit the school their company has sponsored and subsidized. Mike Cameron is suspended for his insolence.
In suburban shopping malls across North America, moms and dads push shopping carts down the aisle of Toys “R” Us. Trailing them and imitating their gestures, their kids push pint-size carts of their own. The carts say, “Toys ‘R’ Us Shopper in Training.”
In St. Louis, Missouri, chemical giant Monsanto sics its legal team on anyone even considering spreading dirty lies — or dirty truths — about the company. A Fox TV affiliate that has prepared a major investigative story on the use and misuse of synthetic bovine growth hormone (a Monsanto product) pulls the piece after Monsanto attorneys threaten the network with “dire consequences” if the story airs. Later, a planned book on the dangers of genetic agricultural technologies is temporarily shelved after the publisher, fearing a lawsuit from Monsanto, gets cold feet.
In boardrooms in all the major global capitals, CEOs of the world’s biggest corporations imagine a world where they are protected by what is effectively their own global charter of rights and freedoms — the Multinational Agreement on Investment (MAI). They are supported in this vision by the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the European Round Table of Industrialists (ERT), the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and other organizations representing twenty-nine of the world’s richest economies. The MAI would effectively create a single global economy allowing corporations the unrestricted right to buy, sell and move their businesses, resources and other assets wherever and whenever they want. It’s a corporate bill of rights designed to override all “nonconforming” local, state and national laws and regulations and allow them to sue cities, states and national governments for alleged noncompliance. Sold to the world’s citizens as inevitable and necessary in an age of free trade, these MAI negotiations met with considerable grassroots opposition and were temporarily suspended in April 1998. Nevertheless, no one believes this initiative will remain suspended for long.
We, the people, have lost control. Corporations, these legal fictions that we ourselves created two centuries ago, now have more rights, freedoms and powers than we do. And we accept this as the normal state of affairs. We go to corporations on our knees. Please do the right thing, we plead. Please don’t cut down any more ancient forests. Please don’t pollute any more lakes and rivers (but please don’t move your factories and jobs offshore either). Please don’t use pornographic images to sell fashion to my kids. Please don’t play governments off against each other to get a better deal. We’ve spent so much time bowed down in deference, we’ve forgotten how to stand up straight.
The unofficial history of America™, which continues to be written, is not a story of rugged individualism and heroic personal sacrifice in the pursuit of a dream. It is a story of democracy derailed, of a revolutionary spirit suppressed, and of a once-proud people reduced to servitude.
Source: Silent Nation
The Men Who Sold The World
As crazy as it sounds… as unacceptable as it is for anyone with any amount of decency…
9/11 was an inside job, and it is sadly but a small part in the globalists’ plan for us all.
Wake up, do your own research, seek the truth, find out what’s going on before it’s too late and nothing can be done.
Wake up, Neo!
David Bowie – The Man Who Sold The World(acoustic vers.)
“The Man Who Sold the World” is a song by David Bowie. It is the title track of his third album, released in the U.S. in November 1970 and in the UK in April 1971.
(Live, Bridge School Benefit Concert 1996)
“AMERICA THE TARGET” Chapter 2
“AMERICA THE TARGET”
9-11 and Israel’s Use of Terrorism
to Coerce the West
By Christopher Bollyn
President George W. Bush, during his January 2008 visit to Israel, is flanked by Ehud Olmert and Shimon Peres, two Zionist terrorists involved in 9-11. Why are American leaders obliged to serve such criminals?
Why should they, the Americans, have trusted us?
We were a bunch of Russians; socialist Russians.
– Isser Harel, founder of Israeli intelligence,
on U.S. relations with Israel
The first chapter, “The Planes of 9-11,” explains that the Israeli military has a history of owning and operating private aircraft leasing and maintenance companies in the United States.
These privately-held aviation companies, created by the Israeli military and linked to its state-owned aviation industry, clearly had the capability and advanced avionics required to convert Boeing aircraft into remote-controlled guided missiles like those that apparently struck the World Trade Center (WTC) on 9-11.
Because the Israeli military had the capability to carry out the attacks, the evidence of Israeli prior knowledge raises a fundamental question that must be asked: Would the Israeli military conduct such an outrageous act of terror?
Millions of Americans have blindly accepted, without any proof, the government and controlled media’s tale that 19 Arabs, who lacked basic piloting skills, were responsible for the coordinated precision aerial attacks and subsequent carnage and destruction of 9-11.
On the other hand, the same government and media have shown absolutely no interest in probing the evidence or looking into the many unanswered questions surrounding the attacks.
There can only be one logical explanation for the persistent avoidance of the evidence by the institutions that should be leading the investigation. It is obviously because the evidence does not fit or contradicts the fictitious tale they have presented to the public.
The number of people who realize that the government and media have lied about 9-11 is large and growing. The pack of lies surrounding the attacks has been thoroughly exposed and can no longer be defended.
Unable to defend their fictional tale against the evidence presented by honest scientists and writers, the defenders of the lie use disinformation, defamation, and slander to try and contain the truth from spreading like wildfire.
ISRAELI PRIOR KNOWLEDGE
While the evidence is clearly indicative of Israeli prior knowledge, commonly-held misconceptions about Israel and ignorance of Zionism’s brutal history of terrorism prevent most people from comprehending the Israeli connection with 9-11. The ignorance of Zionist history, cultivated by the controlled media, prevents people from understanding the present reality.
In order to understand 9-11, it is essential to have a grasp of the history of previous Israeli attacks on the United States. This chapter examines a few little-known, but key events in the history of Israeli false-flag terror attacks and the Zionist planners behind them. The names and events discussed in this chapter are at the center of Zionist terrorism, false-flag and otherwise.
“False-flag” terrorism means an act of terror planned and perpetrated by one party for the purpose of having the blame assigned to its enemy for political or strategic purposes. 9-11, like many other major terror attacks and those which have plagued occupied-Iraq for years, are textbook false-flag operations. False-flag attacks are designed to foment hostility or instigate war between groups or nations.
Only very rarely has the United States, oceans away from the conflicts of Europe and Asia, actually been attacked by foreign militaries. The British invasion during the War of 1812 and the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941 are the only two foreign attacks, prior to 9-11, that come to mind.
Although 9-11 is disguised and interpreted by the government and media as an act of Arab terrorism, the evidence indicates that it was a carefully planned false-flag attack carried out by the Israeli military after years of planning and preparation.
EVIDENCE OF ISRAELI INVOLVEMENT
This is not a hypothesis that can be easily dismissed as based on mere speculation or prejudice. There is solid evidence that Israeli intelligence agencies had prior knowledge of 9-11, which is indicative of involvement in the attacks.
Public statements made by key terror suspects, the five jubilant “movers,” for example, who were actually Israeli intelligence agents, indicate that they possessed prior knowledge of the attacks.
In November 2001, after being released from two months in U.S. custody, three of the five agents appeared on Israeli television and admitted, in plain Hebrew, that their purpose had been to document the event. The Israeli interviewer did not ask the men who had sent them, but it is quite clear they were working for an agency of the State of Israel.
After being released in November 2001, three of the five Mossad operatives appeared on Israeli television and openly admitted that their “purpose had been to document the event.”
The five fake movers from Urban Moving Systems of Weehawken, New Jersey, were actually operatives of the Israeli secret services. The five Israeli agents, described in early news reports as “Middle Eastern,” had been sought by the FBI and New Jersey authorities after they were observed celebrating and photographing the destruction of the World Trade Center.
The Israelis made a video of themselves with the burning towers behind them as they flicked their cigarette lighters, laughed, and celebrated as hundreds of innocent people were being roasted alive. Reportedly, they had worn Palestinian or Arab garb, which was later found in their van.
Two of the five Israelis, who were caught with multiple passports, box cutters, thousands of dollars stuffed into their socks, and driving a van that tested positive for explosives, were actually on a list of foreign agents known to U.S. law enforcement authorities at the time.
ABC News did a follow up on the Israeli agents in June 2002:
The arresting officers said they saw a lot that aroused their suspicion about the men. One of the passengers had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock. Another was carrying two foreign passports. A box cutter was found in the van. But perhaps the biggest surprise for the officers came when the five men identified themselves as Israeli citizens.
‘We Are Not Your Problem’
According to the police report, one of the passengers told the officers they had been on the West Side Highway in Manhattan “during the incident” — referring to the World Trade Center attack. The driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers, “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.” The other passengers were his brother Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari.
The five “movers” were evidently part of a much larger Israeli terror operation in New York City. The Urban Moving Systems company was later exposed as a Mossad “front” company, a fake agency set up to facilitate their terror operation. An American who worked with the company said he was shocked to see that the Israeli employees had openly rejoiced over the attacks.
In November 2001, the five Israeli agents and terror suspects were returned to Israel on “visa violations” although they had repeatedly refused to take, and then failed lie detector tests about their involvement in 9-11.
Instant messages warning of the attack at the WTC, precise to the minute, sent via the Mossad-owned Odigo messaging system hours before the first plane hit the North Tower, are further evidence that members of Israeli intelligence agencies had very specific and accurate knowledge of the terror attacks – long before they occurred.
In a complex and elaborately planned crime of mass murder and terrorism like 9-11, possession of specific prior knowledge like that held by the fake Israeli movers and the senders of the Odigo messages is clearly evidence of involvement in the crime.
Had the recipients of the Odigo warnings contacted the responsible authorities in New York, thousands of lives would have been saved. If these people were not complicit in the crime, why didn’t they contact the authorities?
Taking the evidence of Israeli prior knowledge into consideration with the Israeli military’s capability to launch such a sophisticated false-flag terror attack, the obvious question has to be asked: Would Israeli military agencies commit such an atrocious act of terrorism in the United States in order to achieve a strategic goal?
The question whether Israeli strategic planners would conduct a false-flag terror attack against the United States, their most powerful ally, in order to fix the blame on the Arabs, their enemies, raises several specific questions:
1. Has the Israeli military conducted false-flag terror attacks against the United States in the past?
2. If so, are there links between the people or agencies involved in the previous terror attacks and 9-11?
3. Is there a strategic goal for which Zionist planners would conduct such an extremely dangerous and sophisticated terrorist operation?
4. If so, has that strategic goal been realized as a result of 9-11?
The answer to all four questions is yes.
The Israeli military has a documented history of conducting military and false-flag terror attacks against the United States. It also has a history of withholding information from the United States about threats it is aware of.
Specific Zionist extremists are, furthermore, the prime suspects with the strongest motive for having carried out 9-11. The Zionist motive was to kick-start their long-planned U.S.-led “War on Terror” with a spectacular terror attack against the United States.
Like any other crime, solving 9-11 requires that we diligently investigate those suspects with strong motives and prior histories of committing similar crimes. There are a number of senior Israeli suspects who fit this description.
On the other hand, there is no reasonable Arab motive to attack the World Trade Center or Pentagon. Why would Arabs or Moslems commit such a counter-productive act? Why would any Arab organization commit a senseless crime knowing that it would invite a U.S. military invasion of their nation or another Islamic nation? The Arab/Islamic terror scenario makes very little sense.
ISRAEL‘S HISTORY OF TERROR
On the other hand, senior officials of the Israeli government, the Mossad, and Israeli military intelligence, an organization known as “Aman,” have a long history of carrying out false-flag terror attacks against the United States and Britain, at least as far back as the bombing of Jerusalem’s King David Hotel on July 22, 1946.
The bombing of the luxury hotel was ordered by Menachem Begin, the head of the Irgun, an active Zionist terrorist organization during the 1930s and 40s. Begin later became prime minister of Israel, a position he held during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which was led by Ariel Sharon, then minister of defense.
Menachem Begin, the Polish-born head of the terrorist gang Irgun, and the King David Hotel he ordered bombed in 1946. “Everything was coordinated with the Haganah,” prime minister Begin later told the Israel Broadcasting Authority.
Irgun and Haganah terrorists, disguised as Arabs, set off 7 large demolition bombs in the basement of the King David Hotel, which was the base for the British Secretariat and the military command in British-occupied Palestine. 91 people were killed, most of them staff of the secretariat.
The attack on the hotel was the deadliest attack against the British in the history of the Mandate. To this day, the Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel is the terrorist act which has caused the greatest number of casualties in the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Zionist extremists, however, are proud of the terrorist bombing as one of their actions that compelled the British to give up the Mandate over Palestine.
David Ben Gurion, the head of the Haganah militia, supported the bombing. Although the Haganah publicly condemned the bombing afterwards, many researchers insist that the Haganah directly authorized the bombing.
David Ben Gurion (on left), the Polish-born leader of the Haganah, authorized the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ben Gurion, who developed Zionist terrorism as a tool to coerce the West, meets with his junior partners in terror, Shimon Peres and Moshe Dayan,
“Everything was coordinated with the Haganah,” former prime minister and Irgun leader Menachem Begin declared in a film clip from the Israel Broadcasting Authority’s “Scroll of Fire” series.
NETANYAHU’S SUPPORT FOR TERRORISTS
Members of the Irgun, which carried out scores of terror bombings in the 1930s and 40s (and its political successors in the Likud party) hold the world view that “political violence and terrorism” are “legitimate tools in the Jewish national struggle for the Land of Israel,” according to Arie Perliger and Leonard Weinberg, authors of “Jewish Self Defense and Terrorist Groups Prior to the Establishment of the State of Israel: Roots and Traditions.”
In July 2006, the former prime minister and leader of the Likud, Benjamin Netanyahu, attended a two-day 60th anniversary celebration of the King David Hotel bombing with former terrorists of the Irgun and Haganah. The event was organized by the Menachem Begin Heritage House, the University of Haifa, and the Association of IZL [Irgun] Fighters.
The seminar was held “to mark the 60th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel, Jerusalem, by members of the United Resistance Movement (Haganah and Irgun),” The Jerusalem Post noted in its pre-event notices. The newspaper specifically noted that members of the Haganah and Irgun had been involved in the terrorist bombing.
One of the terrorists even led a tour of the hotel he had bombed. The fact that the American-educated right-wing politician and terror specialist, “Bibi” Netanyahu, had participated in a two-day event celebrating the bombing of the King David Hotel was reported in the Jerusalem Post, and in leading newspapers in Britain, France, and India – but not a single word about the event was printed in the controlled press of the United States, the nation supposedly fighting a “War on Terror.”
“It’s very good,” Benjamin Netanyahu, Zionist extremist and terror specialist, said on 9-11 – about the attacks which were thought to have killed more than 6,000 Americans.
Netanyahu’s conspicuous role as the main speaker at an event celebrating an act of terrorism was not reported in any U.S. newspaper until Patrick Buchanan mentioned it in his article entitled “Moral culpability for Qana,” on August 2, 2006.
Buchanan’s comments, however, appeared only in independent regional newspapers in Pittsburgh, Wyoming, and Ohio:
Rubbing our noses in our own cravenness, “Bibi” Netanyahu took time out a week ago to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the terror attack on the King David Hotel by Menachem Begin’s Irgun, an attack that killed 92 people, among them British nurses. This was not a terrorist act, Bibi explained, because Irgun telephoned a 15-minute warning to the hotel before the bombs went off.
Right. And those children in Qana should not have ignored Israeli leaflets warning them to clear out of southern Lebanon.
Our Israeli friends appear to be playing us for fools.
“TERRORISTS IN DISGUISE”
In 1946, The Times described the Irgun as “terrorists in disguise.”
Sarah Agassi, 80, was one of the “terrorists in disguise” involved in the bombing of the King David Hotel.
She and a fellow agent had cased out the hotel. Her brother and other terrorists had disguised themselves as Arabs delivering milk and brought seven milk cans, each containing 50 kg. (110 lbs.) of explosives, into the basement of the hotel.
There were important strategic reasons for the bombing, according to the Jerusalem Post of July 27, 2006:
The bombing was a direct response to the events of the British Operation Agatha and the Black Sabbath of June 29, 1946, during which 17,000 British soldiers confiscated weapons and intelligence documents and arrested thousands of leaders of the Yishuv and Hagana activists.
The documents, brought to the King David headquarters, revealed most of the Yishuv’s operational plans and incriminated the Jewish Agency in the leadership of the United Resistance, as well as the IZL and the Lehi, against the British.
The evidence would be used to try the Jewish activists and, quite possibly, to hang them.
Twenty-five fighters took part in the carefully-planned and precisely executed bombing. Six of them, dressed as Arab laborers, placed the seven milk cans filled with 350 kg. of explosives, fitted with timers set to go off in 40 minutes, around the central support beam of the hotel’s southern wing. Others spread explosives along the roads leading to the hotel to prevent reinforcements and emergency medical crews from arriving at the scene.
NETANYAHU’S TERRORIST ROOTS
Netanyahu is the son of Ben Zion Netanyahu (born Mileikowsky in Warsaw, Poland). Ben Zion was the former senior aide of Vladimir “Ze’ev” Jabotinsky, the militant extremist founder of Revisionist Zionism and the Irgun.
Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu is a leading advocate of the teachings of Jabotinsky. On July 8, 2007, Netanyahu was the keynote speaker at an event at the Jabotinsky Institute to mark the 67th anniversary of the death of the founder of the Irgun.
The Irgun, a Zionist terrorist organization dedicated to creating Greater Israel, is the political parent of Israel’s extreme right-wing Likud party, which Benjamin Netanyahu currently heads.
The Irgun was the “armed expression” of Revisionist Zionism, which was expressed by Jabotinsky thusly, according to Howard M. Sachar, author of A History of Israel from the Rise of Zionism to Our Time:
· Every Jew has the right to enter Palestine;
· Only active retaliation [i.e. terrorism] would deter the Arabs and the British;
· Only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish state.
Netanyahu is also a terrorism specialist who has made a career out of promoting the Zionist notion of a global “War on Terror” since the early 1980s.
On September 11, 2001, the New York Times asked Netanyahu what he thought of the attacks:
“It’s very good,” Netanyahu said, apparently unable to contain himself.
Who else, but a hardened terrorist involved in the crime, would use the word “good” to describe 9-11?
As James Bennet of The New York Times reported on September 12, 2001:
Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied, “It’s very good.” Then he edited himself: “Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.”
In 2006, the Jerusalem Post and other newspapers reported on Netanyahu’s outspoken support for the terrorists who had bombed the King David Hotel in 1946. The Irgun’s chief of operations at the time of the bombing was Eitan Livni, the father of the current Israeli Foreign Minister “Tzipi” Livni.
The high-level political connections in Israel with the Irgun terrorists of the 1940s are an indication of the degree of terrorist influence on the Israeli political establishment, The Hindu [India] wisely noted in an article entitled “Celebrating Terror, Israeli-style” on July 24, 2006.
“We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated,” Britain’s Ambassador to Israel, Simon McDonald, and its consul-general in Jerusalem, John Jenkins, protested weakly in a letter to the local Israeli administration in Jerusalem.
PREVIOUS ISRAELI ATTACKS ON U.S. TARGETS
Eight years after the bombing of the King David Hotel, the State of Israel carried out a series of false-flag terror bombings against U.S. and British libraries, theatres, and other government institutions in Egypt in a terror campaign designed to be blamed on Egyptian groups.
This Israeli terror campaign of July 1954 is often referred to as the “Lavon Affair” after Pinhas Lavon, the Israeli defense minister at the time.
In June 1967, thirteen years after the Lavon Affair, the Israeli air force and navy deliberately strafed, bombed, napalmed, and torpedoed an unarmed U.S. vessel, the USS Liberty, and tried to kill all of the nearly 300 crew members, simply to achieve a strategic war-time goal.
Recently released documents from the National Security Agency (NSA) confirm that the United States government at the time had evidence that the Israelis had deliberately attacked the USS Liberty knowing it was a U.S. vessel.
Oliver Kirby, the NSA’s deputy director for operations at the time of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, confirmed the existence of the transcripts to John Crewdson of the Chicago Tribune, saying he had personally read them:
Asked whether he had personally read such transcripts, Kirby replied, “I sure did. I certainly did.”
“They said, ‘We’ve got him in the zero,'” Kirby recalled, “whatever that meant — I guess the sights or something. And then one of them said, ‘Can you see the flag?’
They said ‘Yes, it’s U.S, it’s U.S.’ They said it several times, so there wasn’t any doubt in anybody’s mind that they knew it.”
Kirby, now 86 and retired in Texas, said the transcripts were “something that’s bothered me all my life. I’m willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that we knew they knew.”
The Main Battle Dressing Station on the USS Liberty was described as a “bloody scene reminiscent of the American Civil War.” The Israeli torpedo and machine guns took a terrible toll on the Liberty’s crew, killing 34 and wounding 172.
MORDECHAI FEIN (a.k.a. MOTI HOD)
The Israeli planes involved in the attack reported directly to the commander of the air force, Maj. Gen. Mordechai Hod. Hod (a.k.a. Mordechai Fein or “Moti” Hod) was the Commander of the Israeli Air Force during the 1967 Six-Day War. Hod was from Kibbutz Degania, like Moshe Dayan, the defense minister he served under.
Maj. Gen. Mordechai “Moti” Hod, IAF Commander (1966-1973)
Hod left the military in 1975 and created CAL, an Israel air cargo company. Oddly, after only two years he left the company he started and became chief executive of El Al airlines from 1977 to 1979. In 1985, he founded an un-named security company, according to his obituary in The Guardian (UK) from June 2003. From 1987 until retirement in 1993, he was the chairman of Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI).
ICTS, the Israeli airport passenger screening and security firm, is a key defendant in the 9-11 litigation. The ICTS website says this about the company: “ICTS International N.V. was founded in 1982 by a select group of security experts, former military commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and security agencies.”
An employee of ICTS told me in 2001 that Huntleigh USA, their wholly owned airport security subsidiary, had handled passenger screening at Boston and Newark airports on 9-11. As a matter of fact, the Mossad-owned company probably had people at every airport involved in any way on 9-11.
The ICTS company website says as much: “In 1998, ICTS International N.V. made a strategic decision to focus on the US market. The following year, it acquired Huntleigh USA Corp., which provides airline passenger screening services at 47 US airports, including all the international aviation gateways in the USA.”
The ICTS company developed out of El Al (the Israeli-state airlines) security. The Israeli airline security firm went through a number of name changes as it began providing “security” to European and American airports. Mordechai Hod’s relationship with the Mossad-run “security” company at the center of 9-11 will be examined in a chapter about ICTS and 9-11.
Moshe Dayan, defense minister during the Six-Day War, was a close associate and political ally of Shimon Peres. In 1965, former prime minister Ben Gurion and his closest followers, including Shimon Peres and Moshe Dayan, broke away from the ruling labor party, Mapai, and formed a separate minority faction, the Rafi or Workers’ List.
The U.S. government, military, and media all went along with the cover-up of the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty to avoid blaming Israel for the murder of 34 American servicemen, 26 of whom died from the torpedo blast, and the wounding of some 173 others. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, certainly knows who made the decision to attack the U.S. vessel in 1967.
The USS Liberty after being bombed, napalmed, shot, and torpedoed by the Israeli air force and navy
The Crewdson article reveals that the Israelis knew very well that the USS Liberty was an American vessel in international waters – before they fired the torpedo that killed 26 U.S. servicemen in one fell swoop:
Twenty minutes later, after the Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm from the Israelis’ French-built Mirage and Mystere fighter-bombers, the controller directing the attack asked his chief in Tel Aviv to which country the target vessel belonged.
“Apparently American,” the chief controller replied.
Fourteen minutes later the Liberty was struck amidships by a torpedo from an Israeli boat, killing 26 of the 100 or so NSA technicians and specialists in Russian and Arabic who were working in restricted compartments below the ship’s waterline.
“SINK THE TARGET – NO SURVIVORS”
Lt. James M. Ennes, Jr., an officer on the bridge of the USS Liberty, wrote his first-hand account of the Israeli attack in a 1979 book entitled Assault on the Liberty. Lieutenant Ennes’ book is documentary evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate and not an accident of war.
Ennes describes how Israeli torpedo boats repeatedly machine-gunned Liberty sailors fighting the napalm fires on deck and shot her life rafts in the water while an oversize U.S. flag flew from its mast.
The Israeli torpedo killed 26 U.S. servicemen and left a hole 39 feet across.
The shooting of the life rafts indicates that the Israelis did not want anyone to survive the assault and intended sinking of the U.S. vessel.
Steve Forslund, an intelligence analyst for the 544th Air Reconnaissance Technical Wing in 1967, saw the transcripts from the Israeli pilots and their ground control as they came off the teletype machine at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha.
“The ground control station stated that the target was American and for the aircraft to confirm it,” Forslund recalled. “The aircraft did confirm the identity of the target as American, by the American flag.
“The ground control station ordered the aircraft to attack and sink the target and ensure they left no survivors.”
Forslund said he clearly recalled “the obvious frustration of the controller over the inability of the pilots to sink the target quickly and completely.”
“He kept insisting the mission had to sink the target, and was frustrated with the pilots’ responses that it didn’t sink.”
Chief Petty Officer Stanley W. White, president of the Liberty Veterans Association, said, “The Israeli planes and gunboats spent more than one hour hitting us with rockets, napalm bombs, torpedoes, cannon and machine-gun fire. They machine-gunned our firefighters on deck and they shot our life rafts out of the water…I don’t know of a single member of our association who believes that attack was an accident.”
There are three reasons that have been given as to why the Israelis wanted to sink the U.S. electronic reconnaissance vessel:
To prevent the U.S. from knowing that Israel was planning to seize the Golan Heights from Syria;
To prevent the U.S. from obtaining evidence that Israeli troops were slaughtering some 1,000 Egyptian prisoners of war near Gaza;
To destroy the U.S. vessel that was capable of discerning that Israel was sending false communications to Jordan and Egypt to keep them in the war until the Israeli military achieved its territorial goals on the ground.
“U.S. intelligence documents indicate the Israelis attacked the Liberty deliberately. They feared she would monitor their plans to attack the Golan Heights in Syria – a move the United States opposed for fear of provoking Soviet military intervention,” James Ennes said.
Wilber Crane Eveland, an author formerly with the CIA in the Middle East, wrote that the Liberty had intercepted messages that “made it clear that Israel had never intended to limit its attack to Egypt.”
ISRAELI MASSACRE OF EGYPTIAN POWS
The Tribune article reported that the NSA’s deputy director at the time, Louis Tordella, speculated in a recently declassified memo that the attack “might have been ordered by some senior commander on the Sinai Peninsula who wrongly suspected that the Liberty was monitoring his activities.”
The activities that needed to be hidden included the slaughter of some 1,000 Egyptian POWs.
Aryeh Yitzhaki of Bar Ilan University, who had worked in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) history department, said in an August 1995 interview with Israel Radio that a reconnaissance unit, known as Shaked (Almond), headed by Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, had killed hundreds of Egyptians who had abandoned their weapons and fled into the desert during the 1967 war.
Yitzhaki said he had investigated six or seven separate incidents, in which approximately 1,000 unarmed Egyptian prisoners of war had been killed by IDF units.
THE BOMBING OF THE U.S. MARINE BARRACKS -BEIRUT 1983
Sixteen years later, 241 U.S. Marines died when a Mercedes truck packed with explosives demolished their barracks at Beirut International Airport on October 23, 1983. A similar explosion occurred nearly simultaneously at the French military barracks a few kilometers away, killing 56 French troops.
In the wake of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, President Ronald Reagan sent 1,800 marines to Beirut to act as “peace keepers.” Ariel Sharon and the Israeli leadership, however, resented the interference and used the U.S. presence to commit a false-flag operation that killed 241 marines, according to Victor Ostrovsky in his book on the Mossad, By Way of Deception.
Ostrovsky, a former Mossad officer, reported that Nahum Admoni, the Mossad director at the time, had very specific information about the truck being prepared for the attack on the U.S. Marines but had intentionally withheld this crucial information from the U.S. military.
“No, we’re not there to protect Americans. They’re a big country. Send only the regular information,” Admoni reportedly said.
Admoni, the son of Polish immigrants, was director of the Mossad from 1982 to 1989. In 1947-48, Admoni had served in the Shai, the Haganah intelligence branch headed by Isser Harel, and later in the newly created IDF Intelligence, Aman. After the 1948 war, Admoni studied at the University of California, Berkeley, until 1954.
The purpose of the false flag terror bombings in Lebanon was to create U.S. animosity toward the Arab world and align the U.S. with Israel, according to Ostrovsky. There had been an earlier car bomb at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut on April 18, 1983, which had killed 17 Marines. The bombing compelled the Marines to move offshore and President Reagan ordered them to be withdrawn from Lebanon on February 7, 1984.
The Beirut bombing was the deadliest single-day death toll for the United States Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima. Israeli intelligence is suspected of having been involved in the bombings in Lebanon.
“WAR ON TERROR”
The ultimate goal of creating U.S. animosity toward the Arab world is the Zionist mega-fraud known as the “War on Terror.” With its U.S.-led invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, the “War on Terror” is the realization of an important strategic goal for Israeli military planners.
To have the armies of the U.S. and European nations occupying Iraq, the most powerful and advanced Arab nation, has always been the dream of Zionist strategic planners. Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, has explicitly called for such a global “War on Terror” since the early 1980s.
Although it is never mentioned as such in the controlled press, it needs to be understood that the “War on Terror” with its pre-planned invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, constitutes a war of aggression.
To prepare for and carry out a war of aggression is the most serious war crime, i.e. a Crime against Peace under the Nuremberg Principles of 1950. The United States and its allies convicted and literally strangled to death dozens of senior Nazis at the Nuremberg trials for having committed such war crimes.
In the aftermath of 9-11, the U.S. government failed to prove that the terror attacks had been planned, sponsored, or executed by members of the ruling Taliban regime prior to invading Afghanistan. Six years after invading that nation, the U.S. government has yet to prove that any link existed between the Taliban regime and 9-11.
Nor is there any evidence of involvement by any member of the regime of the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, the charges that the Iraqi regime had obtained weapons of mass destruction, trumpeted by senior officials of the Bush administration and Judith Miller of the New York Times, turned out to be nothing but lies crafted solely for the purpose of deceiving the public and provoking another illegal invasion.
The passage of time does not make a war of aggression and occupation any less illegal.
DECADES OF PLANNING
There are key people involved in the 1954 Israeli terror bombings of the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo who held high-level positions in the Israeli government of 2001. There are other Israelis, with long histories of terrorism and strategic planning, who revealed having very specific prior knowledge of 9-11 long before 2001.
The highest Israeli intelligence official at the time of the Lavon Affair, Isser Harel, was evidently aware of the long-term planning of 9-11 — more than twenty years before it happened.
In 1980, twenty-one years before September 11, 2001, Isser Harel, the former director of Haganah intelligence, the Shin Bet (internal) and the Mossad (foreign) intelligence services, predicted with uncanny accuracy the events of 9-11 to Michael D. Evans, an American supporter of Zionist extremists of the Jabotinsky sort.
On September 23, 1980, Evans visited Harel at his home in Israel and had dinner with him and Dr. Reuven Hecht, a senior adviser to then prime minister Menachem Begin.
Isser Harel, Israeli spymaster and master terrorist, who – in 1980 – discussed his knowledge of the plan to bomb the WTC.
“AMERICA THE TARGET”
In an editorial entitled “America the Target,” published in The Jerusalem Post of September 30, 2001, Evans related what Harel had told him:
I sat with former Mossad chief Isser Harel for a conversation about Arab terrorism. As he handed me a cup of hot tea and a plate of cookies, I asked him, “Do you think terrorism will come to America, and if so, where and why?”
Harel looked at his American visitor and replied, “I fear it will come to you in America. America has the power, but not the will, to fight terrorism. The terrorists have the will, but not the power, to fight America – but all that could change with time. Arab oil money buys more than tents.”
As to the where, Harel continued, “New York City is the symbol of freedom and capitalism. It’s likely they will strike the Empire State Building, your tallest building [he mistakenly thought] and a symbol of your power.”
In another article, entitled “Jimmy Carter: Radical Islam’s Ally,” Evans related the same story about Harel:
My last question was would terrorism ever come to America. “You have the power to fight it,” he said, “but not the will. They have the will, but not the power. All of that will change in time. Yes, I fear it will come to New York and your tallest building, which is a symbol of your fertility.”
Michael D. Evans is a Zionist Jew who disguises himself as a Christian. Here Evans meets with Menachem Begin, the former terrorist head of the Irgun who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel. Evans was told by Isser Harel of the Israeli plan to bomb the World Trade Center in 1980, about the time of this photo.
In 2004, Evans published a book entitled The American Prophecies, Terrorism and Mid-East Conflict Reveal a Nation’s Destiny. In a subsequent interview, published under the title “Is America in Bible Prophecy?” with Deborah Caldwell, Evans explains what Harel meant about fertility symbols:
Caldwell: So extrapolating from the scenarios of the Bible, what do you believe is our nation’s future, based on prophecy?
Evans: The story of prophecy that has to do with the Jews goes all the way through to the end of the Book of Revelation. Jesus prophesied in Matthew 24. The disciples said, “What shall be the signs of the coming of the ends of the age?” And he said, “The first sign would be deception.” Now, there’s never been greater deception then what happened on September 11, 2001.
Caldwell: Why do you say that America’s story is contained within biblical prophecies?
Evans: America stepped into the eye of a prophetic storm when it took covenant with both Ishmael and Isaac, the sons of Abraham, the Arab and the Jew…
Most of the Bible talks about this battle between these two brothers, and we’re right in the middle of that.
On Sept. 23, 1979, the founder of Israeli intelligence over dinner told me that America was developing a tolerance for terror. The gentleman’s name was Isser Harel, the founder of Mossad Israeli intelligence — he ran it from 1947 to 1963.
He told me that America had developed an alliance between two countries, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and that the alliance with Saudi Arabia was dangerous and would develop a tolerance for terror among Americans. He said if the tolerance continued that Islamic fundamentalists would ultimately strike America.
I said “Where?”
He said, “In Islamic theology, the phallic symbol is very important. Your biggest phallic symbol is New York City and your tallest building will be the phallic symbol they will hit.” Isser Harel prophesied that the tallest building in New York would be the first building hit by Islamic fundamentalists 21 years ago.
Mike Evans with Ehud Olmert, the mayor of Jerusalem who made a secret visit to New York City – on the day before 9-11. Olmert met with Israelis connected to the Florida operations on Sept. 10, 2001.
The “Is America in Bible Prophecy?” interview with Evans is published on-line on Beliefnet, a Zionist propaganda network disguised as a religious website. Steven Waldman is CEO, Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Beliefnet. Previously, Waldman was National Editor of US News & World Report, National Correspondent for Newsweek in the Washington bureau and editor of the Washington Monthly. One of Beliefnet’s directors is Michael S. Perlis, the former President of the Playboy Publishing Group.
Steven Waldman of Beliefnet
Think about this for a minute. The founder of Israeli intelligence tells an American Zionist in 1980 that Arab terrorism will come to America and that the terrorists will strike the tallest building in New York City. His bizarre prediction, which makes no sense, then comes to pass 13 years later with a hapless and thoroughly fake attack in 1993, evidently arranged by the FBI.
The FBI-coordinated false-flag terror event is followed, 8 years later, by a spectacular, well-planned, and extremely lethal attack which kills thousands. How did Isser Harel know what the Arab terrorists had planned more than two decades before 9-11?
ISSER HAREL – MOSSAD’S MASTER TERRORIST
Under David Ben Gurion, Isser Harel was the former chief of Haganah intelligence (Shai) from 1944, the Shin Bet from 1948, and the Mossad until 1963. Admoni, the Mossad director who refused to warn the U.S. Marines in 1983, had served under Harel.
Given his unique position and penchant for terrorism as a means of coercion, the uncanny accuracy of Harel’s prediction says more about the years of Israeli planning that went into 9-11 than it does about any criminal plots of alleged Arab origin.
After nearly two decades as the head of Israeli intelligence, Ben Gurion reportedly asked Harel to resign in 1963 because of his use of terrorism bombings as a means of coercion against the West.
Harel, as director of the Mossad, had initiated “The Damocles Operation” of the early 1960s, which was a terror bombing campaign to threaten German scientists from helping Egypt develop its defense systems.
Isser Harel, head of Israeli intelligence in 1961
Two Mossad agents were arrested and jailed in Switzerland for using terror bombs against German scientists. The wife of one scientist was killed in a mysterious explosion, a second scientist disappeared, and the secretary of a third scientist was blinded and mutilated by a mail bomb in Cairo.
As Ian Black and Benny Morris, authors of Israel’s Secret Wars: A History of Israel’s Intelligence Services, wrote:
Dr. Heinz Krug, director of a Munich-based Egyptian front company called Intra, had disappeared mysteriously and was presumed murdered in September 1962.
On 7 October Harel [Isser Harel, Mossad head] left for Europe ‘to personally supervise authorized operations and the special collection programme.’
In November, Aman [IDF intelligence] sent several letter bombs to the rocket installations in Egypt and one of them, a large parcel that had been mailed by sea from Hamburg, killed five Egyptians. Someone with a black sense of humour dubbed the campaign ‘post mortem.’
It should be noted that Yosef Goell, a columnist with the Jerusalem Post, published an editorial entitled “Isser Harel and the German Scientists” on February 22, 1991, in which Israel’s international newspaper delivered a threat of Harel-type terrorism to European scientists and companies doing business with Arab nations:
The directors and managers of those firms and the experts who work for them should be reminded that they are playing with their lives and the welfare of their families. It would be well if they went back and studied the episode of Isser Harel and the German scientists in Nasser’s missile program of the 1960s.
THE LAVON AFFAIR
The Lavon Affair, or “the shameful affair” (Esek Habish) as it is known in Hebrew, was an Israeli false-flag terror bombing campaign against the United States and Britain that was carried out in Egypt in 1954.
Israeli military intelligence had set up a terror cell of sleeper agents in Egypt, which was activated in July 1954 to blow up U.S. and British targets.
The Israeli operation was code-named “Susannah.” The false-flag terrorist bombings were meant to be blamed on Egyptians in order to alienate the U.S. and Britain from President Gamal Abdul Nasser and prevent Egypt from nationalizing the Suez Canal.
The Lavon Affair is seldom discussed in the media or in university courses on Middle Eastern history. Strict censorship in the Israeli media even prevented the Israeli public from knowing about the affair for many years.
Only in 2005, fifty-one years after the bombings, did Israel finally admit responsibility for its 1954 false-flag terrorist bombing campaign in Egypt.
The false-flag terror bombings were carried out between July 2 and July 27, 1954 by a covert terror cell composed of about one dozen Egyptian Jews under the command of Israeli intelligence agents.
The Israeli-run terror cell was discovered and broken up on July 27, 1954, when one of its members was caught in Alexandria after the bomb he was carrying exploded.
An Israeli terrorist cell, Unit 131, was reportedly responsible for the terror bombings. At the time of the terror bombings, Unit 131 is said to have been the subject of a dispute between Aman and Mossad over who controlled it. How convenient.
The Egyptian operatives had been recruited several years before, when an Israeli intelligence officer named Avram Dar went to Cairo posing as John Darling, a British citizen from Gibraltar. Dar recruited Egyptian Jews, who had helped with illegal emigration to Israel, and trained them for covert operations.
The Israeli terror cell went to work in the summer of 1954. On July 2, a post office in Alexandria was firebombed. On July 14, the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo and a British theater were bombed. The bombs contained nitroglycerine and were placed on the shelves of the libraries.
After the terrorist cell was discovered, three of the Israeli terrorist commanders succeeded in fleeing Egypt and the fourth committed suicide. After the trial in Cairo, two of the accused Egyptian Jews were condemned to death and executed, and eight were condemned to long terms of imprisonment.
The Israeli prime minister and foreign minister at the time, Moshe Sharett, was evidently unaware of the intrigue, which had apparently been carried out by disciples of David Ben Gurion, namely Isser Harel, Moshe Dayan, and Shimon Peres.
Sharett (born Shertok in Cherson, Ukraine) was Israel’s first foreign minister (May 15, 1948 – June 18, 1956) and second prime minister (Dec. 7, 1953 – Nov. 2, 1955). Sharett held both positions at the time of the Israeli terror campaign.
Sharett, who appears to have known nothing about the terror ring, only became informed of the facts afterwards.
In October 1953, shortly before Ben Gurion took a two-year hiatus in the Negev Desert leaving Sharett in charge, he appointed Pinhas Lavon, a staunch supporter of the “retaliation” [i.e. terrorism] policy, as minister of defense, and nominated Moshe Dayan as chief of staff of the armed forces.
When Sharett was told of Ben Gurion’s decision to nominate Dayan as chief of staff, he penned this note in his diary: “The new chief of staff’s immense capacity for plotting and intrigue-making will yield many complications.”
LAVON – TERRORIZE THE WEST
Pinhas Lavon, Israel’s minister of defense at the time of the terror bombings, was part of a group of military leaders who advocated the use of terrorism against the Western nations, particularly Britain and the United States. This group included the Polish-born immigrants David Ben Gurion and Shimon Peres (Szymon Persky), and Moshe Dayan, the kibbutznik son of Ukrainian immigrants.
In January 1955, Sharett wrote about Lavon to Aharon Barkatt, secretary general of the Mapai party:
He [Lavon] inspired and cultivated the negative adventuristic trend in the army and preached the doctrine that not the Arab countries but the Western Powers are the enemy, and the only way to deter them from their plots is through direct actions that will terrorize them.
When the Israeli terrorist plot against Britain and the U.S. was exposed, Ben Gurion blamed Lavon, who, in turn, blamed Col. Benjamin Givli, another Ben Gurion protégé and the head of Aman, Israeli military intelligence. Lavon said that Givli had organized the covert operation behind his back.
SHARETT & ISRAEL’S TERRORISM
Prime Minister Sharett, however, had “no doubts about the guilt of the Dayan-Peres-Givli clique,” according to the late Israeli historian Livia Rokach, the daughter of Israel Rokach, the former mayor of Tel Aviv and minister of internal affairs in the Sharett government:
For him [Sharett], the question of who gave the order was secondary to the necessity of pronouncing a judgment on the ideology and politics of Israel’s terrorism. Therefore, while he had no doubts about the guilt of the Dayan-Peres-Givli clique; to him Lavon’s political responsibility was also inescapable.
As Sharett wrote about Lavon on January 10, 1955:
[People] ask me if I am convinced that “he gave the order?”… but let us assume that Givli has acted without instructions… doesn’t the moral responsibility lie all the same on Lavon, who has constantly preached for acts of madness and taught the army leadership the diabolic lesson of how to set the Middle East on fire, how to cause friction, cause bloody confrontations, sabotage targets and property of the Powers [and perform] acts of despair and suicide?”
As a “moderate Zionist,” Sharett believed that Israel’s survival would be impossible without the support of the West, Rokach wrote, but that Western “morality” and interests in the Middle East would not support a Jewish state which “behaves according to the laws of the jungle” and “raises terrorism to the level of a sacred principle.”
SHIMON PERES: “FRIGHTEN THE WEST”
In May 1947, Ben Gurion drafted Shimon Peres into the Haganah high command, where he was initially put in charge of manpower and later became involved in arms procurement and production.
Peres served as chief of the naval department in 1948 and was sent to the United States in 1950 on an arms procurement mission.
Peres was instrumental in acquiring weapons for the Haganah and establishing the Israeli defense industries, especially the aircraft and avionics industries, according to his biography. He is also known as the godfather of the Israel’s hi-tech defense industries and illegal nuclear arsenal.
Peres built an alliance with France that secured a source of arms, and was responsible for the program to develop nuclear weapons for Israel, convincing the French to help Israel build a secret nuclear reactor at Dimona in the Negev Desert in 1957.
It was Peres who acquired the French advanced Dassault Mirage III jet fighters that the Israeli air force used to attack the USS Liberty in 1967.
About Shimon Peres, whom Sharett considered to be one of the key planners of the terror bombing campaign of U.S. institutions in Egypt, he wrote this note in 1955:
Peres shares the same ideology [as Lavon]: he wants to frighten the West into supporting Israel’s aims.
Two years later, in 1957, Sharett wrote even more critically about Peres:
I have stated that I totally and utterly reject Peres and consider his rise to prominence a malignant, immoral disgrace. I will rend my clothes in mourning for the State if I see him become a minister in the Israeli government.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Olmert, Ariel Sharon, and Shimon Peres – the architects of Israeli terrorism
Sharett’s terrorism and violence-prone adversaries: Ben Gurion, Dayan, and Peres, however, prevailed and dealt “a crushing blow” to “the very hypothesis of moderate Zionism,” Rokach concluded:
In the final analysis the West, and in particular the U.S., let itself be frightened, or blackmailed, into supporting Israel’s megalomaniac ambitions, because an objective relationship of complicity already existed and because once pushed into the open this complicity proved capable of serving the cause of Western power politics in the region.
The immense profits that have flowed into the coffers of Western drug and oil cartels as a consequence of the Anglo-American control over the opium production of occupied-Afghanistan and the oil of occupied-Iraq amply illustrate Rokach’s point that Israeli false-flag terror is “capable of serving the cause of Western power politics in the region.”
As Rokach concluded in her study of Sharett’s diary and documents:
Just as Zionism, based on the de-Palestinization and the Judaisation of Palestine, was intrinsically racist and immoral, thus the West, in reality, had no use for a Jewish state in the Middle East which did not behave according to the laws of the jungle, and whose terrorism could not be relied on as a major instrument for the oppression of the peoples of the region.
By April 1957, Sharett realized that the hard-line terrorist faction headed by Ben Gurion and his protégés Dayan and Peres had won – and that he, and his vision of moderate Zionism, had lost:
I go on repeating to myself nowadays, “Admit that you are the loser!” They showed much more daring and dynamism…they played with fire, and they won…The public, even your own public, does not share your position. On the contrary…the public now turns even against its “masters” and its bitterness against the retreat [from Sinai and Gaza] is developing into a tendency to change the political balance in this country in favor of [the former Irgun terrorist leader Menachem] Begin.
“His [Sharett’s] defeat in internal Israeli politics reflected the ascendancy of the positions of Ben Gurion, Dayan and others [Peres] who were not reluctant to use force to attain their goals,” Noam Chomsky wrote in his forward to Rokach’s book:
His diaries give a very revealing picture of the developing conflict, as he perceived it, and offer an illuminating insight into the early history of the state of Israel, with ramifications that reach to the present, and beyond.
9-11 and the “War on Terror” are clearly two “ramifications” of the victory of the terrorist Zionists that “reach to the present.”
Had Moshe Sharett, the Israeli prime minister, “spoken frankly and directly to public opinion” and torn up “the mask of secrecy” surrounding the Israeli terror bombings, he could have changed the history of the Middle East, Rokach wrote:
At this point, Sharett could have changed the history of the Middle East had he spoken frankly and directly to public opinion, which was deeply troubled by the events in Egypt: the arrests, the trial, the executions, the contradicting rumors, the climate of intrigue surrounding the “Affair.” [By] tearing up the mask of secrecy, denouncing those who were responsible, exposing his true convictions in regard to Israel’s terroristic ideologies and orientations, [and] proposing an alternative, he could have created for himself the conditions in which to use the formal powers that he possessed to make a radical housecleaning in the security establishment. The impact of such an act would have probably been considerable not only in Israel itself but also in the Arab world, especially in Egypt. The downfall of Lavon on one hand and of the Ben Gurionist gang, headed by Dayan and Peres, on the other hand might have blocked Ben Gurion’s return to power, and in the longer range, the Sinai-Suez war. Events since then would have taken a different course.
Unfortunately, “the Ben Gurionist gang, headed by Dayan and Peres” came to power. Peres, who had served in high-level appointed positions, was elected to the Knesset in the 1959 elections. Peres, the former Director General of the Ministry of Defense under Moshe Dayan, then became the Deputy Defense Minister, a position he held until 1965 when he was implicated, with Dayan, in the Lavon affair.
On June 5, 1967, Israel started the Six-Day War when it launched a pre-emptive attack against Egypt and its air force. Yitzhak Rabin was chief of staff and Moshe Dayan was minister of defense during this crucial war that reshaped the Middle East.
Ben Gurion and his gang of Dayan and Peres formed a new party in 1965, Rafi, partly due to their involvement in the Lavon Affair. Dayan and Peres had worked closely together since their days in the Haganah.
SHIMON PERES: TERRORIST-IN-CHIEF
Shimon Peres, a most unsuitable recipient of the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize, has a long history of terrorism, which is evidently not well known in the West. Peres, the 84-year-old president of the State of Israel, has a documented record of involvement in terrorist crimes over a period of more than 5 decades.
Condoleezza Rice visits Shimon Peres, September 2007
Peres is a survivor of the struggle among Zionists between the militant hard-liners, who promoted the use of violence and terrorism, versus the softer “moderates,” who opposed terrorism and advocated the use of diplomacy.
Shimon Peres is a hard-liner. Born Szymon Persky in Wiszniew, Poland, on August 2, 1923, Peres is the first cousin of Lauren Bacall, the Brooklyn-born Betty Joan Persky. This relationship between the veteran hard-line Zionist and a Hollywood movie star is a good example of how Zionist Jewish families from the Pale of Settlement often established branches in Israel and the United States in the early 1900s.
In 1947, the Polish-born Zionist leader David Ben Gurion (born David Grün) met the 23-year-old Peres at Haganah headquarters and made him responsible for manpower and arms purchases for the underground Zionist militia he commanded in Palestine.
Ben Gurion and Shimon Peres (on left), 1969
Peres became a protégé of Ben Gurion. After the bombing of the King David Hotel and other terror killings by the Haganah and other Zionist terror gangs, the British withdrew from Palestine.
The armed gangs of Zionist immigrants and veterans of the Red Army then turned their terrorist skills, which some had gained during World War II, against the indigenous population of Palestine. Nearly 400 Palestinian towns and villages were completely obliterated or “ethnically cleansed” during the 1947-48 Zionist conquest of Palestine.
Peres was also the chief of the Israeli navy, whose main task at the time was the illegal smuggling of men and arms for the Zionist forces in Palestine.
When the 1947-48 war ended, Peres “assumed the position of Director of the Defense Ministry’s procurement delegation in the United States,” according to his biography.
As director of arms procurement in the United States, Peres was responsible for organizing illegal arms smuggling. Transfers of weapons and planes to Zionist forces violated the U.S. Neutrality Act.
Much of the Haganah arms smuggling activity was run from an office above the “syndicate-owned” Copacabana Club in New York City, where Peres and Teddy Kollek, the Hungarian-born son of the director of the Rothschild bank in Vienna, worked closely with the “crime syndicate” headed by the leading Jewish gangsters of the time.
After World War II, Kollek was sent to New York, where he worked as the Haganah representative and head of its weapons purchasing team in New York. Kollek worked from an office above the Copacabana nightclub in the Haganah’s Hotel Fourteen to arm the Zionist forces in British-occupied Palestine.
Ben Gurion and Haganah gun-runner Teddy Kollek
Also deeply involved in this criminal arms smuggling activities were the American Jews, Adolph “Al” Schwimmer and Hank Greenspun. Greenspun, the Las Vegas-based publicist for mobster Benjamin “Bugsy” Siegel, was eventually pardoned for his crimes by President Bill Clinton, a close friend of the Greenspun family.
In 1951, at the request of Ben Gurion, Schwimmer and Peres founded Bedek, the military’s aviation firm that became Israel’s largest company, Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI).
Adolph W. Schwimmer, Zionist arms smuggler, and Ben Gurion
In 1952, the same year Ben Gurion made Isser Harel the head of the Mossad, he appointed Peres to be Deputy Director General of the Ministry of Defense.
The next year, at the age of 29, Peres became the youngest ever Director General of the Defense Ministry, a position he held until 1959. It is interesting to note that Peres never attended university or served in the army, according to Ha’aretz (Israel) of June 14, 2007.
As Director General, Peres was a founder of Israel’s military and its subsidiary, Israel Aircraft Industries. Ben Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, put Peres in charge of the establishment of the Israel’s unlawful nuclear program and secret reactor at Dimona in the Negev Desert.
Peres has never been very popular with Israeli voters. Although he served twice as prime minister, he was never elected to that position. In 2000, he even lost a parliamentary election for the presidency to Moshe Katsav, an Iranian Jewish immigrant.
In July 2007, at nearly 84 years of age, Peres finally won the presidency, but only after Katsav was forced to leave office under a storm of allegations of rape and sexual misconduct.
One might wonder why an 84-year-old man would even want to be president. Is this an example of the maxim, “no rest for the wicked?” Is Peres still working because he needs to protect the critical secrets about 9-11 and the war agenda it launched?
Oddly, prior to 9-11, Peres, a politician from the left, held the most powerful positions of Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister in a government led by a prime minister from the extreme right, Ariel Sharon. Sharon, now reportedly comatose, is a well known terrorist, war monger, and war criminal with a long record of committing atrocities in Palestine and Lebanon. Peres held these highest level positions in the Israeli government from March 3, 2001 until November 2, 2002.
Peres, godfather and chief architect of Israel’s high tech military and unlawful nuclear arsenal, is a person who has always supported the use of terror to coerce the West to support Israel’s strategic goals. He has been involved, at the highest level, in numerous covert false-flag terrorist operations, such as the Lavon Affair, which was even kept secret from the Israeli prime minister at the time.
Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres, who both have long histories of terrorism, headed the Israeli government in 2001-2002
Did Peres use his senior position in a government of like-minded war mongering terrorists to launch the false-flag terror attacks of 9-11 in order to coerce the United States and the West into the Zionist planned “War on Terror?”
Shimon Peres has the credentials of a Zionist arch-terrorist. Furthermore, he has the record, the worldview, and the capability to be an architectural level planner of 9-11. Is Peres one of the masterminds behind the terrorist crime of the century? Were Isser Harel and Mordechai Hod also involved in the planning of 9-11?
To determine the identity of the architectural level planners of 9-11 we will need a better understanding of how the terrorist aerial attacks were carried out during and within the context of U.S. and international military anti-terrorist exercises and drills that included the exact scenario of a passenger plane crashing into a military building near the Pentagon.
Copyright © Christopher Bollyn 2008
All Rights Reserved
Christopher Bollyn is an independent researcher and journalist working on a book entitled Solving 9-11.
To support his efforts, send a donation by Paypal, check, or money order.
To donate by Paypal, use one of the following email addresses:
To donate or write by post:
3 Golf Center, Suite 365
Hoffman Estates, IL 60169 (U. S. A.)
If you have any comments on this article, please send them to firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you for your support.
ABC News, “The White Van: Were Israelis Detained on Sept. 11 Spies?” June 22, 2002
Bennet, James, “A Day of Terror: The Israelis,” The New York Times, September 12, 2001
Crewdson, John, “Special Report: New revelations in attack on American spy ship,” Chicago Tribune, October 2, 2007
Evans, Michael D., “Is America in Bible Prophecy?” Deborah Caldwell interview with Michael D. Evans, August 2004
Joffe, Lawrence, Obituary: “Mordechai Hod: Israeli air force mastermind behind the six day war,” The Guardian (London, England), July 2, 2003
Melman, Yossi, “Israeli communications said to prove IAF knew Liberty was U.S. ship,” Haaretz, October 4, 2007
Ostrovsky, Victor, and Hoy, Claire, By War of Deception: The making and unmaking of a Mossad Officer, St. Martin’s Press, 1990
Perliger, Arie and Weinberg, Leonard, “Jewish Self Defense and Terrorist Groups Prior to the Establishment of the State of Israel: Roots and Traditions,” Totalitarian Movements & Political Religions, Vol. 4, No. 3 (2003) pp. 91-118.
Prince-Gibson, Eetta, “Reflective truth,” The Jerusalem Post (Israel), July 27, 2006
Rokach, Livia, Israel‘s Sacred Terrorism, 1980
Sachar, Howard M., A History of Israel from the Rise of Zionism to Our Time History of Israel, New York: Knopf, 1976 (3rd Edition, 2007)
Smyth, David, Associated Press, “Americans Rebut Israeli Version of 1967 Attack on U.S. Ship,” Lexington Herald-Leader (KY), October 29, 1984
Suroor, Hasan, “Celebrating Terror, Israeli-style,” The Hindu (Madras, India), July 24, 2006