The Deadly Embrace

Zion-power and War: From Iraq to Iran


Explanations for the US attack on Iraq range from military-political pretexts to accounts focusing on geopolitical and economic interests.

The original official explanation was the now discredited claim that Saddam Hussein possessed chemical, biological and other weapons of mass destructions (WMD), which threatened the US, Israel and the Middle East. Subsequent to the US military occupation, when no WMD were discovered, Washington justified the invasion and occupation by citing the removal of a dictator and the establishment of a prosperous democracy in the Arab world. The imposition of a colonial puppet regime, propped up by an imperial occupation force of over 200,000 troops and irregular death squads, which have killed close to a million Iraqi civilians, forced over 4 million into exile and impoverished over 95% of the population, puts the lie to that line of argument. The latest line of justification revolves around the notion that the US occupation is necessary to ‘prevent a civil war’. Most Iraqis and military experts think the presence of the US colonial occupation army is the cause of violent conflict, particularly the US military’s devastating attacks on civilians, their financing of rival tribal leaders and Kurdish mercenaries and their contracting of local police-military to repress the population. Since most Americans (not to speak of the rest of the world) are not convinced by these specious arguments, the Washington regime rationalizes its continued war and occupation by citing the need for a colonial military victory to maintain its world and regional status as a super-power, and to assure its Middle East client regimes that Washington can defend their ruling cliques and their hegemonic ally, Israel. The Bush White House and pro-Israel Congressional leaders claim a victory in Iraq will bolster Washington’s image as a successful global ‘anti-terrorist’ (anti-insurgent) regime. These post-facto justifications have lost credibility as the war drags on, popular resistance grows in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon, Somalia, Thailand, Philippines, Pakistan and elsewhere. The longer the war continues, the greater the economic cost and the demoralization and depletion of military personnel, the more difficult the task of sustaining the capacity to intervene in defense of the empire.

If the official political and military justifications for the US colonial wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ring hollow and convince few, what of the other economic explanations for the war put forth mostly but not exclusively by critics of the Bush administration?

The major focus of the economic determinists of the war centers on the issue of oil, as in ‘war for oil’.* These explanations in turn break down into several variants: The first and most popular is that the big US oil companies were behind the war, that Bush and Cheney were pressured by their Big Oil handlers into launching the war so that US oil companies could seize the nationally-owned Iraqi oil fields and refineries. A second, slightly modified, version argued that the White House was not pressured by Big Oil but acted on their behalf as a reflex action. (This is put forth to explain why the spokesmen for Big Oil multinationals were so conspicuously absent from the media and halls of Congress in the lead-up to the war.) (* see recent statements in September and October by former Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan and US General John Abazaid among others)

A third version argued that the US went to war to secure oil for US national security interests threatened by Saddam Hussein. This explanation cites the danger of Saddam Hussein closing down the Strait of Hormuz, invading the Gulf States, inciting revolts in Saudi Arabia and/or reducing the flow of Middle East oil to the US and its allies. In other words, the ‘geopolitics’ of the Middle East dictated that a non-client regime was a threat to US, European and Japanese access to oil. This is apparently the latest argument put forth by Alan Greenspan, a former proponent of the WMD propaganda.

The major advocates of the ‘war for oil’ (WFO) argument fail several empirical tests: Namely that the oil companies were not actively supporting the war via propaganda, congressional lobbying or through any other policy vehicle. Secondly the proponents of WFO fail to explain the efforts by major oil companies to develop economic ties with Iraq prior to the invasion and were in fact, working through clandestine third parties to trade in Iraqi oil. Thirdly, all the major oil companies operating in the Middle East were mainly concerned with political stability, the liberalization of the economic policies of the region and the opening of oil services for foreign investors. The big oil companies’ strategies were to advance their global interests through the on-going liberalization process in the Middle East and conquering new markets and oil resources through their formidable market power – investments and technology. The onset of the US invasion of Iraq was viewed with anxiety and concern as a military action, which would destabilize the region, increase hostility to their interests throughout the Gulf and slow down the liberalization process. Not a single CEO from the entire petroleum industry viewed the US invasion as a positive ‘national security’ measure, because they understood that Saddam Hussein, after over a decade of economic and military sanctions and frequent bombing of his military installations and infrastructure throughout the Clinton years, was not in a position to launch any acts of aggression against Gulf oil companies or states. Moreover the oil companies had several real prospects of developing lucrative service and commercial oil contracts with Saddam Hussein’s regime in the lead-up to the war. It was the US government pressured by the Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC), which pushed legislation blocking (through sanctions) Big Oil from consummating these economic agreements with Iraq.

The argument that Big Oil promoted the war for its own benefit fails the empirical test. A corollary to that is that Big Oil has failed to benefit from the US occupation because of the heightened conflict, continuous sabotage, the predictable resistance of the Iraqi oil workers to privatization and the general insecurity, instability and hostility of the Iraqi people.

The American Left jumped on Alan Greenspan’s declaration that the Iraq war was about oil, as some kind of confirmation in the absence of any evidence. Yet everyday that has transpired since the beginning of the war five years ago, demonstrates that ‘Big Oil’ not only did not promote the invasion, but has failed to secure a single oil field, despite the presence of 160,000 US troops, thirty thousand Pentagon/State Department paid mercenaries and a corrupt puppet regime. As of September 19, 2007 the Financial Times of London featured an article on the conspicuous absence of the ‘Oil Majors’ in Iraq: “Big Oil Plays a Waiting Game over Iraq’s Reserves’ (September 19, 2007). Only a few small companies (‘oil minnows’) have contracts in Northern Iraq (‘Kurdistan’), which has only 3% of Iraq’s reserves. ‘Big Oil’ did not start the Iraq war, nor has ‘Big Oil’ benefited from the war. The reason why ‘Big Oil’ did not support the war is the same reason they haven’t invested after the occupation: “The level of violence is still unacceptably high…if anything the prospects of agreement appears to be receding as tensions between parties grow.” (ibid) ‘Big Oil’s’ worst nightmares leading up to the Zionist-influenced war have all been utterly confirmed. Whereas ‘Big Oil’s’ negotiations and third party deals with pre-war Iraq provided a stable and consistent flow of oil and revenue, the war has not only reduced these revenues to zero, but has all but eliminated any new options for the next decade.

Despite the war, liberalization elsewhere in the region has proceeded and US oil and financial interests have advanced despite the increased obstacles and hostilities, which have grown out of the US slaughter of Muslims.

Big Oil, Texas billionaires, even big contributors to the Bush family political campaigns were no match for the ZPC when it came to Middle East war policy. They lacked the inside and outside power, the disciplined grass roots organization of Jewish community organizations to overcome the Zionist warmongering power over Congress, their position in strategic executive offices and their army of academic scribes from Harvard, Yale and Hopkins churning out bellicose propaganda in the US media. What is striking about the position papers and op-ed reprints in the Daily Alert is the total absence of any deviation from official Israeli pro-war positions: Whether it is killing children in Jenin, bombing population centers in Lebanon, shelling Arab families relaxing at the beach in Gaza, the Daily Alert simply echoes the official Israeli line and blatant lies about human shields, accidents, gunmen among school children, self-induced atrocities. Never in the entire period analyzed is there a single critical article questioning Israel’s massive displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. No crime against humanity is too great for the Presidents of the Leading American Jewish Organizations to defend. It is this slavish obedience to the official Israeli policy that marks out the Zionist Power Configuration as something much more than just another lobby as its ‘left’ apologists and even Walt and Mearsheimer claim. The ZPC is much more sinister both as a transmission belt for the policies and interests of a colonial power hell-bent on domination in the Middle East and as the most serious authoritarian threat to our democratic freedoms: no single individual who dares criticize can escape the long hand of the pro-Israel authoritarians. Book sellers are picketed, editors are intimidated, university presses and distributors are threatened, university presidents are blackmailed, local and national candidates are browbeaten and smeared, meetings are cancelled and venues are pressured, faculty are fired or denied promotion, corporations are blacklisted, union pension funds are raided, theater performances and concerts are cancelled. And the list of repressive actions taken by these authoritarian Zionist organizations at the national and local levels runs on, arousing fear among some, anger among many more and a slowly burning resentment and growing awareness among the silent majority. The second geo-political version of ‘oil for war’ focuses on the national security issues. After the First Gulf War in 1991 and eleven years of economic sanctions and military disarmament, Iraq was an impoverished, weak nation partially dismembered by the US backed Kurdish enclave in the north and constant US bombing and over flights. Iraq was severely bombed several times during the Clinton regimes and over 1 million of its citizens, including an estimated 500,000 children, died prematurely from conditions related to the US imposed deprivation of food and essential medical and water treatment supplies.

Before the invasion in 2003, Iraq did not even control its shorelines, airspace or even a third of its national territory. As the US invasion demonstrated, Saddam’s military lacked the most elementary capacity to mount any defense in a conventional war, not even a single fighter plane presented a threat to any offshore US client or to the Strait of Hormuz. The stiff resistance to the US came later in the form of irregular forces engaged in guerrilla warfare, not from any organized force established by the Baathist regime. In other words no matter how far the concept of ‘national security’ is stretched to include US military bases, oil installations, client rulers and transport and shipping lanes in the Middle East, Saddam Hussein was clearly not a threat. If however the concept of ‘national security’ is re-defined to mean the physical elimination of any potential opponent of US and Israeli domination in the region, then Saddam Hussein could be labeled a national security threat. But that takes the discussion of the explanation for the US war against Iraq to another terrain and a discussion of the political forces who manipulated the phony WMD and ‘War for Oil’ propaganda to justify a war for US and Israeli hegemony in the Middle East. Even more important the disinformation campaign about who was responsible for the US invasion and occupation of Iraq is highly relevant to the current propaganda blitz driving us toward a war with Iran.

From the Iraq War Cover-up on to Iran War Propaganda

The pro-Israel power configuration beats the war drums for an assault on Iran with greater insistency and successfully induces the Democratic Congress and Presidential hopefuls as well as the Republican White House to “put the military option on the table.” Parallel to overt war propaganda, a number of liberal critics of the Iraq war have published articles arguing that Israel “really opposed the Iraq war.” Writers as diverse as Gareth Porter, ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern, Colonel Wilkerson (Colin Powell’s Aide), ultra Zion-Con Michael Ledeen and others claim that Israel opposed the war because they wanted the US to target Iran. Others argue that Israel had advised the US that an invasion of Iraq would have dire consequences for the Middle East, tipping the balance toward Iran and which they now claim to have predicted. These Israel-exonerators point to other culprits, namely Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld or the American Neo-Cons (better known as the Zion-Cons) who, they insist, have acted independently of Israel or ignored Israeli priorities in the region.

There is an alternative view which argues that Israel promoted the US attack on Iraq, did all in its power through its US pro-Israel followers to design, propagandize and plan the war. This alternative view sustains that at no point did the Zion-Cons act contrary to Israeli state interests. In fact, Israeli officials worked on a daily basis with its US agents inside the government, particularly the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans to provide disinformation to justify the military attack. If, as we will show, Israel was deeply involved in pushing the US to attack Iraq and is behind the current disinformation campaign to provoke a US war against Iran, then anti-war forces and US public opinion must openly confront the ‘Israel factor’.

We will argue that the exoneration of Israel is mainly an attempt to deflect US public hostility away from those Israel Firsters who manipulated us into this costly, bloody unending war. Exoneration of Israeli responsibility for the US invasion of Iraq allows the Jewish state and its US agents to escape any blame for the degradation of US forces in Iraq and provides them a ‘clean moral slate’ for launching a new bloody US attack against Iran. Rather than seeing Israel as giving us a double dose of an incurable colonial disease, exoneration allows Israel and its agents to follow the same Iraq invasion pattern of manipulation and duplicity in leading us to war with Iran. The White House and Democratic Congress, echoing Israel, are using inflated threats of nuclear attack, demonizing Iran’s leaders, financing low intensity warfare through the training and funding of violent Iranian exile-based clients, economic sanctions and ‘failed’ diplomatic maneuvers . . . to lead up to a new war. Taking advantage of their liberal (Zion-lib)-led exoneration for their role in the invasion of Iraq, the Zionist Power Configuration, through such loyal mouthpieces as Senator Joseph Lieberman, blame the Iranians for the deaths of US soldiers in Iraq. It is not the Zionist pro-war officials in and out of the government who sent young American soldiers to die in Iraq at the behest of the Israeli state to whom the US public should direct its anger, but rather the Iranians who are accused of arming and training Iraqi resistance fighters. Leaving Israel out and bringing Iran into the debacle in Iraq serves the Israeli purpose of covering their backsides while inciting Americans into a new military adventure against the much larger and better-armed Iranians.

The exonerators of Israel are not homogeneous in their political background or goals. Some liberals, fearful of arousing a powerful Zionist backlash, seek to whitewash Israel’s lobby operatives in the US as a way of gaining sympathy among pro-Israel Congressional Democrats and financial backing from wealthy Jewish liberals critical of the Iraq war. Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean, following the new Israeli script declared during a visit to Tel Aviv in 2006 that the ‘the US invaded the wrong country!’

The price of the ‘exonerate Israel’ strategy is to overlook the powerful role that the Israel First lobby is playing in bringing us to a new war with Iran as part of a sequence of invasions promoted by Israeli strategists. These clever ploys are backfiring. Playing to the prejudices of the liberal pro-Israel crowd in the Democratic Party has led to the current absence of any significant anti-war movement against the Zionist-led propaganda and war-mongering blitz against Iran.

There is no question that some anti-war Zion-Libs are trying to put some distance from the Zion-Con/Israeli policymakers who promoted the invasion of Iraq. But this does not come from any opposition to another new and more dangerous military commitment. On the contrary, the Zion-Libs criticize the discredited Bush-Cheney-Iraq policy in favor of a new more aggressive war policy toward Iran. By exonerating Israel and its transmission belt of organized local and national Jewish and fundamentalist Christian organizations, the liberals have not found allies for peace – they have revived the powerful influence of Israel and its US apparatus which was being increasingly rejected by the US public and elements in the US military. By putting the blame for the debacle in Iraq exclusively on Bush/Cheney and their allies in ‘Big Oil’ and excluding the role of Israel, the ZPC and their toadies among the Democrats in Congress, the liberal exonerators, open the way for a new cycle of war in the Middle East. To prevent a future Zionist and Israeli-orchestrated US attack against Iran, we must be perfectly clear about who maneuvered the US into attacking Iraq.

Israel, the ZPC and the Run-up to the Invasion of Iraq

Analytically, the differences between Israeli state policy and the leading US Zionist organizations are, with very rare exceptions, indistinguishable. The run-up to the US attack on Iraq is a case in point. From the late 1980’s, through the first Gulf War, the Clinton Administration’s sanctions, daily bombings and territorial separation of northern Iraq, ‘Kurdistan’, from the rest of the country, to the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, the Israeli government pressured US Congress-people and senior policy makers toward bellicose policies toward Israel’s ‘enemies’. Israeli state policy urging further US degradation of Iraq was transmitted through the major Zionist organizations and key Zionist officials in the Clinton and later Bush administrations. Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk, Madeleine Albright, Richard Holbrook, Sandy Berger, William Cohen and others were the most important foreign policy-makers toward the Middle East in the Clinton Administration and they produced and implemented the sanctions, bombings and territorial dismemberment of Iraq. Following their term of office, key Clinton Zionists went to work at pro-Israeli think tanks in Washington. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Zion-Cons in top level positions in the Bush Administration (Ari Fleischer, Paul Wolfowitz, David Frum, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Eliott Abrams, Irving (Scooter) Libby, David Wurmser and others) and key Zionist Congress-members like Senator Joseph Lieberman, called for the US to attack Iraq, as part of a series of sequential wars, to include Syria and Iran. They echoed the policies of the Israeli state and in particular Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

Israeli state officials, at no point expressed any reservations or differences with the bellicose efforts of its highly placed liaison agents in the Bush Government, nor with its servile lobby, AIPAC, nor with the pro-Israel Op-Ed writers of the major newspapers and broadcast media. Zionist ideologues prevailed everywhere berating the US military officials for their timid caution. Israel, consistent with its policies since the late 1980’s, encouraged the Bush Administration toward an invasion and occupation of Iraq in all of its top level meetings with Rumsfelt, Powell, Rice and Bush. The Israeli media, with rare exceptions, demonized Saddam, played up his ‘threat’ to the Middle East and Israel’s security, conflated Palestinian suicide bombings with Iraqi support for the Palestinian people’s national aspirations, and energized their fundamentalist Christian allies in the US to follow suit in calling for an invasion of Iraq.

An analysis of the relationship between the Israeli state and highly placed Zionist officials in the Bush Administration reveals first and foremost that Tel Aviv laid out the strategic policies of eliminating Middle East regimes opposed to its ethnic cleansing of the occupied territories and unlimited expansion of colonial settlements in Occupied Palestine and the consolidation of Israeli hegemony in the Middle East. The Zionist elite in the Bush regime invented the pretext and the propaganda for war and most important, successfully designed and operationalized the US invasion of Iraq. This ‘division of labor’ included the Zion-Cons in the executive branch, backed by the Presidents of the Major Jewish American Organizations (including AIPAC), the regional, state and local Jewish federations through their influence over Congress.

Testimony by former Pentagon analyst, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski confirms that throughout the period leading to the Iraq war, Israeli military officials, intelligence officers and other high ranking functionaries had daily access with top Zionist Pentagon officials like Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. Frequent consultation, intelligence coordination and joint planning between top Zion-Cons in the Pentagon and top Israeli military operatives in the US indicates that there was close agreement in directing the US to invade Iraq. There was Zion-Con/Israeli agreement, confirmed in the immediate aftermath of the initial ‘successful’ occupation, that Iraq was the first of a series of invasions in the Middle East, to be followed by attacks against Iran and Syria. The Israeli joke current at the time was: ‘Anyone can take Baghdad, real men go for Tehran.’ In November 2002, Ariel Sharon, in an interview with the Times of London, called for the bombing of Iran ‘the day after the US invades Iraq’.

The Zion-Con/Israeli blueprint for sequential wars was explicitly stated in the policy paper “Project for a New American Century’, a kind of American-Israeli Mein Kampf of US world domination in which Israel would be a co-benefactor of American military might and treasure. Most of the Zion-Con designers and executers of US war policy in the Middle East were listed as authors or sponsors of the ‘New American Project’. Many were also contributors to the policy paper for Likud leader, Benyamin Netanyahu, which specifically called for the dismemberment of Iraq into manageable ethnic enclaves.

Israeli intelligence ‘disinformation’ about Saddam Hussein’s ‘threat’ to the region was embellished and adapted to the propaganda needs of the White House. While Israeli propaganda pounded away at ‘Saddam Hussein’ as the modern Hitler, Zionist propaganda chief and Bush speechwriter, David Frum, repeated the same theme in the infamous ‘Axis of Evil’ speech in which Bush pronounced before the world his intention to attack other nations preemptively. Given the Israeli regime’s pro-war propaganda it is understandable that Israeli public opinion was overwhelmingly in favor of the war as were all the leaders of the major American Jewish organization, but not the majority of American Jews, especially young Jews and those who were not members of any of the Zionist (Israel First) front organizations.

Israeli advisers and Zion-Cons in the US government were highly influential in the dismantling of the entire civilian and military administrative structures in Iraq – the so-called De-Baathification campaign – in order to decisively weaken any attempt to reconstruct Iraq as a modern secular republic opposed to Israeli regional hegemony. The Israeli policy, pursued by the Zion-Cons, was to fragment the Iraqi state and society into pre-modern ethno-religious entities run by pro-Israeli Iraqi exiles (like Ahmed Chalabi who had business ties with Douglas Feith), incapable of ever challenging Israeli policy in the Middle East.

Israeli Zion-Con policy succeeded in so far as it secured the US destruction of the Iraqi state; but it failed to secure a rapid victory on the road to the second phase of invading Iran, because of the massive armed resistance by the Iraqis. In their blind racism against Arabs, the Israeli officials and their American agents discounted any possibility of Iraqis mounting a people’s war against the destruction of their society. As the Iraqi resistance gained momentum and US military and economic losses multiplied, US public opinion turned against the war and began to ask who was responsible for the military debacle. In the face of this potentially dangerous question Zionist propaganda shifted gears in order to cover their tracks. Top Zionist official who framed the war quickly left the scene, beginning with the most obvious war perpetrators: Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and Shumsky in the Pentagon and David Frum and Ari Fleischer in the White House. The hardliners with less overt profiles in the State Department stayed on for a while longer– Elliot Abrams, Scooter Libby, David Wurmser. Libby later was convicted of a felony for his role in exposing the CIA operative married to Ambassador Joseph Wilson in retaliation for his exposing his Zionist cohorts’ fabrication of ‘intelligence’ in the lead up to the war.

War with Iran: The Highest Priority for the ZPC (and Israel)

Israel’s campaign for the destruction of Iran has already led to two acts of war. In June 2006 Israel assaulted Lebanon, aiming, unsuccessfully, to destroy the Shiite political-military organization Hezbollah, an ally of Iran. A little more than a year later (Sept 6, 2007) Israel engaged in an even more provocative act, an unprovoked bombing mission over Syrian territory, destroying a military installation. Since Syria and Iran have a mutual defense pact, the Israeli action was designed to test the willingness of Iran and Syria to respond to a surprise (sneak) military attack.

The propaganda arm of the Israeli intelligence services prepared a piece of disinformation comparable to their earlier weapons of mass destruction lie: They claimed that they bombed a nuclear site which North Korea was constructing and supplying with nuclear material. Israeli disinformation was immediately reproduced verbatim in the leading US newspapers, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and the New York Times and all the major television networks. Pro-Israeli propaganda experts justified the attack and were in turn quoted in the Washington Post (Sept 20, 2007). The Post quoted Bruce Riedel, formerly an intelligence ‘expert’ at the pro-Israel Saban Center for Middle East Policy (housed in the now discredited Brookings Institute): “There is no question it was a major raid. It was an extremely important target. It came at a time the Israelis were very concerned about war with Syria and wanted to dampen down the prospects of war (sic). The decision was taken despite their concerns it could produce a war (sic). The decision reflects how important this target was to Israeli military planners.” In other words, Israel is “concerned about war” so it engages in an unprovoked act of war in which the propagandists don’t even know the nature of the target!

On September 21, 2007, the principle propaganda sheet (Daily Alert) of the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO) then reproduced the pro-war propaganda cycled through the Washington Post and sent it out to all top officials and Congressmen in Washington and across the country and activated its lobbyists in AIPAC to ensure US support for the blatant Israeli act of war. True to its deceptive propaganda function, the Daily Alert published a highly misleading excerpt from an article in the Financial Times (September 21, 2007 p.4), which combines the Israeli propaganda line of a ‘potential’ Syria-North Korea nuclear tie without including several paragraphs debunking the Israeli-Zionist disinformation campaign. The Financial Times article quotes Joseph Circcione, Director of Nuclear Policy at the Center for American Progress: “It is highly unlikely that the Israeli attack had anything to do with significant Syrian-North Korean nuclear cooperation. The basic, well-documented fact is that the 40-year-old Syrian nuclear research program is too basic to support any weapons capability. Universities have larger nuclear facilities than Syria,” (Financial Times, September 21, 2007, p.4). A former senior Asian adviser to President Bush and expert on North Korea, now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, also debunked the Israeli-Zionist nuclear weapon ploy: “I would be very, very surprised if the North Koreans were dumb enough to transfer fissile material to Syria or were trying to do work outside of North Korea in a place like Syria”, (ibid). Equally damaging to the Israeli-Zionist war propaganda, the Bush Administration never raised North Korea’s supposed involvement with Syria during the entire series of meetings during 2007, despite the fact that it was greatly hostile to Syria and looking for any excuse to attack it. In contrast to previous Israeli provocations in which the Bush Administration rushed to vouch for Israel’s pretexts, Bush declined to comment on the Israeli attacks against Syria, likely advised by his intelligence chiefs that it was an Israeli act of provocation hoping to draw in the United States.

The Israeli act of war against Syria and its defense and promotion by the US Zionist Power Configuration is the latest step in bringing the US into a joint war against Iran and Syria. A survey of the Daily Alert (the house organ of the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations) from January to September 2007 (180 issues) reveals that there is an average of three articles in each issue calling on the US to engage in acts of war, impose strict economic sanctions and a naval blockade and prepare for a widespread confrontation with Iran. There is not a single voice or article that questions Israel’s pro-war posture. Every issue of the Daily Alert parrots the Israeli line, even when it involves supporting the brutal cutting of electricity, gas and drinking water to over a million trapped civilians in Gaza – a war crime under international law. In the words of the Daily Alert, Israeli murders of unarmed teenage Palestinian boys and girls are labeled ‘militants’ or ‘gunmen’. And the Daily Alert describes Israeli ‘peace negotiations’ as being carried out in ‘good faith’ – despite continued land grabs and assassinations of scores of Palestinians, including young kids. “In the time between George W. Bush, US President announcing the (Annapolis) peace meeting on July 16, 2007 and October 15, 2007, the Israeli military had killed 104 Palestinians including 12 children.” (Financial Times, October 18, 2007 p.4)

After the November 2006 Democratic Party Congressional victory thanks to the increasingly angry anti-Iraq war voters, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Levi attended the AIPAC meeting in Washington to urge the thousands of Zionist activists and a large contingent of US Democratic and Republican congressmen to continue to support the Bush Administration’s occupation of Iraq and incited them toward another war against Iran. In a highly charged screed, she ejaculated on the non-existent “existential threat” of Iranian nuclear capability. The entire Jewish Lobby picked up the line and went into action.

The scope, depth and centralized structure of the Zionist Power Configuration far exceed anything, which can be properly conceived of as a ‘lobby’. In that sense Mearsheimer and Walt in the study of the Israel Lobby underestimate the power and political influence of the pro-Israeli forces. Secondly the measure of the ZPC power must take account of several factors. These include its direct and indirect power. ZPC power is exercised directly on political, academic and cultural decision makers to make sure their policies back pro-Israel, pro-Zionist interests. An even more direct expression of power is when Zionists occupy top decision-making positions and make policies on behalf of Israeli military and economic interests. Elliot Abrams, President Bush’s key Middle East advisor on the National Security Council is one of many examples as is the Director of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, who allocates over three-quarters of available funds for the ‘security’ of private Jewish organizations.

Equally formidable is the ZPC exercise of indirect power through several mechanisms.

One is by parlaying influence over a small group of Congressmen into a large majority. For example, AIPAC wrote up the bill, presented by Senator Lieberman and co-signed by Senator Kyl, labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as ‘terrorists’, which paves the way for Bush to launch an attack. It was passed by 80% of Congress.

Cumulative power is the convergence of different sectors of the ZPC on a single issue. For example, pro-Israel writers and Jewish leaders from all major organizations and spheres of its media from Left to far Right, joined to denounce Mearsheimer and Walt’s essay and subsequent book, most resorting to either ad hominem attacks (‘anti-Semites’) or illogical and convoluted arguments ignoring the empirical data.

Propaganda of the deed is a favorite power tool of the ZPC. This involves publicizing the successful punishment of critics of Israel and the ZPC in order to intimidate current or future policymakers. An example is how Ziono-fascist Professor Alan Dershowitz of the Harvard Law School successfully campaigned, with backing from the ZPC, ousted Professor Norman Finkelstein from his university post, thus serving as ‘exemplary punishment’ to any future academic critics of Israel. Dershowitz campaign went so far as to slander Professor Finkelstein’s deceased mother, a survivor of the Nazi death camps, as a Jewish ‘kapo’ or Nazi collaborator.

The ZPC has multiple resources that are mutually re-enforcing in both the private, and public spheres. Large-scale, long-term party and electoral financing buy Congressional influence. This in turn increases the power of the large minority of Zionist Congressmen in gaining control over party nominations and committee assignments in Congress. This in turn feeds back into greater influence for the ZPC in shaping US-Middle East foreign policy and facilitating access of pro-Israeli writers to the Op-Ed pages of the major dailies, weeklies and other branches of the corporate media.

Zionist power is also the result of a long-standing, pervasive and totally one-sided propaganda campaign that demonizes Israel’s Arab, especially Palestinian critics, and paints Israel (the world’s fourth largest and Middle East’s only nuclear power) as a democratic fortress, surrounded by hostile authoritarian governments. Through its access and partial control over most of the major media, the Zionist Power Configuration provides heavily biased reports on events such as the Israeli terror bombings of populations centers in Lebanon, Gaza and elsewhere. Reputational power projected by the ZPC in the US counteracts reality in the Middle East to the extent that Palestinian victims of all ages and genders, suffering 40 years of Israeli military rule, land expropriation and constant violent assaults are made into aggressors and the Israeli executioners are portrayed as virtuous, peaceful victims.

Israel Lobby or ‘Zionist Power Configuration’?

Mearsheimer and Walt describe the pro-Israel power configuration as a ‘lobby, just like any other US lobby’, a ‘loose collection of individuals and groups’ outside of government, acting on behalf of Israel. Nothing could be further from the truth. The power of Israel in the United States is manifested through a multiplicity of highly organized, well-financed and centrally directed structures throughout the United States. The ZPC include several score political action committees with innocuous names, at least a dozen propaganda mills (‘think tanks’) employing scores of former highly connected top policymakers mostly in Washington and the East Coast, and the 52 major American Jewish Organizations grouped under the umbrella listing ‘Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations’ (CPMAJO). AIPAC and other national organizations (ADL, AJC etc ) are important influences at the national Executive-Congressional lobbying levels. But equally or even more important in censoring and purging critics, controlling local media and shaping opinion throughout cities, towns and villages are the local Jewish community federations and organizations which browbeat local cultural programmers, editors, bookstores, universities, churches and civic groups to deny public platforms to speakers, writers, artists, religious spokespeople and other public figures critical of Israel and its Zionist disciples.

The power base of the ZPC is found in the local activist doctors, dentists, lawyers, real estate brokers and landlords who preside over the local confederations and their several hundred thousand affiliates. It is they who harass, badger, browbeat, raise money and organize propaganda junkets for elected officials and ensure their support for Israeli wars and increases in the US multi-billion dollar aid packages to Israel. The local Zionist power structure organizes successful campaigns forcing state pension funds to purchase billions of dollars in underperforming Israel state bonds and to disinvest in companies engaged in economic transactions with Israel’s self-described ‘state terrorists adversaries’. It is the Jewish based pro-Israel student organizations which spy on US professors, who may or may not be critical of Israel and smear them in local and national newsletters and pressure administrations to fire them. Even where less than 1% of the local population is Jewish, Zionist zealots are able to pressure small private Christian colleges to ban a Nobel Peace Prize winning theologian, like Bishop Desmond Tutu, from speaking on their campus. The Zionist octopus has extended its tentacles far beyond the traditional centers of big city power and national politics, reaching into remote towns and cultural spheres. Not even the American small town obituary pages are exempt: When a Connecticut newspaper published a memorial of a prominent Palestinian grandmother and community leader from Hebron (May 2003) the 61 year old Shadeen abu Hijleh, who was shot in her home by Israelis soldiers, members of the local Jewish confederation expressed outrage at the exposure of Israeli military crimes – thus censoring a moving obituary page tribute written by her American friends and relatives.

Centralized structures – coordinated policy, targets, quotas, fund raising, large-scale special campaigns, black lists (‘anti-Semites’ and ‘self-hating Jews’), and networks all are integral parts of the ZPC. Mearsheimer and Walt have failed to analyze the organizational relations between the head office, regional staff and local organizations of the major pro-Israel Jewish organizations and how quickly they can be mobilized to stigmatize, censor or support a given speaker, activity or fund raiser in favor of Israeli interests.

Throughout the country the newsletters of local Jewish Community Relations Councils have parroted the line or reprinted libelous canards of their national offices denouncing Mearsheimer and Walt’s book The Israel Lobby – and from their rather ill-informed caricatures of M and W’s discussion it is clear they have barely even read the book’s cover.

One thing is clear from the largely emotional ejaculations from the predominantly Jewish intellectuals’ attacks against the book, the intellectual level of contemporary Jewish intellectuals has seriously deteriorated to the point that envy, communal spite and partisan vitriol has gotten the better of a reasoned review of data and logic. The literary efforts by Abraham Foxman of the ADL to answer M and H are reminiscent of the Stalinist diatribes featured during the Moscow show trials of the 1930’s (our Jewish version of Andrei Vishinsky). What accounts for the influence of these intellectual mediocrities is neither the evil vapors emanating from their venomous writing, nor their appeal to reason – though some pretense to reasoned debate is made by Zionist progressives – if such exist – but the fact that their repetitious message circulate throughout their mass media outlets uncontested.

The ZPC, having organized the war through falsified data, via the top two officials in the Pentagon (Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith), the Vice Presidents office (Wurmser and Irving Scooter Libby) and the National Security Council (Elliot Abrams) organized the President’s office (Ari Fleischer) and written Bush’s pre-emptive war speech (David Frum) are now fearful they will face the anger of the American people who have suffered the loss of thousands of soldiers – to an extent not experienced by the authors and implementers of this war for Israel. To avoid identification with this disastrous war, Zionist Power Configuration War planners and propagandists have resorted to lies (denial of the crucial role of Israel in bringing the US to war) and the somewhat more clever operators like Alan Greenspan have joined the mindless American left to drag out the old canard of ‘War for Oil’.

War For Oil or War For Israel: The Public Record

Zionist Power Configuration support for the Iraq War was an open, relentless, propaganda campaign by well-known writers, publicists, and community leaders as well as by the 52 leading Jewish organizations. There was ‘no conspiracy’ or ‘cabal’ – the Zionist campaign was brazenly public, aggressive and reiterative.

A systematic review of the major propaganda organ of the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organization’s newsletter, Daily Alert, from 2002 to September 2007 – 1,760 issues – provides us with a scientific sample of ZPC opinion. On average, each issue contained 5 articles in favor of the war or moves toward war with Iraq and/or Iran. The Daily Alert featured op-ed articles by the major liberal, conservative and Zion-fascist writers and academics that regularly appeared in the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, the New York Sun, and the New York and Los Angeles Times, the Daily Telegraph and Times of London, YNet and others. In other words, in the crucial pre-war to post-invasion period, the leading pro-Israel Jewish organizations produced approximately 8,800 pieces of pro-Iraq war propaganda and circulated it to all its member organizations, every Congressman, every leading member of the executive branch with follow-ups by local activists and an army of Washington lobbyists (150 from AIPAC alone) plus several hundred full-time activists from local and regional offices.

In a comparable survey of the leading Anglo-American business and financial newspaper, the Financial Times between 2002 and September 2007, regarding Big Oil’s policy toward war with Iraq and now Iran is just as revealing. I reviewed the opinion, editorial and letter pages of 1,872 issues of the Financial Times and there is not a single article or letter by any spokesperson or representative of a major (or minor) oil company calling for the invasion and occupation of Iraq or the bombing of Iran. There was no oil lobby or grass roots organization demanding Congress or the Bush Administration to go to war in defense of US oil interests. But the ZPC was active, promoting the lie that disarmed and embargoed Iraq represented an ‘existential threat’ to the nuclear armed Israel.

A similar comparison of Zionist and Big Oil regarding propaganda for a US military confrontation with Iran reinforces the argument of the centrality of the major Jewish organizations in promoting United States involvement in Middle East wars for Israel. Between 2004 and September 2007 (three years and nine months) the Zionist propaganda sheet, the Daily Alert, published 960 issues in which an average of 6 articles argued for an immediate or near future US or Israeli preemptive military attack on Iran, tougher economic sanctions than the Security Council was willing to support, organized disinvestment and boycotts of Iran. A survey of the Financial Times during the same period, 1,053 issues, (the FT prints six times a week, the Daily Alert five times), fails to produce a single letter or op-ed article by any representative or spokesperson of Big Oil supporting war against Iran. On the contrary, as was the case with Iraq, major oil leaders expressed anxiety and fear that an Israeli instigated war would destabilize the entire area and lead to the destruction of vital oil installations, undermine transport routes and shipping lanes and cancel lucrative service contracts. Contrary to the latest Zionist propaganda, Big Oil wants the US to lift its sanctions against investment in Iran, since it has lost lucrative deals to competitors.

In complete contradiction to the ‘leftist’ Trotskyist-Zionist finger pointing at Big Oil as the main push for war, big Texas oil was working profitably with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, signing hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal contracts with the now executed ruler. Oscar Wyatt, a Texas oil billionaire, recently convicted for paying bribes to Saddam Hussein, was one of many big oil dealers involved in the lucrative pre-war oil trade with Iraq (Financial Times, Oct. 2, 2007, p.2).

Zionist Warmongering: Fear and Venom

As the pressure from Israel for a US-backed military attack on Iran mounts, and as top US military officials and the general public grow increasingly hostile to Zionist arm-twisting and gross manipulation of policy makers, the ZPC turns aggressively authoritarian in its effort to silence opposition which exposes its role as a disloyal actor for a foreign power. In the past, agents for a foreign power, once detected, usually received severe sanction or worse. Today, numerous Zionist insiders know they are playing an increasingly risky game as the perceived costs of a new war with Iran rise and their Israeli ‘handlers’ press them to promote an attack Iran at the top of their agenda.

Ultimately, the Zionist Power Configuration, despite their wealth and current dominance over US Middle East policy, know that they represent less than 1% of the population; they are an elite without a mass base. They have power only as long as the other 99% of the population is inactive, manipulated or intimidated to serve Israel’s interests. But as the growing flow of books, articles and speeches begin to call attention to the Israeli-directed ZPC and their destructive war-mongering activities, their self-promoted images of their members as brilliant professionals, successful leaders in the world of business and finance and compassionate politicians serving the best interests of the USA, begins to erode. The ugly side of their servile loyalty to Israel, an arrogant, racist colonial power provoking wars via the US to establish itself as an unchallenged regional power has entered into the American public debate.

The ZPC is at or near the peak of its political power – in Congress, the Executive, the Office of Homeland Security and prospective Attorney General, in ‘culture’ and the mass media propaganda. But paradoxically, as the ZPC peaks, it also exposes more of itself – much more than it wants to be seen by the American public.

Even the brash and impudent Zionist polemicists who hole up in the prestigious universities and ‘think tank-propaganda mills’ are beginning to feel public anxiety, even perhaps private worries. As they do so, they back track, trying to cover their fingerprints on all the war plans and propaganda leading to the now-massively unpopular invasion of Iraq. They resort to outright lies in the form of denials or complicity or ‘warmongering’. Outrageous denials abound! For the more aggressive die-hard Zion-Cons, exposure of the disloyal role of the ZPC and their complicity evokes savage rejoinders, academic screeds in the gutter language of ad hominem abuse which reflects poorly on their vaunted academic positions. The ZPC, its scribes, operatives and power brokers are vulnerable – they have committed great crimes against the interests of the American people. Their actions have led to the death and maiming of tens of thousands of US soldiers, 99.9% of whom have no ‘loyalties’ to the interest of greater Israel or its US agents who have their own children pursuing lucrative civilian careers. Recent estimates found less than 0.2% of US soldiers serving on the ground in Iraq are American Jews, some of whom were Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union. This despite the strong Zionist pressure to invade and destroy Iraq and Iran. The manipulations of the ZPC in pushing the Bush Administration into invading and occupying Iraq has led the US military into an unprecedented state of disgrace and demoralization, with thousands of officers tendering their early retirement, thousands of troops going AWOL and facing court-martial, and an increasing number of retired senior officers expressing outrage. It is no surprise that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates secured the support of top military officers in the Middle East in opposing an immediate invasion of Iran.

Zionist vituperation against their critics expresses fears of exposure and unmasking of their double discourse, their false amalgamation of Israeli colonial policies with the democratic values of the American people. Nothing else can explain the shrill verbal personal assaults – aimed at killing the messenger rather than facing unpleasant realities and working to rectify a disastrous situation. While the state of Israel has placed its American promoters in an uncomfortable position as the occupation of Iraq crumbles and Americans resist shrill calls for attacking Iran, nevertheless Israel has turned out to be the real winner, in the short term, having achieved the destruction of the unified, secular republic of Iraq.

From a Scratch to Gangrene: The Transition from Zionism to Zion-Fascism

The ‘mainstream’ Zionist conservatives early on demonstrated their authoritarian politics through their whole-hearted and un-problematical support for Israel’s brutal campaigns driving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes and lands. Subsequently, the Zion-Cons fully and un-questioningly endorsed the killing and jailing of thousands of Palestinian civilians protesting the Israeli military occupation and conversion of the occupied West Bank and Gaza into ‘open air’ concentration camps, with over 500 military outposts and roads blocks. More recently the entire leadership of the major Jewish organizations, comprising both Zion-Cons and Zion-Libs, defended Israel’s building of a massive 30 meter wall, effectively corralling the entire Palestinian population in ghettos resembling the walls constructed around the huge Jewish population in Warsaw by the Nazis. The wall and the military outposts strangle trade, movement of food and people from the occupied territories to markets, schools and hospitals and prevent farmers from even tilling their lands.

On October 10, 2007 the Jerusalem Post quoted Aron Soffer, head of research and lecturer at the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) National Defense College. The 71-year old father of 4 and grandfather of 8 had said on May 21, 2004: “When 2.5 million people live in a closed off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today, with the aid of an insane fundamentalist Islam. The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day . . . every day.”

This is the literal message of murder taught to Israeli officers at their most advanced military school by eminent Zion-Fascist lecturers. This helps us understand the naked brutality and homicidal behavior of Israeli soldiers in the occupied territories.

A recent Israeli study by two prominent psychologists illustrates the deep strain of sadism and racism inculcated by Israel’s military academies and backed by Israel’s top politicians, including the Prime Minister’s Office. According to Haaretz on September 21, 2007, two Israeli psychologists interviewed 21 Israeli soldiers, who expressed “their innermost emotions about the horrendous crimes, in which they took part: murder, breaking the bones of Palestinian children, acts of humiliation, destruction of property, robbery and theft.” One of the Israeli psychologists was “shocked to find that the soldiers enjoyed the ‘intoxication of power’ and had pleasure from using violence.” She said, “Most of my interviewees enjoyed their own instigated violence during the occupation.” (Haaretz, September 21, 2007) Absolute colonial domination brings out the psychopathic tendencies in an occupation army. Soldier C testified, “If I didn’t enter Rafah (Palestinian City in Gaza) to put down some rebellion – at least once a week I’d go beserk.” Like previous colonial occupiers, the Israeli soldiers adopt a totalitarian ‘super-race complex’. Soldier D testified, “What is great is that you don’t follow any law or rule. You feel that YOU ARE THE LAW. Once you go into the Occupied Territory YOU ARE GOD!.” The soldiers’ internalization of the powerful Zion-fascist ideology provides a self-justification in the eyes of the interviewees for castrating a man, bashing in the face of a woman protester, shooting an innocuous pedestrian, breaking the arm of a four-year old child and other ‘gratuitous’ acts of random violence.

The Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations never ever mention, let along criticize, the daily psychopathic behavior of the IDF. Major Jewish billionaire philanthropists contribute hundreds of millions in support of the IDF’s violent occupation and repression of Palestinian civilians, described with cruel pleasure by the soldier-subjects of the Israeli study. In fact, the biggest Zionist contributor to the Democratic Party, Haim Saban ($12.3 million dollars in 2002), has a ‘soft spot for Israeli combat soldiers.’ According to Haaretz (September 12, 2006), Saban declared, “I can’t handle combat soldiers, whenever I have any interaction with them . . . I cry.” There is a powerful emotional bond that links Israeli Zion-fascism to its US counterparts. Saban arrogantly points to the primacy of his loyalty to Israel, “I strut around like a peacock in America and say I am an Israeli-American. What you hear… an Israeli-American.” (Haaretz, October 14, 2007). The formerly respectable Brooking’s Institute now houses the ‘Saban Center’, financed by Haim Saban, turning Brookings into just another of a dozen propaganda mills churning out apologetics for the totalitarian practices of the IDF – their leading research directors and their Prime Minister. The deadly ‘sentimentality’ of the Israeli-American billionaires toward the psychopaths in the IDF does not extend to the young Americans serving Israel’s interests as US soldiers in Iraq and who are suffering the burdens of a war to extend Israel’s regional power. Saban, like the great majority of the top leaders of the most influential Zionist organization are pushing for another war – this time with Iran. According to Saban, “I would try other things first, but if they don’t work, then attack…In Iran you go in and wipe out their infrastructure completely. Plunge them into darkness. Cut off their water.” (Haaretz, October 14, 2007). These are not the homicidal ranting of a fanatical Jewish settler beating a pre-adolescent Palestinian shepherd. Saban is a major leader in AIPAC, family friend and political broker of the Clintons and the entire current Israeli leadership. His $2.8 billion dollars buys the fawning attention of all major US presidential “candidates courting Jewish support” (MSNBC, October 14, 2007).

The Zionist Power Configuration has buried 3 top level political initiatives designed to reach a settlement of the Israeli colonial occupation of Palestine. A statement to President Bush and Secretary of State Rice sent by former top political officials of both political parties, including Brzezinski, Lee Hamilton, Brent Scowcroft and others calling for Israel to abide by UN Security Council Resolution 242 and 338 and other initiatives, was totally dismissed by the Democratic Congress and the Republican White House, after the ZPC intervened and labeled Brzezinski as ‘hostile to Israel’ – following the Israeli state’s complete dismissal of the statement. Tony Blair’s efforts as head of the ‘Quartet Peace-Making Mission’ has been a total failure in resolving even the humanitarian plight of the Palestinians, in the face of Israeli intransigence and rejection of any but the most banal conversations with the now subdued (formerly so frenetic) ex-British Prime Minister (Guardian, October 13, 2007). Secretary Rice’s efforts to organize a Middle East peace conference for late November in Annapolis, Maryland were diluted to the point of pointlessness by Israeli pronouncements. Israel rejects any substantive agreements on borders, timetables, Jerusalem, settlements, territory etc. They insist the conference focus on meaningless general agreements that commit them to nothing. In action designed to further humiliate US Secretary of State Rice, the Israeli government illegally seized several hundred acres of Palestinian lands – a clear example of extending the settlements (Aljazeera, October 14, 2007). While trying to appear stylish in a dunce cap, Secretary Rice responded that the new Israeli confiscation of Palestinian land might ‘erode confidence in the parties’ commitment to a two state solution’ (BBC, October 14, 2007).

Recognizing that the ZPC has completely tied up her negotiation position, that she cannot demand anything substantive from Israel, Secretary Rice has signaled the futility of the Annapolis meeting by calling for ‘lower expectations’, that is no agreements of substance. There is good reason to believe that Israel and its Fifth Column have effectively scuttled Bush’s own Annapolis initiative. Even US clients like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and even the Palestinian puppet Abbas have expressed doubts since there are no substantive agreements on state boundaries, anathema to Israel and the ZPC. Whether the conference is ‘postponed’ or actually takes place, the event promises to be another inconsequential gesture, another US Middle East defeat, another victory for Israel’s colonial status quo and another reason for increased Arab resistance in the Middle East.

What is more ominous, Israel and the ZPC will find that their successful sabotage of the White House Annapolis Peace Conference is likely to encourage them to press ahead with further violent seizures in the Occupied Territories, new more deadly incursions in Lebanon and Syria and heightened pressure for war with Iran. Zion-fascism feeds into the sense of irresistible power over US Middle East policy against any major US institutional force, which fails to follow the Israeli line.

Along with the right-wing radicalization of Zion-Con ideology with regard to Israel’s push toward totalitarian solutions, came overt manifestations of racist anti-Islamic, anti-Arab and anti-Persian practices and speeches from leading Zion-Con spokespeople and especially academic propagandists in the United States.

War propaganda and military solutions dominate Zion-Con rhetoric: first against Palestine, then Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Somalia and Sudan. Accompanying the radicalization of Zion-con rhetoric is a growing number of repressive acts within US society.

The ZPC and Holocaust Denial: At the Service of Israel

Leading Zionist Democrats following Israeli directives played a major role in undermining a Congressional resolution condemning as genocide the Turkish murder of 1.5 million Armenians. For many years the state of Israel and its academic specialists both in Israel as well as in the US have denied Turkish-led Genocide against the Armenians in their ancient homeland between 1915-1917 despite the voluminous documentary record complied by scholars throughout the world. One reason is that the Jewish Holocaust industry insists on the exclusive franchise on 20th century genocide, in order to push its fundraising and propaganda efforts. An even more important contemporary reason for Israeli and US Zionist holocaust denial is the close military collaboration between Israel and Turkey and more recently the heavy presence of Israeli military advisers and secret police (Mossad) operations in Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq, dubbed Kurdistan.

Former member of the Israeli armed services, ‘US’ Congressman Rahm Emanuel, Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, opposed the resolution from the start and convinced a group of senior House Democrats to demand the Democratic Congressional leadership drop plans for a vote on the measure. Deeply implicated with the interests of Israel, Emanuel has both feet in the terrain of an Israeli-defined Middle East reality. Congressman Emanuel cynically rationalized his service for the state of Israel in a convoluted statement: “This vote (on the Armenian genocide) came face to face with the reality on the ground in that region of the world.” (NY Times, October 16, 2007) The Israeli fifth column in the US Congress has extended the scope of its control beyond narrow focus on the contemporary Middle East and Israel’s quest for regional dominance to encompass historical issues involving non-Arab, non-Muslim people who indirectly affect Israeli strategic interests. Israeli strategists see the Congressional resolution on the Armenian genocide as provoking Turkish hostility to the US, increasing the likelihood of an invasion against the US and Israeli-backed ‘Kurdistan’ in Northern Iraq. Israeli officials have been training and arming Kurdish commandos to engage in terrorist activities in Iran and elsewhere on the Turkish, Iranian and Syrian border. A Turkish land invasion and aerial attack would, at a minimum, destroy or disarticulate these terrorist bases and more likely lead to a generalized Kurdish mobilization in defense of the Kurdish irregulars. The Kurds are loyal clients and their Peshmerga militias play an integral role in ethnic cleansing of non-Kurds in Northern Iraq and savage repression in Central Iraq as US-led mercenary forces against the Iraq Arab resistance. A Turkish invasion is likely to result in the transfer of the Kurdish military toward their Turkish frontier, undermining US control in Iraq and weakening their assaults on Iran. The Israelis will have to choose between its alliance with Turkey, its only consequential ally in the Middle East, by withdrawing its operative and arms sales from ‘Kurdish’ Northern Iraq or its support for Kurdish separatists.

The entire ZPC was on maximum alert to block or defeat the Armenian resolution in the US Congress in order to show the Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan that Israel is using its power over the US Congress on Turkey’s behalf. In this conflict between, on the one hand, millions of Americans who abhor genocide – wherever it occurs and whoever is victimized – and the influential Armenian lobby, and, on the other hand, a few dozen highly placed ‘Israel First’ Congress members and their billionaire Zionist political contributors, the latter won out. Even on an issue as palpable as genocide, the ZPC has no fear or shame in opposing a symbolic resolution recognizing a world-historic crime.

The Zionist Congressional victory on the Armenian resolution illustrates in the most graphic manner the way Israeli interests degrades our institutions and values. The fact that many Congress-members, including the majority of Democrats, were initially convinced of the justice of passing the resolution, and later under the pressure of the Zionist Congressional leadership, withdrew their support, is indicative of just how far Congress has degenerated into a Zionist colonized institution. Not only does Congress ignore its electorate, the values of the people who elected them, but also they surrender their own values and conscience, for what Seymour Hersh aptly refers to as ‘New York Jewish money.’

The Israeli effort to head off a Turkish attack on their Kurdish clients is closely related to their efforts to undermine Iranian defenses and gain intelligence via terrorist ‘commando operations’ by Kurdish irregulars.

The centerpiece of activity for all the major national, state and local pro-Israeli Jewish organizations is to isolate and destroy Iran, by economic sanctions and a massive military attack by the US. There is absolutely no consideration of the millions of Iranians who would be killed, injured or made homeless by a US or Israeli effort to ‘wipe Iran off the map.’

The major recipient of ‘New York (and Los Angeles, Miami and Chicago) Jewish money’ is Hillary Clinton, the most hawkish Democratic war monger in the 2008 president race – in fact the most hawkish Democratic candidate since the Vietnam era. Clinton, in a recent article in Foreign Affairs, has all but written the date and weapons with which the US will strike Iran. She argues that ‘Iran poses a long-term strategic challenge to America and its allies and that it must not be permitted to build or acquire nuclear weapons…” If Iran does not comply, all options must remain on the table. (Guardian, October 15, 2007).

Israel keeps a box score on how servile US presidential candidates are to Israeli state interests and obedient to the dictates of the Israel lobby. Clinton, by far, is the Zionist choice among Democratic presidential candidates. They have forgiven her for kissing Suha Arafat over a decade ago, because she has kissed both cheeks of each and all male and female Zionist lobbyists and Israeli officials in Washington and applauded the repression of Palestinians. Clinton aroused the passion and pleasure of the pro-Israel Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organization by being the only Democratic presidential candidate to support the Senate resolution calling on the US government to declare the Iranian government’s ‘Revolutionary Guards’, an elite division of Teheran’s military, to be a ‘terrorist entity’, thus providing the Bush administration with a justification for a massive pre-emptive attack against Iran and its infrastructure.

Both in terms of financing war resolutions and sanctions campaigns against Iran, in terms of lobby authored legislation and Congressional speeches, of hours campaigning for an attack on Iran, of op-ed columns published and media pundits comments, the Zionist Power Configuration exceeds by a multiple of ten any other group in pushing for a war with Iran. Not only does the Zionist monopolize the ‘attack Iran’ propaganda, but they are leading all other authoritarian groups in silencing US critics of this aggressive military option.

Let us be perfectly clear that the ZPC, the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations, the Rahm Emanuels (Israeli-Americans) controlling the Democratic caucus agenda…do not always and everywhere speak for the majority of American Jews, especially on the denial of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians. Pugnacious ADL President Abraham Foxman found out in Watham, Massachusetts that both the local Armenian-American community and their Jewish-American compatriots and neighbors do not tolerate the denial of genocide – even by the ADL. Substantial sectors of American Jews object to Clinton’s war mongering and find her servile truckling to Israeli officials offensive, even obscene. Zionist polls reveal the majority of educated young American Jews are less and less interested in Israel and its local Fifth Column – much to the chagrin of the self-styled ‘leaders’ of the community. Saying that a Jewish minority speaks in the name of an unwilling majority, however, does not lessen its power and stranglehold over US political institutions and public opinion with regard to policy or appropriations touching on the Middle East or Israeli-defined interests.

“Jew-haters’ became the agitation slogan animating the Zion-con purge of public forums and a call for mass direct action by hundreds of local Jewish notables and ‘community’ councils. Even Presbyterian elders were browbeaten by Jewish Zionists because of their tepid stand divesting from US companies involved in oppressing Palestinians.

There is no transcendent event, which defines the moment in which Zion-conservation became Zion-Fascism. The transition was an evolutionary process, during which racism, militarism and authoritarianism developed a mass community base and took hold over time and became the definitive modus operandi of the ZPC.

Like earlier fascist movements, Zion-fascism subscribes to racialist doctrines of knowledge: According to Zionist epistemology only Jews can (if they dare) criticize Jews as knowledge of Jewry is monopolized by a closed communally defined people. This Zion-fascist theory of knowledge is buttressed by the frequent utterances of progressive or leftist Zionists who frequently dismiss or warn non-Jewish writers that they enter the ‘Jewish’ debate at their peril.

Zion-fascism is not merely an ideological expression of a marginal group of unbalanced extremists – its ideology and practice, in full or part, has been taken over by mainstream Jewish organizations.

Zionist Authoritarianism on the March

Grassroots Zionist-led authoritarianism, practicing coercion, repression and financial blackmail in defense of Israel and the ZPC is occurring in every region of the country, in every sphere of social, cultural and academic life at an accelerating pace. Below we cite a small sample of cases which have gotten national and even international attention and which illustrate a far more extensive pattern. We lack a comprehensive data bank to cover the hundreds of incidents of Zionist intimidation and thought control which occur on a weekly basis and go unreported by their victims for fear of retaliation or because they would not receive sympathetic public attention given the media bias. In informal interviews, writers and journalists have reported to me ‘visits’ by local Jewish ‘notables’ and members of the Jewish Community Councils to local newspaper editors to demand the firing of columnists who dared to criticize, for example, Israel’s horrific invasion of Lebanon. After one such ‘visit’ and ‘talk’, a local columnist never ventured to criticize or even write about the Middle East. This is not a matter confined to the United States. In 2004, after I wrote an article for the Mexico City daily La Jornada critical of Israel’s savage repression of Palestinians in Jena and the US Zionist apology for mass killings, the Israeli Ambassador in Mexico visited the editors to demand they discontinue publishing my articles. The editor refused to accede at that time, but immediately afterwards they published several vicious personal attacks by their regular columnists (one a Trotskyist and the other a Jewish dentist) labeling my critiques as ‘Nazi’ propaganda in line with the ‘Protocols of Zion’. This was in a reputed independent progressive daily newspaper.

‘Private visits’, abusive phone calls by Zionist zealots, including death threats are not uncommon practices among ‘respectable’ Zion-fascists. One incident involved a local doctor who received a ‘visit’ to her office by a fanatical Zionist ‘colleague’ complaining of her letter to the local newspaper criticizing the role of the Zionists in financing the electoral defeat of Georgia Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney because of her criticism of Israeli policy. She was ‘warned’ that it was anti-Semitic to criticize the activities of organized Jewry in destroying politicians, especially black politicians, for their support of Palestinian civil rights. African Americans, she was told, were increasingly ungrateful to American Jews, who had lead and financed the civil rights struggle, and therefore had to be taught a history lesson. A local ‘group’ of notables had chosen her Harvard-educated Zionist colleague to deliver this message. When he declared himself ‘a Jew and a Zionist’, she countered that she was ‘an anti-fascist and an anti-Zionist’ and pointed to the door but not before asking him how an educated man of high professional standing could stomach such a degrading task of trying to censor a colleague. These types of ‘visits’ from ‘respectable’ Zionists intimidate others with less standing and intestinal fortitude.

When presented with the manuscript of my book, The Power of Israel in the United States, many of my previous editors informed me that it would make a great book… but… they didn’t want to face the backlash, threats and vituperation that they expected from the ZPC, Jewish academics, writers on contract and publishers. Even the publisher and editor who finally agreed to publish my MS expressed real fear of Zionist hostility – and eventually a dozen or so Jewish academics cancelled book orders for their classes.

A sample of the most publicized cases of Zionist efforts to silence and purge American society of critics of Israel and the Zionist Power Configuration includes the case of over one thousand Zionist alumni of Barnard College campaigning to deny tenure to Professor Nadia Abu el-Haj for publishing Facts on the Ground, her ground-breaking critique on Israeli archeologists efforts to erase centuries of continued Palestinian presence in the Holy Lands (Chronicle of Higher Education, August 5, 2007).

More recently there was the public campaign to rescind Colombia University’s invitation to Iranian Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmadinejad resulting in an unprecedented insulting introductory address by the President of Colombia University.

Banning the successful British play, ‘My Name is Rachel Corrie’ based on the writings of the murdered American activist from scheduled performances in New York, Miami and Toronto caused consternation among theater goers and actors on both sides of the Atlantic. The Israeli soldier who murdered the young woman was exonerated in Israel while Rachel’s words were banned from the cultural capital of her own country.

Even more recently, the Chicago Council of Global Affairs bowed to pressure from the Zionist lobby and cancelled a lecture by the respected professors of political science, John Mearsheimer and Stephan Walt because of their critical study The Israel Lobby.

The list goes on to include the cancellation of a concert by Marcel Khalife in San Diego, California and the cancellation of an invitation to Nobel Peace Prize winner, South African Bishop Desmond Tutu because of his criticism of Israeli apartheid policies in the occupied territories.

There was a successful campaign to prevent author Susan Abulhawa from presenting her gripping novel, The Scar of David, at a Barnes and Noble Bookstore in Bayside, New York. This was followed by a cyberspace attack on the author to undermine a scheduled speaking tour. This pro-Israel attack was led by 14 rabbis and the President of the Queens Jewish Community Council.

The University of Michigan Press was pressured to withdraw distribution of Joel Kovel’s Overcoming Zionism, violating a contract with his publisher, Pluto Press. The University Press then threatened to stop distribution of all books published by Pluto Press.

The recent Congressional Hearings of a blue ribbon committee, which finally got around to investigating the Israeli military attack on the USS Liberty (after 40 years of successfully preventing an official investigation through the pressure of the Israel lobby) found Israel guilty of the deliberate killing and maiming of over 100 US service personnel. Its explosive findings, published in the Congressional Record, never appeared in the print and broadcast media.

In violation of United Nations resolutions, Israel’s military aggression against Lebanon, Syria and Palestine, were rewarded by the US Congress with an additional $30 billion dollars in military aid over the next 10 years, making the US annual ‘tribute to Israel’ in excess of $6 Billion dollars a year (NY Times, August 16, 2007). At a time of record US deficits and cuts in domestic health programs for poor children and educational services, the vote to give Israel an additional $30 billion dollars passed with virtually no opposition or even discussion.

Australian journalist and documentary maker, John Pilger produced a searing critique of Israel entitled Palestine is Still the Issue which has been viewed all over the world. Its scheduled showing on the public educational channel in San Francisco was blocked by a campaign led by the Jewish Community Relations Council.

The bilingual Arabic-English public middle school in New York City named after the Lebanese Christian poet, Kahil Gibran, was attacked by the ZPC (NY Times, August 11, 2007) leading to the firing of its Arab American Principal. Her ‘crime’ was accurately translating the Arabic word ‘intifada’ into ‘shaking off’ instead of ranting against the Palestinian rights movement in the Occupied Territories. The Zionist-controlled United Federation of Teachers actively backed the blatant purge of one of its own members for her thought crimes.

At San Francisco State College there was a campaign led by the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco to ban a mural depicting a famous Palestinian cartoon character, a little boy defiant before Israeli occupiers. The subject in question was a child holding a key in his hand, which, according to the local Jewish leadership represented a ‘veiled reference to Palestinian right of return to Israel’ (Jewish Forum, August 10, 2007).

One of the most bitter and successful Zionist Purge campaigns was to deny tenure to highly respected scholar, Professor Norman Finkelstein of De Paul University in Chicago. The purge, led by Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, was a direct response to Finkelstein’s numerous scholarly studies critical of Israel and the exploitation of the Holocaust to further the aims of the Zionist Power Configuration.

Despite the recommendations of three academic committees at Yale University, Zionist millionaire philanthropists were able to block the appointment of renowned Middle East specialist, Professor Juan Cole. The millionaires threatened to withdraw contributions and several Zionist professors prepared a scurrilous attack on Professor Cole (June 1, 2006).

A campaign was mounted to pressure several state pension funds to divest funds from any company doing business with Iran and pushing the funds to invest in Israel bonds. This has so far succeeded in Texas, Florida, New York, and New Jersey. Several state governors were ‘persuaded’ while on Zionist-paid junkets to Israel (see Houston Chronicle, July 18, 2007). During one of these junkets, the now disgraced New Jersey Governor McGreevy met an Israeli operative with whom he formed a homosexual relation and later had him installed as ‘Homeland Security’ Chief for the State of New Jersey, until the FBI intervened. McGreevy resigned from office after denouncing the Israeli, Golan Cipal, for blackmail.

The Anti-Defamation League, pro-Israel transmission belt, forced the only Muslim Congressman, Keith Ellison, to recant and humiliate himself for daring to compare the tactics of the Bush Administration to the Nazis (Jewish Telegraph Agency, July 20, 2007). As in the case of Congresswoman McKinney, Zionist ‘punishment’ against African-American politicians is particularly vehement.

The major Zionist organizations led by the American Jewish Committee successfully mobilized the major US trade union bureaucrats to denounce the United Kingdom’s militant trade union’s boycotts of Israel (Jerusalem Post, July 22, 2007). The AFL-CIO unions are under the thumb of the ZPC and have purchased over $5 billion dollars of their members pension funds in Israel bonds which consistently under-perform market indexes, thus costing their 12 million members hundreds of millions of investment returns each year.

The dean of religion Barry Levin, a pro-Israel activist at McGill University recently fired Professor Norman Cornelt after 15 years of teaching for his support of Palestinian human rights (Montreal Gazette, June 2, 2007).

Every major newspaper published editorials and scurrilous book reviews attacking former US President Jimmy Carter’s critical study, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. This was part of a high-priority propaganda campaign coordinated by major Zionist organizations and prominently included Professor Alan Dershowitz (Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2007).

The prominent Jewish writer, Professor Tony Judt of New York University was dis-invited from a scheduled talk at the Polish Consulate because of Zionist opposition to his criticism of Israeli policy.

B’nai Brith of Vancouver, Canada attacked a Canadian web site called Peace, Earth and Justice forcing the removal of 18 articles critical of Israel.

In early 2007 the ZPC intervened in the US Civil Rights Commission and introduced a section equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism and slandered dozens of academic Middle Eastern studies programs as centers of campus ‘anti-Semitism’. The Middle East Studies Association of North America, the major academic group, wrote a reasoned refutation on June 11, 2007.

Plans to construct a mosque for the Muslim community in Roxbury, Massachusetts were attacked in a campaign by the ‘David Project’, a Zionist front group affiliated with the Jewish Community Council of Greater Boston.

On the basis of secret testimony by Israeli intelligence agents and backed by the ZPC ‘terrorism’ charges were made against 16 members of a US Islamic charity. A Texas court convicted them of ‘crimes’ against Israel, even though many of the accused were US citizens and had no access to challenge their hooded accusers, Israeli secret agents operating in the US. The lead defendant, Dr. Rafil Dhofer received a sentence of 22 years for an ‘Israeli’ crime – although he was never convicted of any crime committed in the US. The defendants and their attorneys were never allowed to question the secret foreign ‘witnesses’.

Campus Zion-fascist organizations run by their ‘little fuehrer’ David Horowitz, routinely bait blacks, Latinos and Arab Americans by praising the ‘benefits’ of the African slave trade and defend the use of torture and assassination by Israelis and their US counterparts in Iraq and Guantanamo. In addition, they smear professors not sufficiently favorable to Zionism, spy on instructors, disrupt classes, bring lawsuits for ‘anti-Zionist’ bias against teachers, other students and college administrators throughout the US.

Despite the Zionist turn to fascist tactics and embrace of authoritarian-coercive measures, the fact of the matter is they still only have partial control over civil society and political power. Some of the Zion-fascist power plays were, at least temporarily, defeated in specific circumstances. The play, My Name is Rachel Corrie played to packed houses in London, Seattle and other courageous cities even as it was banned in New York, Toronto and Miami.

Norman Finkelstein was fired, but he got powerful support throughout the academic world and was able to negotiate monetary compensation for De Paul University’s cowardly betrayal of one of its faculty. Above all, Professor Finkelstein is fighting back.

The University of Michigan was forced to distribute Kovel’s book even as they threatened to cancel their contract with his publisher, Pluto Press.

The lesson is clear: the rise of Judeo-fascism (JF) represents a clear and present danger to our democratic freedoms in the United States. They do not come with black shirts and stiff-arm salutes. The public face is a clean-shaved, necktied, pink-jowled attorney, real estate philanthropist or Ivy League professor. They work hard to send the family members of non-Zionists to fight wars in the Middle East in the interest of Greater Israel. And they tells us to keep quiet or face slander, ostracism in our communities, loss of jobs or worst… And it is the exemplary punishment of the many small voices, which keeps the number of vocal critics low…until recently. There is rising anger and hostility in America against the ZPC, against its arrogant authoritarian communal attacks on our democratic values. Sooner or later there will be a major backlash – and it ill behooves those who, through vocation or conviction, engaged in the firings, censoring and intimidation campaigns against the American majority. The American people will not remember their cries of ‘anti-Semitism’ they will recall their role in sending thousands of American soldiers to their death in the Middle East in the interests of Israel.

Let us hope that those who seek justice will not use the same authoritarian laws like the Patriot Act, nor the harsh interrogation techniques of degradation (torture) and anti-Arab/Muslim practices promoted by the Zionists in the Pentagon, Congress, Justice Department and Homeland Security. Those who oppose Zionism need to abide solidly by higher moral standards.

56 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Ken said on November 6th, 2007 at 11:35am #

    The article states: “The recent Congressional Hearings of a blue ribbon committee, which finally got around to investigating the Israeli military attack on the USS Liberty (after 40 years of successfully preventing an official investigation through the pressure of the Israel lobby) found Israel guilty of the deliberate killing and maiming of over 100 US service personnel. Its explosive findings, published in the Congressional Record, never appeared in the print and broadcast media.”

    This is nonsense. There has never been a Congressional investigation or hearing dedicated to establishing culpablity for the USS Liberty attack.

  2. jaime said on November 6th, 2007 at 2:13pm #

    You can say that again Ken.

    But this article does go a long ways towards explaining why my dentist in Newark, New Jersey re-scheduled my root canal this week.

    For sure it’s because he and the rest of the Zionist Power Elite were busy conniving more plans for world domination.

    & I just don’t see how NATO and the Pentagon could plan their invasion of Iran without him.

  3. Derek said on November 6th, 2007 at 3:39pm #

    Jaime – I don’t see anywhere in this article where Petras is stating that Jewish people as an ethnicity or religion are in any way in control of US foreign policy. Rather, he is clearly talking about powerful people who share an ideological vision, and who are very well organized, and who yield enormous power in various levels of society.

    The ethnicity or religion of these people is completely irrelevant.

    But of course, you know that.

    Now maybe you should respond to the deluge of commentary and fact presented in the article instead of playing the anti-Semitism card?

  4. jaime said on November 6th, 2007 at 4:23pm #

    Give us a break Derek!

    “…the rise of Judeo-fascism (JF)…”

    “..American Jews…”

    “…Zionist front group affiliated with the Jewish Community Council of Greater Boston….”

    Who do you think the author is referring to? Congolese Pygmies?

  5. gerald spezio said on November 6th, 2007 at 4:50pm #

    Professor Petras has delivered the most scathing and complete expose of the murdering Zionist/Israeli power configuration on the net.

  6. Abraham Weizfeld said on November 6th, 2007 at 9:27pm #

    There is a problem with the Petras method of analysis. He has himself mentioned that a majority of the American Jewish community is not of the same mind as the Zionist organizations that claim to represent the community as a whole. Not only that is the case but a majority of the Israeli Jewish public is also opposed to the continuing occupation of the PAlestinian territories. Is is possible to make the case that the Zionist-Christian establishment therefore controls the Israel government rather than the reverse. Petras has not made the case and uses empiricism as his sole methodology. In my own case my doctoral Thesis was blocked at the last moment by pressure most likely but there is much more to the Zionist power centres than the Jewish organizations that are under its sway.

  7. Leyla said on November 6th, 2007 at 10:51pm #

    I hate to sound like a broken record but… Can you stop referring to the so-called “Armenian Genocide” as though it is a proven case?? This is getting extremely annoying. I love this site except for the constant referral to this event that “supposedly” happened but the Armenians constantly refuse to debate it or allow an open investigation of the matter:

    Pocket Guide

    On unproven, alleged Armenian claims of Genocide against Turks.

    To reach the truth, find out what Armenian Premier Senin Ovanes Kacaznuni said in 1923 Dashnak Party Conference in Bucharest-Romania

    Available from moc.iralniyaykanyaknull@misiteli ISBN 975-343-438-3

    You may peruse, by author Holdwater &

    Read on internet, written by a British officer in 1916 examine Guenter Lewy’s “The Armenian Massacres in Turkey, A Disputed Genocide”

    ISBN-13:978-0-87480-849-0 available on (Jewish writer) & Salahi Sonyel’s “The Turco-Armenian Imbroglio” ISBN-0-9504886-6-6, available at Cyprus Turkish Association 0207 437 4940 moc.tcennoctbnull@ctsirbik (Cypriot Turk author)

    films to watch are:
    “The Armenian Revolt 1894-1920” documentary DVD by Third Coast Films, P.O. Box 664, Clarion, PA 16214, USA (by an American Director)
    “Sari Gelin’ documentary DVD through moc.ileseglebnilegirasnull@ofni (maybe available on eBay) (by a Turkish Director)

    Have a look at by Turkish Armenians (including free downloadable books and automatic translation of site text into several languages),


    ISBN 1=4243=1004-0 (obtainable from moc.enilnorepusnull@ayass), (Turkish author)

    “MYTH OF TERROR’ by late Erich Feigl (1986)Zeitgeschichte/Bucherdienst Austria (Austrian Author) which contains the signatures of 63 foreign Academics refuting the Armenian claims for Armenian terrorism against Turks.. why Armenians are not talking about their terrorists?

    an interesting read (in 3 languages) of memoirs of a Russian Officer on Armenians at (click on the book for downloading) or access it and others at (from Turkish Military archives reputed to be richest for this issue)

    There are also several powerful books on this subject by the American author Justin McCarthy

    The TURKS ARE READY, WILLING AND ABLE TO FACE THE ARMENIANS AT A PUBLIC INQUIRY FOR THE SAKE OF TRUTH. The Turkish Government wants an independent International historical commission to thoroughly research the background but the Armenians are refusing to participate! Do ask them why!

    Contrary to their claims, 200,000 Armenian traitors were well armed by outside powers.

    So how could they be the so called unarmed innocent Armenians !!!

    That’s how Armenians murdered 524,000 innocent Turks then?

    What would you have said if 200,000 traitors armed by Nazis in the middle WW2 murdered 524,000 innocent British men, women and children in cold blood?
    By the way, there were the Armenian Nazi Brigade/s during WW2 too !!

    Ever wondered how many innocent people they may have murdered?

    Seek truth for humanity’s sake! ask Armenians to face Turks in a public debate

  8. Dan said on November 7th, 2007 at 12:31am #

    Quit playing the anti-Jewish card (the term “anti-semitic,” as presently used, makes no sense, and is an insult to Arabs, who are semitic peoples as well. Thus, I choose to use “anti-Jewish”). Petras specifically says, “Given the Israeli regime’s pro-war propaganda it is understandable that Israeli public opinion was overwhelmingly in favor of the war as were all the leaders of the major American Jewish organization, but not the majority of American Jews, especially young Jews and those who were not members of any of the Zionist (Israel First) front organizations.” Zionists and irrational Israel supporters are who we’re dealing with here, not the entire Jewish population.

  9. Deadbeat said on November 7th, 2007 at 12:37am #

    Ridicule is all Jamie has to offer. Petras provide a comprehensive account of the racism that grips the U.S. today.

    Here’s a link that would support Petra’s contention regarding the USS Liberty. Another story omitted due to Zionist pressure…

    USS Liberty

  10. Deadbeat said on November 7th, 2007 at 12:39am #

    Who do you think the author is referring to? Congolese Pygmies?

    No Petras was referring to RACIST/ZIONISTs.

  11. Leyla said on November 7th, 2007 at 4:08am #

    And another thing:

    The Armenian Story has Another Side
    By Norman Stone, a historian and the author of “World War I: A Short History”

    All the world knows what the end of an empire looks like: hundreds of thousands of people fleeing down dusty paths, taking what was left of their possessions; crammed refugee trains puffing their way across arid plains; and many, many people dying. For the Ottoman Empire that process began in the Balkans, the Crimea and the Caucasus as Russia and her satellites expanded. Seven million people — we would now call them Turks — had to settle in Anatolia, the territory of modern Turkey.In 1914, when World War I began in earnest, Armenians living in what is now Turkey attempted to set up a national state. Armenians revolted against the Ottoman government, began what we would now call “ethnic cleansing” of the local Turks. Their effort failed and caused the government to deport most Armenians from the area of the revolt for security reasons. Their sufferings en route are well-known.Today, Armenian interests in America and abroad are well-organized.

    What keeps them united is the collective memory of their historic grievance. What happened was not in any way their fault, they believe. If the drive to carve out an ethnically pure Armenian state was a failure, they reason, it was only because the Turks exterminated them.For years, Armenians have urged the U.S. Congress to recognize their fate as genocide. Many U.S. leaders — including former secretaries of state and defense and current high-ranking Bush administration officials — have urged Congress either not to consider or to vote down the current genocide resolution primarily for strategic purposes: Turkey is a critical ally to the U.S. in both Iraq and Afghanistan and adoption of such a resolution would anger and offend the Turkish population and jeopardize U.S.-Turkish relations.Given this strong opposition, why would Congress, upon the advice of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, make itself arbiter of this controversy? What makes the Armenians’ dreadful fate so much worse than the dreadful fates that come with every end of empire? It is here that historians must come in.

    First, allegedly critical evidence of the crime consists of forgeries. The British were in occupation of Istanbul for four years after the war and examined all of the files of the Ottoman government. They found nothing, and therefore could not try the 100-odd supposed Turkish war criminals that they were holding. Then, documents turned up, allegedly telegrams from the interior ministry to the effect that all Armenians should be wiped out. The signatures turned out to be wrong, there were no back-up copies in the archives and the dating system was misunderstood.

    There are many other arguments against a supposed genocide of the Armenians. Their leader was offered a post in the Turkish Cabinet in 1914, and turned it down. When the deportations were under way, the populations of the big cities were exempted — Istanbul, Izmir, Aleppo, where there were huge concentrations of Armenians. There were indeed well-documented and horrible massacres of the deportee columns, and the Turks themselves tried more than 1,300 men for these crimes in 1916, convicted many and executed several. None of this squares with genocide, as we classically understand it. Finally, it is just not true that historians as a whole support the genocide thesis. The people who know the background and the language (Ottoman Turkish is terribly difficult) are divided, and those who do not accept the genocide thesis are weightier. The Armenian lobby contends that these independent and highly esteemed historians are simply “Ottomanists” — a ridiculously arrogant dismissal.Unfortunately, the issue has never reached a properly constituted court. If the Armenians were convinced of their own case, they would have taken it to one.

    Instead, they lobby bewildered or bored parliamentary assemblies to “recognize the genocide.”Congress should not take a position, one way or the other, on this affair. Let historians decide. The Turkish government has been saying this for years. It is the Armenians who refuse to take part in a joint historical review, even when organized by impeccably neutral academics. This review is the logical and most sensible path forward. Passage of the resolution by the full House of Representatives would constitute an act of legislative vengeance and would shame well-meaning scholars who want to explore this history from any vantage point other than the one foisted upon the world by ultranationalist Armenians.

  12. jaime said on November 7th, 2007 at 1:23pm #

    Hey what gives?

    For anyone who’s tuned in late. Yesterday I posted something like the following in response to the above article.

    OK, here goes again. Maybe there’s a reason why management doesn’t want you to consider what I have to say.

    The above article is, in my opinion, a bunch of trash, containing many many leaps of of logic and unsubstantiated assertions.

    For instance, there is an assertion above that Jewish American professionals, ie: lawyers, Doctors, Dentists connive and effect on both community and national levels to drive the USA into war in Iraq on behalf of Israel.

    That’s garbage. Maybe it’s the writer’s perception. But that doesn’t necessarily make it true. Besides which, there’s no substantiation. And without that, It’s just drivel.

  13. jason said on November 7th, 2007 at 3:50pm #

    you have a serious problem conflating “jews” with “zionists”. i, for one, will NEVER hurl the “anti-semite” epithet at anyone, because it has lost meaning… but honestly, as a jew and as an anti-zionist, i feel that you truly believe that all “jewish organizations” support the heinous, right-wing policies of the israeli government and the zionist neoconservatives in the US, and i’m quite insulted at the suggestion.

    it has been my policy since i was old enough to understand the situation in full for a full redress of grievances in palestine. a one-state solution. a renaming of the area to “palestine”… no special rights for jews, christians, muslims or anyone else. just a parliamentary democracy similar to israel’s current structure, without the religion. the palestinian “right of return” must be addressed as well. people who lost their land must be compensated, granted citizenship in this new state should they want it, and truly helped out of “refugee” status and back into “Palestinan” citizenship. No Jew, Christian or Muslim inhabitant of Palestine (even now, while it is still called “Israel and the Territories”) should be ashamed to call himself a “Palestinian”. No more “Israeli Arabs” or “Israeli Jews”. One word for one nationality, “Palestinian”. It is 2007. There is no place for religion in government. I was not the first to suggest the policy I just described, and I will not be the last. There are many Post-Zionist Jewish organizations who believe in a one-state solution. Don’t assume that all Jews are pro-Zionist, pro-Likud, anti-Arab. We are not.

  14. Dan said on November 7th, 2007 at 5:52pm #

    Bravo Jason! We need more voices like yours.

  15. jaime said on November 7th, 2007 at 5:53pm #

    I’ve never said or implied that “all Jews” believed in one thing or another. If you think I have, then that’s up to you.

    But the one-state solution is a hopeless concept. It can never be practical for several reasons. You can’t cobble together a nation out of disparate societies when the the premise of one of the parties is the extinction of the other. Go read the Hamas Charter.

    Also, there’s no deal that can ever be made until the Arabs accept the existence of a majority state of Israel in the middle east. Until then, this one state concept, as I’ve seen it, is just another ploy to gull the Israelis into relinquishing territory and safety for empty promises.

    Heinous right wing policies?

    Well, they’re being shot at. what are they supposed to do? What would you do?

    The best hope for everybody is for the Abbas gov’t to take proper control and authority, ban or dispose of rogue militias including the Hamas, and do so in a step by step fashion that builds confidence all around. Then negotiate borders and so on.

    Personally, I don’t think they’re capable of it.

  16. Kim Petersen said on November 7th, 2007 at 6:12pm #

    James Petras makes a well reasoned argument for Big Oil not being exclusively or primarily behind the invasion of Iraq.
    But when he says that “Big Oil has failed to benefit from the US occupation,” the argument falters a bit. While Big Oil may not be reaping direct benefits from oil in Iraq, it is enjoying record profits from the spike in oil prices following the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

  17. Mike McNiven said on November 8th, 2007 at 1:40am #

    Thank you Jason! No religion-based government on this planet!

    (Leyla, for the past forty years, the world has been witnessing acts of genocide against the Kurds by the Turkish government! Petras and Chomsky, among others, have written about it! If you like to see a movie about it :”Yule”. Adding insult to injury, for the past ten years, Israeli forces are aiding the Turkish forces in their war crimes against the Kurds! It is happenning in front of our eyes — right NOW!)

  18. Shabnam said on November 8th, 2007 at 2:23pm #

    Thank you very much Mr. Petras for your analysis which is based on truth. Your criticism of Mearsheimer and Walt who have described the ZPC as a lobby is correct and I should say these individuals have no objection to Zionism. They have copied words of many individuals, such as Kathleen Christinson, Kim Patterson, and others like you who have described the destructive role of Zionism in the foreign policy of the US for the past 20 years, in one paper yet they are silent on question of Zionism. These individuals are angry to see a microscopic state where suppose to be a puppet of the United States has accumulated so much influence with the help of the local facilitators through their Think Tanks and organizations to direct the Middle East foreign policy to benefit Israel. Mearsheimer and Walt do not allow anyone to criticize Zionism in general and if Israel follows the footprint of the empire then it is OK for them but should not be placed in the driving seat.
    I think Kim Petersen does not realize the high price of oil is unintended consequence of the Zionist war and not part of the plan. One can argues not only the oil companies are beneficial as a result of the high oil prices but also the enemies of the Zionofascist, Iran, Venezuela and others are benefiting from the unintended consequences and an ally of the Zionofasist such as Japan is a looser.

    One State for all is Iran suggestion since 1948. Iran did not vote for the partition of Palestine and insisted that partition brings nothing but war and destruction and Iran has been proven right all these years.
    The zionofascist plan “Middle East map change” is to divide countries in the region to construct puppet states as allies for Israel to secure an apartheid state, an oil line to Israel and to direct the real assets of the region into the west. This plan is going to be carried out through rape, torture and massacre of the population of the region including Sudan and other Muslim countries.
    The tribe of Kurdistan where it has been engaged in spying for Zionists for the last fifty years is going to be Israel protectorate. To obtain such an honorable position they are accomplice with the Zionofascist plan and are trained in Israel to attack neighboring countries such as Iran. The Zionists are active in Northern Iraq and implementing partition of Iraq through known servant of Zionism in Washington such as Joe Biden who brought the resolution in the senate to partition Iraq. Those hidden Zionists such as Chomsky who present Kurds as victims are silent on Kurds’ terrorist activities against neighboring countries to improve Israel strategic position to be called, as Chomsky does, the SUPER POWER OF THE REGION. This is happening at a time where the European countries are joining together to bring about stronger union to be able to stand a hegemonic power. I am sure these people take their wish into their graves.

    Israel is in bed with Turkish Military which is not the same as the Turkish Government where are not aiding the “Turkish forces in their war crimes against the Kurds.”

    Furthermore, to reduce the Zionist propaganda in the US, people should be vigilant in their local public libraries about what kind of books are going to end up on libraries’ shelves, because those who are in the position of ordering books are usually pro Israel who purchase books that are written by the Zionists. People should demand their tax money to be used for balanced books and not books by pro Israel “journalists” and their supporters who have kept American public ignorant for such a long time.

  19. Ekosmo said on November 8th, 2007 at 7:29pm #

    some personal opinions on Shabnam’s post…

    Assuming from the blog-url he/she is from the Middle East…

    1. Mearsheimer and Walt is a study of domestic US power and influence wielded by a foreign client state. It was never intended to be a critique of Zionism – merely the influence Israel and its US support-systems exert on US foreign policy via its high value status in a super strategic region.

    2. Its common knowledge Israel wants the fragmentation of all large, rival Arab-Muslim states. This buttresses its position as a regional Nuclear superpower – a continuously destabilising and dangerous FACT you need to acknowledge. [see ‘Chomsky’ below]

    3. I’m no expert on “the tribe of Kurds” but I’d suggest they are no more a “tribe” than the “tribe of Palestine” — meaning both are complex, diverse and in no way homogenous entities with different wings and factions.

    4. You say “the high price of oil is unintended consequence of the Zionist war and not part of the plan.”

    The Bush-Cheney junta is criminally depraved – but not all stupid – they have ideological worlds to conquer and they and their successors, have lots more blood to spill.
    So its equally possible that the oil-price hikes is/was “part of the plan” – meaning more geo-political leaverage for the US-led Empire and more profitable bonanzas from finite resources ‘flooding up’ to corporate elite strata — while the rest of the planet pays thru the nose.

    This is called “Free [meaning Monopoly] Market Neoliberalism” — not to be confused with ‘Regime-Changing’ US “Neoconservative” attack dogs [its ‘Wahhabbi wing’ on steroids…] and has been the driving political-economic ideology of US-led Anglo-Western elites and corporate institutions for some 27 years.
    Since 9/11 its gone on several full-throttle ram-raids for Empire enlargement, but its about to collapse in ignominy again as it did in Vietnam and Korea etc…

    4. To call Chomsky a “hidden Zionist” is nonsense. The only thing Chomsky has recorded annotated and contextualised more of than Israeli-Zionist crimes, are the crimes of Israel’s BOSS-paymaster – located at the Capital Hill Casino-Whorehouse complex, Washington D.C..

    It’s been the BOSS’s intention that Israel be [quote] “the SUPER POWER OF THE REGION” [unquote] since circa 1968 — it is NOT Chomsky’s and you have misread this…

    Chomsky merely satirises this ‘received wisdom’ to pour scorn on standard US intellectual culture and to stop the entire world from collapsing into hysterics at the sheer monumental hubris of it all, but perhaps such sentiments don’t translate so well into Arabic…

  20. Concete man said on November 8th, 2007 at 8:27pm #

    Yet another devastating and, for all intents and purposes (and people will have their quibbles), unmatched critique of the Zionist Power Configuration. Kim P. may be right to an extent about Big Oil incidentally benefiting from the high prices, but it is true that neither Petras nor Kim does a statistical cost benefit analysis so in both cases it is a matter of speculation. (It is worth noting that according to JJ Goldberg’s book, Inside Jewish Power, he found that the Rothschild family is the key petroleum interest in Israel.) In Petras latest book though he reaffirms the Jewish Holocaust Myth over and over in his chapter on 20th century genocide with no understanding of the details of the topic. See: Germar Rudolph, Lectures on the Holocaust. Buy it before you get put in prison for “thought crimes.”

  21. Jacob Noiz said on November 8th, 2007 at 9:29pm #

    To LEYLA:
    Most of those sources you gave were by Zionist/jewish writers and propagandonists. Like when I read your comment of Norman Stone it escaped you that it is a jewish name. You still don’t know that the Young Turks were crypto-Jewish and not Turks and Jews are trying to hide that fact for all those years. Go to> and read the book posted there freely.
    The Armenians of Izmir were all massacred when Ataturks’ forces occupied that city. Jews of that city accompanied Turkish mobs and showed them the houses of the Armenians or were they lived or where they were hiding, thus all Armenians were slaughtered. Few places in the Ottoman Empire where Armenians were relatively spared because the orders of Jewish Young Turks were not obeyed.
    Then, it was a big lie that Armenians had armed army and forcres of 200,000. There were Armenian volunteers in the Russian army less than 7,000 from Eastern Russian Armenia and not from Western Turkish Armenia, those Turkish Armenians majority did not rebel and were loyal, and Moslem Turks, manipulated by Zionist Young Turks, went ahead and exterminated the whole Armenians of Turkish Armenia because of very few guilty ones. Zionist have turned the facts around; 200,000 Armenians were drafted in the Ottoman Army and then exterminated in very cowardly way, women, children were left defensless. You try to justify your genocide of Armenians, there is no justifications of your genocide. What about half million Assyrians you killed also? They had no relation with Russia or were rebels looking for a homeland. Turkish cowardish nature make them justify and even believe the lies of Zionists about Armenian and other Christian genocides by crazy, serial-killer minded Turks. There were Armenians rebels who longed for freedom and homeland in their historical lands where they lived for thousands of years before the Turks showd up in the middle ages. So because of those aspirations and because of fear that tomorrow the rest innocents Armenians will long for freedom, because of that possibility, Turks went aheand when they had opportunity of WWI and they exterminate all Armenians? That is serial-killer mentality and you Turks can not be logical with that mind and the darkness in your hearts, you belong to be classified/catagorized as serial-killers. If history does not judge you then someday surely God at His time will. As you did to Armenians so someday others will do it to you. The sooner you start to repent and start to make compensasion and amends, and give back the Armenians lands to them, is better for you. You stole all the wealth and material, houses and lands where Armenians lived for thousands of years. You are robbers & plunderes, shame on you!

  22. Concete man said on November 8th, 2007 at 9:34pm #

    Kim, Reread this section. I think Petras is making the point that oil companies would rather have a bird in the hand rather than a burning bush, which is what they got. He cites their prewar activities to secure steady oil revenues from Iraq rather than war. On the other hand, someone said that Iran is sitting on top of a huge pile of oil that the Zionists want to get. One of the theories behind why the Neocons attacked Iraq was to flood the world with cheap oil and bring down the Saudis.. Another person posits that World Jewry (and no, I don’t blame the majority of Jews!) want to destroy the Gentile world. So there are many theories around. On top of that you have the Peak Oil pundits who warn that depleting oil supplies are the cause of the behavior of states. Anyway:


    “The American Left jumped on Alan Greenspan’s declaration that the Iraq war was about oil, as some kind of confirmation in the absence of any evidence. Yet everyday that has transpired since the beginning of the war five years ago, demonstrates that ‘Big Oil’ not only did not promote the invasion, but has failed to secure a single oil field, despite the presence of 160,000 US troops, thirty thousand Pentagon/State Department paid mercenaries and a corrupt puppet regime. As of September 19, 2007 the Financial Times of London featured an article on the conspicuous absence of the ‘Oil Majors’ in Iraq: “Big Oil Plays a Waiting Game over Iraq’s Reserves’ (September 19, 2007). Only a few small companies (‘oil minnows’) have contracts in Northern Iraq (‘Kurdistan’), which has only 3% of Iraq’s reserves. ‘Big Oil’ did not start the Iraq war, nor has ‘Big Oil’ benefited from the war. The reason why ‘Big Oil’ did not support the war is the same reason they haven’t invested after the occupation: “The level of violence is still unacceptably high…if anything the prospects of agreement appears to be receding as tensions between parties grow.” (ibid) ‘Big Oil’s’ worst nightmares leading up to the Zionist-influenced war have all been utterly confirmed. Whereas ‘Big Oil’s’ negotiations and third party deals with pre-war Iraq provided a stable and consistent flow of oil and revenue, the war has not only reduced these revenues to zero, but has all but eliminated any new options for the next decade.”

  23. Shabnam said on November 9th, 2007 at 1:07am #

    Ekosmo: Thank you for your comments.

    FIRST: It is true that Mearsheimer and Walt study is about “domestic US power and influence wielded by a foreign client state” but they bring issues related to Israel’s behavior which requires more explanations. For example: when the writers raise doubts about nature of democracy in Israel and refuse to accept Israel as a “fellow democracy surrounded by hostile dictatorships” where Israel’s supporters try to sell, these writers point out that “some aspects of Israeli democracy are at odds with core American values” for one they point out to a Jewish state and citizenship based on the principle of blood kinship and treatment of 1.3 million Arabs who are treated as second-class citizens yet they do not criticize the ideology of the Zionist state or do not refer to the policy as Zionist policy which was recognized as racist ideology by the UN few year ago where later was dismissed. I think these writers are not concerned with this issue for reasons not clear to me. I have not read their book yet and I don’t have a plan to read it soon either.

    SECOND: The point that Israel is seeking partition of the regional states is seen by many. Please consult the following papers and many others:

    THIRD: As Mr. Petras has pointed out this war was not supported by the oil companies. When there is a war there is more instability which makes it more difficult to predict the behavior of the market. If this unintended consequences is desired by Bush and his associates then why the empire puts puppets in place, such as “Wahhabbi wing” in Saudi Arabia, to “guarantee” flow of cheap oil for the empire and the “free world”. Why not let it go as it is for long time to benefit the oil companies. We will see soon enough that this increase in price of oil has negative effects on other industries which finally are going to be manifested in the increase rate of unemployment.

    FOURTH: Chomsky was an active Zionist up to 1970 by his own confession and has lived in Israel in the past. His desire is to live in Israel which is not possible right now. He said this two years ago. I don’t find him a bad person if he is a Zionist. Some from the “left” call him a “Zionist Liberal.”
    As Jeffrey Blankfort has pointed out: “What is less generally known is that he [Chomsky] admits to having been a Zionist from childhood, by one of the earlier definitions of the term- and, as he wrote 30 years ago.” Blankfor is a Jewish anti Zionist who has tried many times to debate Chomsky but he has not been successful.

    However, he was successful to debate his close associate, Stephen Zunes, whom Chomsky recognizes as a Middle East scholar, on KPFA in May 2005. According to Blankfort:
    In the debate Zunes said, “I’ll be a Zionist as long as there is anti-Semitism,” that “Israel is an example of ‘global affirmative action’,” and he repeated this a year later on a panel in Marin County.

    My feeling is that Chomsky has kept his earlier affection towards Zionism. He also protects Israel in his own way by diverting attention away from Israel and fixing attention on US imperialism. This
    Strategy is used by many from the “left” especially the Trotskyite.
    Chomsky has always protected the interest of Israel in his own way. Again according to Blankfort:
    “Chomsky came out against divestment at MIT, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he teaches, and where he was able to water down a divestment resolution. Then he came out two weeks later and attacked the whole divestment issue. He is against sanctions against Israel, he is against divestment, he has not revealed any kind of agenda that would change things other than having people “write letters to the editor”.
    Fifth: Chomsky has repeatedly called Israel as SUPER POWER OF THE REGION and the US as GLOBAL POWER. Please watch the following video and judge for yourself if he is joking or he really means it. I don’t think it depends on the kind of language one speaks:

  24. Kim Petersen said on November 9th, 2007 at 1:36pm #

    Concrete Man, my comment was only directed to the spike in the price of oil benefiting Big Oil — not to the thesis of Petras.

    Shabham, your assertion is unfounded. How do you support your contention that the oil price increase was “unintended”? Do you really think that Big Oil (in which Zionry is well represented) was unaware of the effect that the attack on Iraq would have on oil prices?

  25. jaime said on November 9th, 2007 at 10:14pm #


    That’s a new one.

    OK, I’ll bite. Which of these Big oil corporations are controlled by Jewish interests??? And lets see some substantiation, too, please.

    Saudi Arabian Oil Co.
    Petroleos Mexicanos
    Petroleos de Venezuela
    China National Petroleum
    BP Amoco + Arco
    Royal Dutch/Shell
    Nigerian National Oil Co.
    Iraq National Oil Co.
    Kuwait Petroleum
    Chevron + Texaco

  26. Concete man said on November 10th, 2007 at 3:54am #

    This is a question I have long wondered about: to what extent is Big Oil and Jewish Power intertwined? The money system is largely Zionist, shall we say, so to that extent they get their cut. Someone told me the Rothschild’s get a five percent of the global economy, but there is no source for that assertion! see The Money Masters video nevertheless, by Bill Still, very good.

    By the way, please read some of Christopher Bollyn’s latest articles about Zionism and 9-11. Amazing journalism. He names names and points us in the direction of the Israelis with solid premises and evidence. Wow, the people in charge of airport security on that day were the Mossad! Is that true? Wow!

  27. Kim Petersen said on November 10th, 2007 at 4:40am #

    Please read more carefully Jaime; I wrote “represented” and not “controlled.” The picture is fluid, nevertheless, Roman Abramovich with Sibneft and the Rothschilds with Royal Dutch Shell are well known, as was Mikhail Khodorkovsky with Yukos.
    This is only tangential to the point I was making.

  28. jaime said on November 10th, 2007 at 10:21am #

    Thank you Kim, the Rothchilds were indeed significant players in Royal Dutch Shell until about 1909.

  29. Kim Petersen said on November 10th, 2007 at 4:50pm #

    “Anticipating the death of Eduoard in 1949, Rothschild agents began to sell their majority stock holdings of Royal Dutch Shell, … A few days following the death of Eduoard, Rothschild agents bought the volume of stock back at depressed prices, and his reported estate wealth was taxed at the depressed price on the day of his death.” [source]

    I provided three examples; I noted that ownership picture (as it is in many enterprises) is fluid. But I was not directing my original comments at ownership or even representation (which was only tangential to the subject I addressed).

  30. Ekosmo said on November 10th, 2007 at 6:05pm #

    Oh dear… forgive these attempts at unpicking Shabnam’s “feelings” [see above]

    FACT 1 — Israel is a Nuclear Regional SUPERPOWER
    FACT 2 — The USA is a GLOBAL POWER
    …how dare Chomsky — that wicked “diverter”, who, by “fixing attention on US imperialism” so as to “protect Israel” – how dare he “repeatedly”proclaim these two utterly deranged fantasies …

    FACT 3 – Meir’ & Walt is NOT a direct critique of Zionism – so because it’s not what “your feelings” wish it to be, presumably its “issues” are “hidden” — like Chomsky’s “hidden Zionism”…?

    IMO [1] (not Petras or anyone else’s) — the only surefire “unintended consequences” of the Empire’s lawless assaults on Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon etc. and the resulting oil hikes, were “unintended” oil revenue boosts to Chavez’s, Iran’s, Sudan’s, Russia’s etc. treasuries…
    I “feel” Kim P. might also concur with this…

    IMO [2] …as its ‘Wahhabbi wing’ directs the assaults from the BOSS’s command and control bunkers, I’d argue that the only Trotsky-ist “strategy” being employed here, or anywhere else for that matter, is Free Market Neoliberalism’s ongoing ‘permanent revolution’ …!

    Finally, instead of fixating on Chomsky’s “hidden Zionism” [sic], you really need to discover his powers of irony, ridicule and satire, as it appears you feel that he, Petras, Blankfort, Zunes, Meirs’ & Walt, and everyone else should — like Arabian National Guards, or Marxist vanguards, or the Hill voting Israeli arms shipments, or the “9/11 inside job mobs”, or “the tribe of the Kurds” — all act, think, syncronise and march in lock-step alongside your still developing [?] “feelings”…

    My “feeling” is you “seem” like an earnest, if confused, if “truth”-seeking young Arab scholar — perhaps resident in Nth America… [?]

    If so, my well-intentioned advice is to relocate asap, or asa your studies are over…

    IMO you’re under a severe existential threat to your freedom – rather like a gay in Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or wherever…

  31. Michael Pugliese said on November 11th, 2007 at 1:29pm #

    Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism within the Left

    The dominant anti-globalisation grievance against capitalism goes something like this. Money- and market-orientated processes have reduced human beings to commodities, robbing them of any means of existence except the sale of their own labour-power in exchange for tokens of commodity-value: money. Value therefore comes to be overwhelmingly predetermined by the concrete terms of money. Money comes to dictate social relations with human and environmental degradation as an inevitable consequence. Money is therefore the essence of capitalism and capitalism’s overthrow will hinge on the rejection of money and money-grubbing and the adoption of more natural, authentic, humanising forms of capital – craft and agricultural. Here the discourse becomes personalised.

    Why Your Revolution is No Liberation is a reader critiquing this analysis of capitalism. From the introduction:

    “A criticism of capitalism limited to big players bypasses the totality of societal relations and disguises these by presenting a concrete scapegoat that can also serve as the object of violence for the anti-capitalist revolution.”

    “… the personalisation of the capitalist socialization creates the structure of modern anti-Semitism. Value, money and trade as abstract homeless and exploitative forms are being ascribed to particular persons: Bankers, Fat Cats and capitalists. The step then to the personalisation of anti-Semitism, to the Jew, which most globalisation critics have not taken yet, is only a small one.”

    Containing writings of Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Jean Amery, Stephan Grigat and Moishe Postone, Why Your Revolution Is No Liberation was compiled in response to a debate between German and Austrian anti-facist groups
    and anti-globalisation activists in the run-up to the 33rd G8 summit last June.

    It’s also available in French and German.
    During the recent weeks and months a spirited debate developed in different German left wing newspapers and groups about the sense or non-sense, the perspectives and the means and goals of the mobilisation against the G8 summit. Different German and Austrian anti-fascist groups started a campaign to criticise a wrong analysis of capitalism widely spread in the anti-globalisation movement. In the context of this campaign several public discussions and lectures were held, a special webpage was set up but above all reader was published that contains a set of basic texts referring to this problem. This reader is available in German and English and will soon also be published in French in order to spread the debate also across other countries.
    >> More about the reader <> Table of contents
    Moishe Postone History and Helplessness: Mass Mobilization and Contemporary Forms of Anticapitalism
    Moishe Postone Anti-Semitism and National Socialism
    Max Horkheimer & Theodor W. Adorno Elements of Anti-Semitism: Limits of Enlightment
    Stephan Grigat Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism within the Left
    Jean Amery The respectable Anti-Semitism

  32. Michael Pugliese said on November 11th, 2007 at 1:43pm #

    Re: previous comments w/URL link to
    That would be Holocaust Denialist, Christopher Bollyn. Longtime writer for the rag of Neo-Nazi Willis Carto, publisher of The American Free Press, (previously The Spotlight) and The Barnes Review, a pseudo-academic journal chock full of articles lauding the Nazi Waffen SS!
    On Willis Carto, see a long study on his ideologicakl mentor, Neo-Fascist intellectual Francis Parker Yockey by Kevin Coogan. , “Dreamer Of The Day: Francis Parker Yockey And The Postwar Fascist International.”

  33. Michael Pugliese said on November 11th, 2007 at 2:06pm #
    The key theme of the reader is how anti-globalization/anti-imperialism has increasingly morphed into anti-semitic tropes. One of the primary authors is Moishe Postone, a professor of Jewish history and Marxist thought at the University of Chicago.

    It’s dense, academic reading. But here are a few excerpts:

    With in the last couple of years, another consensus has–explicitly and implicitly–been agreed on: An antagonism toward the USA and Israel, as well as a structurally anti-Semitic criticism of capitalism. The closing statement of th e world social forum of Porto Alegre expressed the forum’s solidarity with the “Palestinian people”-not a word about suicide bombings or Islamic anti-Semitism. The European Social Forum in Paris willingly offered a platform to the Islamist Tariq Ramadan, whilst activists, that criticized the anti-Semitism of the No-Globals in a Flyer, were attacked and expelled from the forum. At an event during the EU-Summit in Copenhagen the Danish group “Global Roots” demanded a boycott of Israel stewards wore shirts with the slogan “Burn Israel Burn” on them.

    Value, money and trade as abstract homeless and exploitative forms are being ascribed to particular persons: Bankers, Fat Cats and capitalists….This association is, however, based on prejudices passed on since the middle ages of the Jew being a homeless huckster, extortioner and exploiter so perfectly obvious that it doesn’t need to be expressed openly….The anticapitalist revolt against the separated, abstract side of capitalist creation of value is thereby structurally anti-semitic.

    In plainer terms, an article in the Sunday Times asks: Where do you stand in the new culture wars?:

    A glorious culture clash took place in Iran recently that made me laugh out loud. The children of Che Guevara, the revolutionary pin-up, had been invited to Tehran University to commemorate the 40th anniversary of their father’s death and celebrate the growing solidarity between “the left and revolutionary Islam” at a conference partly paid for by Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president.

    There were fraternal greetings and smiles all round as America’s “earth-devouring ambitions” were denounced. But then one of the speakers, Hajj Saeed Qassemi, the co-ordinator of the Association of Volunteers for Suicide-Martyrdom (who presumably remains selflessly alive for the cause), revealed that Che was a “truly religious man who believed in God and hated communism and the Soviet Union”.

    Che’s daughter Aleida wondered if something might have been lost in translation. “My father never mentioned God,” she said, to the consternation of the audience. “He never met God.” During the commotion, Aleida and her brother were led swiftly out of the hall and escorted back to their hotel. “By the end of the day, the two Guevaras had become non-persons. The state-controlled media suddenly forgot their existence,” the Iranian writer Amir Taheri noted.

    After their departure, Qassemi went on to claim that Fidel Castro, the “supreme guide” of Guevara, was also a man of God. “The Soviet Union is gone,” he affirmed. “The leadership of the downtrodden has passed to our Islamic republic. Those who wish to destroy America must understand the reality and not be clever with words.”

    My own test for spotting a phoney liberal is as follows. If you think Bush is a fascist and Castro is a progressive, you are not a democrat. If you think cultural traditions can trump women’s rights, you are not a feminist. And if you think antisemitic rants are simply an expression of frustration with American and Israeli policy, you have learnt nothing from history.

    The Sunday Times has even published this “culture wars” quiz. [pdf] It’s not hard to imagine how the delegates to the next Cairo International Conference will score.

  34. Shabnam said on November 11th, 2007 at 2:20pm #

    Thank you very much KIM and sorry I was not able to get back to you earlier.
    We know that war and crisis invites instability and therefore disturb the market. Oil is a commodity not like other commodity and our economy is driven by oil and the price of oil is very sensitive to disturbances of the market. Before the war, Laurence Lindsey – President Bush’s senior economic advisor at the time — argued in 2002 that the Iraq war would increase oil supplies and lower prices.

    As for the impact of a war with Iraq, “It depends how the war goes.” But he quickly adds. Mr. Lindsey said that there would be great uncertainties for the U.S. and global economies in any military action against Iraq, but that if the war was successful and short, the economic benefits of removing Saddam would far exceed the costs.

    “It’s hard to say whether the net economic effects would be positive or negative. There are enormous uncertainties about what might happen. It depends on the prosecution of the war. But under every plausible scenario, the negative effect is quite small relative to the economic benefits that would come from a successful prosecution of the war,” he said.

    Therefore, the administration thought they are going to have a short and successful invasion where allows them to stabilize the country fast and ables them to go into Iran in a short time but things did not turn the way as they wished to be. In a way they lied to American people in order to get support for their criminal act.
    It is true that the oil corporation are very happy with the high price of oil especially that the price of oil will not go back to the old days, very cheap oil and somewhere in between is going to stabilize itself.
    So may be I should not have used “unintended” instead “unexpected” might be a better word. I am talking about the administration where wished a quick and successful war, and not the oil corporations.
    The coorportion kew from the beginning what is going to happen to oil prices. The administration did not listen to them in the past.

    About Zionist’s interest and control of the oil market please see the following links:
    If you have articles regarding this issue please share them with us.

  35. jaime said on November 11th, 2007 at 9:19pm #



    The Khodorkvosky Affair

    Kevin Alfred Strom gives an uncensored version of the ‘official’ news
    Here’s just a bit more about Kevin Alfred Strom……..

    White Supremacist Busted on Child-Porn Charge

    Leading Intellectual of Racist Movement Was Arrested by Federal Agents

    Jan. 4, 2007 —

    A leader of the white supremacist movement was arraigned today on charges of possession of child pornography and witness tampering after being arrested by FBI agents Thursday night at his home in Charlottesville, Va.

    Kevin Alfred Strom, founder of the National Vanguard white supremacist group, was considered the leading intellectual of the movement since the death of William Pierce, the author of the notorious “Turner Diaires.”

    Strom was arraigned in U.S. District Court in Charlottesville, charged with the two counts, and is currently being held at a facility in the city. According to the indictment, he allegedly possessed or attempted to possess “multiple images of child pornography” on his computer’s hard drive.

    Strom was also charged with witness tampering, which involved physically assaulting and mentally intimidating a witness to his criminal activity.

    Last July, Strom took a leave of absence from National Vanguard, citing “family and health matters” and saying that he had “made mistakes, sometimes serious ones,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks white supremacist activity.

    “After the death of Pierce, Kevin positioned himself to take over the leadership of the National Alliance,” says Mark Potok, the editor of the SPLC’s “Intelligence Report.” “But he wasn’t in the same position as Pierce and he didn’t get the same respect. He was a wannabe and he was considered something of a wimp by other supremacists.”

    Strom wrote frequently about art and beauty, often rhapsodizing about the physical attributes of white women and girls.

    In an 2003 essay titled “Millstone for the Mogul” for the National Alliance’s Web site, he condemned the producers of the movie “Thirteen” for “what they are doing to our little children — teen and preteen White children — to normalize perverse and degenerate sexual behavior for them, to normalize homosexuality, to prematurely sexualize them, and to make interracial sex fashionable to them — can never be forgiven, can never be explained away. The media moguls who are doing this to our children deserve to be tried and punished for conspiracy, rape, gang rape, murder and attempted murder.”

    Later in the essay, he goes on to describe his desire to give children “self-respect, respect for their ancestors, respect for the future of their people, a deep respect for their own sexual nature, and respect for the members of the opposite sex who will be their mates and life companions.”

    Copyright © 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures

  36. Concete man said on November 11th, 2007 at 11:41pm #

    To Michael: Regarding the character assassination of Bollyn, READ HIS ARTICLES, do not judge him for being a “Nazi” or some other cheap smear. As for the “Holocaust”, read Germar Rudolph’s books: Dissecting the Holocaust and Lectures on the Holocaust and still tell me you believe in the Hoax of the 20th century. Putting Petras article together with Bollyn points the finger directly at our friends, ISRAEL.

  37. Shabnam said on November 12th, 2007 at 6:18am #

    LONDON (Agence France-Presse) — Control of Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s shares in the Russian oil giant Yukos have passed to renowned banker [the Rt Hon Lord] Jacob Rothschild, under a deal they concluded prior to Mr. Khodorkovsky’s arrest, the Sunday Times reported.
    According to a Nov. 3 Agence France-Presse story, Khodorkovsky made a deal with Jacob Rothschild this year that control of the YUKOS giant would pass to Rothschild in the event of Khodorkovsky’s arrest. However, the Russian government has frozen all YUKOS assets for the time being.

    It is significant that YUKOS’s liberal pressure group, the Open Russia Foundation, is completely controlled by Rothschild now that its founder is in jail. As their official mission statement reads, “The motivation for the establishment of the Open Russia Foundation is the wish to foster enhanced openness, understanding and integration between the people of Russia and the rest of the world.”

    Their board of trustees includes Rothschild and Henry Kissinger. The Washington, D.C. launch of the organization included Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Librarian of Congress James Billington, one of the leading voices against Russian traditionalism in the academic establishment. Significantly, the Open Russia Foundation recently provided Yale University with substantial grants to study the Russian economy as well as providing the Carnegie Foundation with 3 percent of its entire operating budget.

    We read and seek materials of interest. We don’t pay any attention to the Zionist smear tactics to prevent knowledge on certain issues because knowledge is POWER and against IGNORANCE where Zionist feeds on. If we listen to rubbish of the Zionists then we should not read Werner Sombart (The Jews and Modern Capitalism), Martin Heidegger, Friedrich Nietzsche, Roger Garudy, and ………..but we are determined to obtain knowledge wherever it can be found, the final judgment is OURS and only OURS.

  38. Shabnam said on November 12th, 2007 at 6:51am #

    To Jamie
    Read the article, he said:
    “The facts here are taken from a report in the Sunday Times of November 2nd. The one thing missing in the ST report is the race of the tycoons in question, which has been added in this version. “

  39. jaime said on November 12th, 2007 at 12:34pm #

    Dear Shabnam…..


    From progressive folks with genuine Integrity.

    Here’s a little more about your hero: Alfred Strom. And David Irving’s no slouch in the integrity dep’t either.

    Strom & Prussian Blue? I Just Knew It!

    Strom enticement, intimidation trial begins
    by Lisa Provence

    The founder of the white supremacist National Vanguard, Kevin Strom, 50, went on trial today for enticing a minor and intimidating a witness– the witness being his wife, Elisha Strom.

    In a quavery voice, Elisha Strom, 32, testified about finding her husband naked and aroused, looking at photos of two girls whose heads had been transposed onto naked bodies. “They didn’t look right,” said Elisha of the girls, who were affiliated with the National Vanguard. “Their bodies didn’t match what they look like.”

    Earlier, in motions regarding the introduction of the photos of the two girl singers, Judge Norman Moon declared that it was not illegal to look at the photos and said, “It’s not against the law to sit there naked.”

    Elisha Strom also told of awaking October 17, 2005, to find her husband looking at images of a little girl. “I didn’t know what to do,” she testified. “I wanted to talk to someone.”

    She had the phone in hand when her husband said he wasn’t going to let her make a call and then began choking her. “I hit him with the telephone,” she testified. His parents took a bloody Kevin Strom to the hospital.

  40. Steve Fleischman said on November 12th, 2007 at 7:48pm #

    Claims such as the “money system” and Zionism are intertwined are total lies. Nothing could be further from the truth. Oil and Jews are fairly separate, certain claims of Jewish connections to the Russian YUKOS notwithstanding. Saudi Arabia is far more important to US foreign policy considerations than is Israel. Oil imports into the US continue to increase. The Saudis get richer. The Saudis own a larger share of the US economy, with shares worth hundreds of billions, than does even the domestic resident Jewish community. It’s just that opposition to US support for Israel comes from weak sources. If the oil companies and other power centers ever really opposed Zionism it would decisively end. Also, Zionism was always an embedded Christian belief in Anglo-Saxon religious heritage. That also plays a great role in US support for Israel and popular perceptions of Israel.

  41. Berge said on November 12th, 2007 at 9:39pm #

    Genocide is a human rights issue that concerns everyone.

    By the silence of Israel and the American Jewry – acting as a proxy for Turkey, by actively lobbying Congress to deny the Armenian genocide – ADL’s Abraham Foxman sends a clear message to Iran’s Ahmedinajad that he too can commit a genocide and get away with it.

    It is very clear who Ahmadinejad has in mind and which country he wants to wipe out of existence. So, if Iran has geo-political backing it can commit & deny its own Genocide. By denying one genocide you deny all of them. By not condemning one you encourage new ones.

  42. Berge said on November 12th, 2007 at 9:43pm #

    What does Abraham Foxman’s Anti-Defamation League have in common with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

    Both are genocide deniers.

    Genocide denial is the worst type of hate crime. Not only does it murder the historical memories of the victims, but it also murders the victims a second time by erasing them from the pages of history.

    We were, and continue to be, intensely offended by Ahmadinejad for his public denying of the Holocaust last November 2006.

    We are similarly deeply offended by Foxman’s ADL for publicly denying the Armenian genocide and actively working against the Congressional affirmation of it.

  43. Berge said on November 12th, 2007 at 9:57pm #

    “If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when? – Rabbi Hillel

    If we are unwilling to stand up for ourselves – to have the courage of our convictions – then it is absurd to expect others to take us, our issues, or our plights seriously. And if we are *only* for ourselves, then we’re not very good citizens.

    It is astonishing that Abraham Foxman’s Anti-Defamation League justifies his choice of words by referring to the Armenian genocide as a “consequence” of World War I, and describes it “tantamount to genocide,” as this is in obvious breach of article II of the U.N. genocide convention of 1948.

    The 1948 U.N. convention on prevention of genocide cites the Armenian genocide as an example, and uses the word “intent” and not “consequence,” a key element that constitutes genocide.

    ADL’s reasoning — “If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide” — is misguided. In a 1949 CBS News interview, Dr. Raphael Lemkin, a lawyer of Polish-Jewish descent, explained that he became interested in the barbarity that befell the Armenians before World War II and that he coined the word genocide to describe what had happened to the Armenians.

    Dr. Raphael Lemkin coined the word Genocide in the late 30’s / early 40’s to describe the Armenian experience – the intent, deliberate, systematic, planned, perpetrated, extermination of the Armenians at the hands of the Turks.

    The word “holocaust” has been widely used since the 17th century to refer to the violent death of a large number of people. Before World War II the word was used by Winston Churchill and others to describe the Armenian Genocide of World War I.

    We cannot help but ask ourselves, had the world community used its full energy and resources to speak out against the Armenian genocide, might the Holocaust have been prevented?

    “The world doesn’t take seriously what an Israeli leader or an American Jewish macher has to say about the Six Million, not when it sees that same Israeli leader and American Jewish macher shushing everyone over the murders of 1.5 million other innocents.” – Jerusalem post

    “If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when? – Rabbi Hillel

  44. Concete man said on November 13th, 2007 at 5:03am #

    Yes Berge, Genocide Denial is a crime which World Jewry is neck deep in: Iraqi Genocide in a “War” for Israel. As for the “Jewish Holocaust” this is a big exxaggeration that is a founding conerstone of modern Jewish Power. Forget the Jewish Holocaust because it never happened. Many Jews died in WWII along with many many other people. The HOLOCAUST is the BIG LIE. Don’t believe me? Read Germar Rudolph’s book, Lectures on the Holocaust and prove me wrong. You can’t do it.

  45. jaime said on November 13th, 2007 at 9:58am #

    First Kevin Strom, now Germar Rudolph.

    Stay tuned for Ernst Zundel and David Duke!

    German Holocaust denier Rudolf jailed for 30 months

    Mar 15, 2007, 16:47 GMT

    Mannheim, Germany – A 42-year-old German neo-Nazi who claims the Holocaust never happened was jailed for 30 months by a court in the south-western city of Mannheim on Thursday.

    At the start of his trial in November, Germar Rudolf had called the Holocaust ‘a gigantic fraud.’ He was last year expelled from the United States to Germany, which charged him with incitement to racial hatred.

    A chemist, Rudolf has published pseudo-scientific claims that it was impossible that Zyklon-B poison was used in the gas chambers at the Nazis’ Auschwitz death camp.

    Denial of the Holocaust is punishable in Germany with up to five years in jail. …

  46. Concete man said on November 14th, 2007 at 3:19am #

    Jaime, Is this meant to debunk Rudolph’s work? From a mainstream German “news” source which is neck deep under control of the Jewish Criminal Power Syndicate? “Pseudo-scientific” claims? … if you can’t read the original book and refute the work of revisionists including Rudolph, Faurisson and the rest of the Truth Fighters.

  47. jaime said on November 14th, 2007 at 12:53pm #

    Debunk Rudolph’s work?

    Perish the thought!

  48. Leyla said on November 14th, 2007 at 7:37pm #

    The Turkish Diaspora is not silent because it feels that it is guilty of any crime. It is silent because of its naive belief that the truth will somehow come out and that will be the end of it – or it just can’t be bothered with trying to prove it is innocent of a crime that it has NOT committed.

    I like the way the so-called “Armenian Genocide” is treated as being concrete truth when there has never really been any valid non-biased research on the matter. Even if the Russian and Turkish archives have been opened up for use for research, the Armenian archives (anywhere in the world – including the USA) has not been opened up. They will probably never be opened. But imagine, there would be 3 sources where data can be compared. Information could not be fudged but if any is missing, it will become clear very quickly.

    If the Armenians (who happen to be extremely rich thanks to American and European aid) have enough funds to take this matter to international courts to have it proven once and for all. Have they done this do you think? No. Do they accept any attempts of the matter being investigated, discussed or researched by unbiased parties? No. All they do is repeat the same accusations again and again hoping that if it mentioned enough times then it will be believed whether it is true or not.

    How hard is it to understand? Anyone with even a mild understanding of maths would see that there is something terribly wrong with the numbers? Based on the population counts made by the Ottomans, French, English and the Armenians themselves the numbers cannot be more than 1.6 million (and that is the most inflated figure provided by the Armenians). If 1.5 million had been killed/died, how can so many Armenians exist today based on just 100,000m Armenians surviving? What is even more strange is that I have seen some articles by Armenians bumping this figure up to 2 million. Even if we wanted to kill them do you think that we would have wasted precious bullets that we needed on the Armenians when we needed armaments for the war. Having the Armenians relocated was the best option for us.

    As much as you would like to believe the Christian Armenians and see the Muslim Turks as the enemy, this does not change what happened at that time. You all seem to forget that the Ottoman Empire was in the midst of war with the enemy attacking it from all angles. And yes the Assyrians and the Pontians also contributed to quite a few Turkish deaths. True they were Turkish Muslim lives and probably don’t mean very much to you but they mean a lot to us. I come from a town in Ankara. Our towns and villages where we live were not burned to the ground but all our men were sent to the battle fronts to protect our country. There were no males and hardly any food left as the food was being sent to the soldiers – and we were the lucky ones in our country. Can you imagine the horror faced by the not-so-lucky ones?

    Despite our suffering during that time, do you think we go around crying that the Armenians, Greeks, Arabs, Pontians, Assyrians, Europeans and Russians have killed us and that we deserve to be recompensated? NO. It was a war and unfortunately we have decided to go with the European idea that all is fair in war and let bygones be bygones. Unfortunately we have an extremely weak government that would do very little to help its people. The reason why so many are accusing us of any hint of a genocide (I’m sure that some of you probably think that we committed the Jewish Genocide as well, why not, we seem to be accused of any other ones). What I detest the most is the way the Armenians keep comparing themselves to the Jews. The Jews did not take up arms and kill the people of the country they lived in. They were peaceful and wanted to live a peaceful life. They did not want to carve out a new country for themselves – remember I am talking about WWII. Most Armenians in the Ottoman Empire were also peaceful and were happy with their lives – why shouldn’t they be, they lived better lives than the Turks did. Unfortunately the henchmen lived amongst them ( a little like the PKK are doing now). We had no choice but to remove them all. Most Armenians that live in Turkey now (including the 40,000 or so that work illegally) are happy. There will always be a small percentage that will never be happy until all Turks are killed or leave the region altogether. I just hope that you stop listening to the small minority and listen to what the wider group feel.

    This brings me to the Kurds. Most Turks are related to Kurds in some way or another. There is so many intermarriages happening that if such a country as Kurdistan ever legally gets created, it will be very difficult to separate the Kurds from the Turks in Turkey. And you will have a lot of trouble getting them to move to this new country. Again, imagine if the American Indians started taking up arms and started killing your people? Do you think that they would be alive?? If the USA stopped arming the PKK terrorists there would be peace in the region. I’m sure that wouldn’t please Mr Bush et al, however, that whole area would live in a better state than what they do now – even the minorities. A lot of Kurds have suffered in the region and the best thing to happen to them has happened, they moved away from the region and therefore away from the clan leaders. The biggest enemy of the Kurds are not the Turks or the Iraqis or even the Iranians – it is their own clan leaders. When they can make their own decisions for themselves, they start to become more pleasant and more peaceful. The laws in Turkey have given them the freedom to speak their own language and use their own names (one hopes that Greece will provide the same freedom to its Turkish population one day). Most Turks have never agreed to this law anyway, it was ridiculous. However, living abroad as I do I would find it strange if we were told that we could learn and speak our own language and won’t need to learn English at all. Australia is looking at making English compulsory for the Aborigines just as Turkey sees Turkish as being compulsory to all the minorities. I don’t see why Kurds should be any different to the many minorities that live in Turkey. A lot of injustice has been done to the Kurds, but don’t forget, they are not a weak race that would take anything lying down. They give as good as they get. If you have sympathy for the Kurds (as you should) you must have some sympathy for the many innocent Turkish lives taken by the Kurds as well. By the way I have Kurdish ancestors too and like most Turks/Kurds in Turkey we want real peace without any interference from Europe or America.

    I would love to say more and probably could but I feel like I’m chasing my tail. The general feeling amongst the Turks is that because we are Turkish, nothing we say is taken as being even remotely true (even if it is). I am getting the Turkish Diaspora feeling again….

  49. Berge said on November 15th, 2007 at 11:06am #

    Dear Leyla,

    From your writing in the above post (Leyla said on November 14th, 2007 at 7:37 pm #) , it is apparent that your are confused and clearly misinformed.

    I know it is hard for people in Turkey to accept the facts of their history, when their Turkish state dictates falsified history in its educational school systems. Even impose Turkish laws that forbid the mere mention of ‘Armenian Genocide’ let alone have a discussion of it. That law is enforced by Turkish penal code #301 and entails severe punishments.

    There is no excuse for any Turk t o remain ignorant about the Turkish history. Especially those Turks who have access to freedom of speech and freedom of expression outside of Turkey, with access to wealth of knowledge and information.

    You see, genocide denial is the last phase of the crime. The perpetrator denies everything – and that is what you and the Turkish government are doing. That’s what a denialist does, raise doubt about the facts, create disputes, suggest more research, more study, and more proof needed, etc….

    My suggestion is for you to go to a library and read up on history and on-going Turkish genocide of Armenians. I’d be happy to refer you to hundreds of studies on the Armenian genocide. They all have the verdict: Turkey guilty of genocide.

    Here is a an excerpt from a news article today, by David Olson from the Press-Enterprise:

    The International Association of Genocide Scholars unanimously approved a 2005 letter stating that “the overwhelming opinion of scholars who study genocide” is that the murders were genocidal.

    To deny the Armenian genocide “is like Holocaust denial,” said Gregory Stanton, vice president of the association, president of Genocide Watch and a professor of human rights at the University of Mary Washington in Virginia.

    … many leading scholars say the massacres clearly fit the definition of genocide.

    So, you see Leyla, you just need to get educated on the facts of the brutal, and oppressive history of the Turks. And if you happen to be in Eastern Turkey (Armenia) just ask any elderly resident, they will not only account to you the horrors your Turkish ancestors inflicted on the Armenians, but they will even point you to the sites and killing fields.

    You owe it to yourself to learn the truth.

  50. Concete man said on November 15th, 2007 at 3:14pm #

    Jaime, Ah, Mr. Green’s “debunking” of Rudolph, but you fail to post Rudolph’s debunking of Green in Rudolph’s books (that is your idea of social science). Green appears in the film Mr. Death which was a biased piece of garbage that was meant to trash the Leuctner report. If you can’t read the actual revisionist literature and have to rely on the JewsNews for your information, it sounds like you are the one with mental illness. How about putting Green and all of the other phoney Holocaust Affirmers in jail and see how that feels, you friggin’ hypocrite.

  51. Leyla said on November 15th, 2007 at 6:44pm #

    So you know exactly what happens in Turkey do you Berge? You have some strange idea about what the government tells the people. The education board in Turkey is run by a majority of Americans. The Turkish history books are written and printed in Europe. The Turkish people have no idea what happened during that time. You are wrong about being misinformed, the fact of the matter is that we are not informed at all. Most of us know about this matter because we have had to hunt it down.

    I can tell you without checking that that the “The International Association of Genocide Scholars” would be majority European Christians. I cannot for the world see how there could ever be an unbiased decision being made. If it were the Chinese or Indians who did the research, I would find them to be more accurate than a bunch of Turk-haters.

    ooh look:

    “To deny the Armenian genocide “is like Holocaust denial,” said Gregory Stanton, vice president of the association, president of Genocide Watch and a professor of human rights at the University of Mary Washington in Virginia. ”

    How dare you compare the Holocaust with such a fictional story!!!

    If we were so brutal, all these races would have disappeared. They would not be around now howling like wolves ready to attack and kill the hand that fed them for so many centuries. Yes, the Ottoman Empire was one of the oldest empires in the world. And all the people in the Empire lived in relative peace. I will even go so far as to say that they were able to practice their religions with more freedom than they would have had they been governed by Christian empires. I will even go further and say that they lived much better lives than the Turks.

    If you want to look for brutal, go study the Christian Crusades and the cruelty they inflicted on the Turks. Now that is brutal. And funny enough they took so much back with them that they finally started having culture and cleanliness. Did you know that Europeans didn’t even have proper toilets until a few centuries ago…. And they call the East barbaric.

    I am getting sick of this all. You want us to sit back and accept any lie that you all spin out. When we are quiet, we are considered to be guilty. When we speak up, we are considered to be guilty. We have thrown the gauntlet and said, “If we are guilty of committing genocide, take this matter to the international courts AND PROVE IT”. If the Armenians have any balls, they will accept our challenge. But they don’t so I’m not going to be holding my breath.

    Again and again I will say it. PROVE the genocide claim in an unbiased international court. Otherwise shut up.

  52. Leyla said on November 15th, 2007 at 6:51pm #

    And yes, I do owe the truth to myself. For years I had a blurry idea that as impossible as it might seem, maybe the genocide did happen. I know better now and it absolutely has nothing to do with the Turkish Government, it is inspite of it. I really wouldn’t go blaming the Turkish government, really. They are on your side.

    I am just lucky that I was able to find reliable sources of true information about the whole ordeal. How about you all let go of some fictional event that the Armenian Diaspora has churned out to get money from your countries? Really, keep your money for more important things in America. Like stop so many people dying in your streets from hunger and the cold and lack of health care… You need the money more than the Armenians do. And while you are at it, why don’t you try to get the worlds biggest terrorist organisation (CIA) out of other countries. We will really worship you then.

  53. Concete man said on November 17th, 2007 at 1:48am #

    Jaime, The Washington Post? That’s a good JewsNews “information” service. The “debunking” of Leuchter was part of a smear campaign of the HolyHoax Industry. There are millions of questions involving the “Holocaust” and none of them are allowed to be answered by researchers since it is ILLEGAL in many countries to investigate. This I am sure you are happy about since you yourself have no interest whatsoever in the truth, I shall bid you a good day friend.

  54. jaime said on November 17th, 2007 at 2:03pm #

    Dear Concrete Head,

    Being as you’re so knowledgeable about the Holocaust, maybe you could be so kind as to tell me what happened to all my relatives in Europe?

    According to our best records, several members of my extended family were rounded up, shipped off to Auschwitz and never returned. Presumably they were gassed or worked to death and then disposed of.

    Don’t fuck with the memory of the dead. It’s very bad karma. As those knuckleheads you’ve cited above have found…

    Of course if you’re mentally ill, then get some help and have a better day.

  55. Concete man said on November 19th, 2007 at 2:57pm #

    Dear Jamie, Read the revisionist literature, your answers are in part answered there. Even the Yad Vashem museum in Israel lists 3 million missing, which is far from a scientifically reliable number, but much less than the official 6 million figure. Please note that the revisionists are not claming that the Nazis did not commit atrocities and persecute Jews but they question (illegally) the 6m figure; premeditation of the liquidation of European Jewry; homocidal gas chambers. As for Mr. Green:

  56. Concete man said on November 22nd, 2007 at 2:05pm #

    Wow, I am impressed with your vocabulary Jamie. This shows once again the superior intellect and intelligence (it goes without saying really) of the Jewish Scholars or their Supporters in public discourse. However, in case you find the time you may also want to avail yourself to this recent article, to further your education:
    Is the Holocaust Well Documented?:
    Bollinger’s Outrageous Statement
    By Paul Grubach
    copyright 2007