Rahm Emanuel, up until recently the mayor of Chicago and before that a top advisor to the president in the Bill Clinton and Barack Obama White Houses and still earlier a volunteer in the Israeli Army, famously once commented that a good crisis should never be allowed to go to waste. He meant, of course, that a crisis can be exploited to provide cover for other shenanigans involving politicians. It was an observation that was particularly true when one was working for a sexual predator like Bill, who once attacked a “terrorist” pharmaceutical factory in Sudan to divert attention away from the breaking Monica Lewinski scandal.
To be sure, the United States government is focusing its attention on the coronavirus while also using the cover afforded to heighten the pressure on “enemies” near and far. As the coronavirus continues to spread, the Trump White House and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have increased the ferocity of their sabre rattling, apparently in part to deter Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela. Ironically, of course, none of the countries being intimidated are actually threatening the United States, but we Americans have long since learned that perceptions are more important than facts when it comes to the current occupant of the oval office and his two predecessors.
The latest bit of mendacity coming out of the White House was a presidential tweettargeting the usual punching bag, Iran. Based on an incident that occurred two weeks ago, Trump threatened “I have instructed the United States Navy to shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass our ships at sea.” Iran’s flying gunboats are clearly a formidable force but it is certainly reassuring to note that naval anti-aircraft fire has been directed to deal with them. The U.S. Navy ships in question are, one might also observe, in a body of water generally referred to as the Persian Gulf, where they are carrying out maneuvers right off of the Iranian coast. Meanwhile, Iranian flying gunboats have not yet been observed off of New Jersey, but they are probably waiting to be transported to the Eastern Seaboard by those huge trans-oceanic gliders that once upon a time were allegedly being constructed by Saddam Hussein.
Given the cover provided by the virus, it should surprise no one that Israel is also playing the same game. The Jewish state has been continuing its lethal bombings of Syria, with hardly any notice in the international media. In a recent missile attack, nine people were killed near the historic city of Palmyra. Three of the dead were Syrians while six others were presumed to be Lebanese Shi’ites supporting the Damascus government. Israel de facto regards any Shi’ite as an “Iranian” or an “Iranian proxy” and therefore a “terrorist” eligible to be killed on sight.
But the bigger coronavirus story has to do with Israel’s domestic politics. Benjamin Netanyahu and his principle opponent Benny Gantz have come to an agreement to form a national government, ostensibly to deal with the health crisis. The wily Netanyahu, who will continue to be prime minister in the deal, has thereby retained his power over the government while also putting a halt to bids from the judiciary to try and sentence him on corruption charges. As part of the deal with Gantz, Netanyahu will have veto power over the naming of the new government’s attorney general and state prosecutor, guaranteeing the appointment of individuals who will dismiss the charges.
And more will be coming, with the acquiescence of Washington. U.S. elections are little more than six months away and Donald Trump clearly believes that he needs the political support of Netanyahu to energize his rabid Christian Zionist supporters, as well as the cash coming from Jewish oligarchs Sheldon Adelson, Bernard Marcus and Paul Singer. So, it is time to establish a quid pro quo, which will be Israeli government behind the scenes approaches to powerful and wealthy American Jews on behalf of Trump while the White House will look the other way while Israel annexes most of the remaining Palestinian West Bank. Pompeo has welcomed the new Israeli government and has confirmed that the annexation of the Palestinian land will be “ultimately Israel’s decision to make,” which amounts to a green light for Netanyahu to go ahead.
A vote on West Bank annexation will reportedly be taken by the Knesset at the beginning of July followed immediately by steps to incorporate Jewish settlements into Israel proper. According to the Israeli liberal newspaper Haaretz, the planned annexation has raised some concerns among a few liberal American Jewish organizations because it will convince many progressives in the U.S. that Israel has truly become an apartheid state. J Street warned that annexation “would severely imperil Israel’s future as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people, along with the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship” and has even suggested cutting U.S. aid if that step is actually taken. Most other ostensibly liberal groups have adopted the usual Zionist two-step, i.e. condemning the move but not advocating any effective steps to prevent it. And it should also be noted that the largest and most powerful Jewish organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) have not raised any objections at all.
Unaffiliated individual liberal Jews, to include those who consider themselves Zionists, have generally been concerned about the move, though their argument is quite hypocritical, based on their belief that annexation would pari passu destroy any possible two-state solution, damaging both Palestinian rights and “Jewish democracy.” Some have even welcomed the change, noting that it would create a single state de facto which eventually would have to evolve into a modern democracy with equal rights for all. Such thinking is, however, nonsense. Israel under Netanyahu and whichever fascist retread that eventually succeeds him regards itself as a Jewish state and will do whatever it takes to maintain that, even including dispossessing remaining Arabs of their land and possessions, stripping them of their legal status, and forcing them to leave as refugees. That is something that might be referred to as ethnic cleansing, or even genocide.
And those Americans of conscience who are hoping for some change if someone named Joe Biden defeats Trump can also forget about that option. Biden has told the New York Times that “I believe a two-state solution remains the only way to ensure Israel’s long-term security while sustaining its Jewish and democratic identity. It is also the only way to ensure Palestinian dignity and their legitimate interest in national self-determination. And it is a necessary condition to take full advantage of the opening that exists for greater cooperation between Israel and its Arab neighbors. For all these reasons, encouraging a two-state solution remains in the critical interest of the United States.”
Unfortunately, someone should tell Joe that that particular train has already left the station due to the expansion of the Jewish state’s settlements. Nice words from the man who would be president aside, Biden is bound to the Israel Lobby for its political support and the money it provides as tightly as can be and he will fold before AIPAC and company like a cheap suit. He has famously declared that “You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist – I am a Zionist” and “My Name is Joe Biden, and Everybody Knows I Love Israel.” His vice-presidential candidates’ debate with Sarah Palin in 2008 turned embarrassing when he and Palin both engaged in long soliloquys about how much they cherish Israel. Indeed they do. Every politician on the make loves Israel.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is email@example.com.
ANApril 29, 2020
An investigation of supposed Iranian nuclear documents presented in a dramatically staged Netanyahu press conference indicates they were an Israeli fabrication designed to trigger US military conflict with Iran.
President Donald Trump scrapped the nuclear deal with Iran and continued to risk war with Iran based on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim to have proven definitively that Iran was determined to manufacture nuclear weapons. Netanyahu not only spun Trump but much of the corporate media as well, duping them with the public unveiling of what he claimed was the entire secret Iranian “nuclear archive.”
In early April 2018, Netanyahu briefed Trump privately on the supposed Iranian nuclear archive and secured his promise to leave the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). That April 30, Netanyahu took the briefing to the public in a characteristically dramatic live performance in which he claimed Israel’s Mossad intelligence services had stolen Iran’s entire nuclear archive from Tehran. “You may well know that Iran’s leaders repeatedly deny ever pursuing nuclear weapons…” Netanyahu declared. “Well, tonight, I’m here to tell you one thing: Iran lied. Big time.”
However, an investigation of the supposed Iranian nuclear documents by The Grayzone reveals them to be the product of an Israeli disinformation operation that helped trigger the most serious threat of war since the conflict with Iran began nearly four decades ago. This investigation found multiple indications that the story of Mossad’s heist of 50,000 pages of secret nuclear files from Tehran was very likely an elaborate fiction and that the documents were fabricated by the Mossad itself.
According to the official Israeli version of events, the Iranians had gathered the nuclear documents from various locations and moved them to what Netanyahu himself described as “a dilapidated warehouse” in southern Tehran. Even assuming that Iran had secret documents demonstrating the development of nuclear weapons, the claim that top secret documents would be held in a nondescript and unguarded warehouse in Central Tehran is so unlikely that it should have raised immediate alarm bells about the story’s legitimacy.
Even more problematic was the claim by a Mossad official to Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman that Mossad knew not only in what warehouse its commandos would find the documents but precisely which safes to break into with a blowtorch. The official told Bergman the Mossad team had been guided by an intelligence asset to the few safes in the warehouse contained the binders with the most important documents. Netanyahu bragged publicly that “very few” Iranians knew the location of the archive; the Mossad official told Bergman “only a handful of people” knew.
But two former senior CIA official, both of whom had served as the agency’s top Middle East analyst, dismissed Netanyahu’s claims as lacking credibility in responses to a query from The Grayzone.
According to Paul Pillar, who was National Intelligence Officer for the region from 2001 to 2005, “Any source on the inside of the Iranian national security apparatus would be extremely valuable in Israeli eyes, and Israeli deliberations about the handling of that source’s information presumably would be biased in favor long-term protection of the source.” The Israeli story of how its spies located the documents “does seem fishy,” Pillar said, especially considering Israel’s obvious effort to derive maximum “political-diplomatic mileage” out of the “supposed revelation” of such a well-placed source.
Graham Fuller, a 27-year veteran of the CIA who served as National Intelligence Officer for the Near East and South Asia as well as Vice-Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, offered a similar assessment of the Israeli claim. “If the Israelis had such a sensitive source in Tehran,” Fuller commented, “they would not want to risk him.” Fuller concluded that the Israelis’ claim that they had accurate knowledge of which safes to crack is “dubious, and the whole thing may be somewhat fabricated.”
No proof of authenticity
Another document that generated widespread media interest was an alleged report on a discussion among leading Iranian scientists of a purported mid-2003 decision by Iran’s Defense Minister to separate an existing secret nuclear weapons program into overt and covert parts.
Left out of the media coverage of these “nuclear archive” documents was a simple fact that was highly inconvenient to Netanyahu: nothing about them offered a scintilla of evidence that they were genuine. For example, not one contained the official markings of the relevant Iranian agency.
Tariq Rauf, who was head of the Verification and Security Policy Coordination Office at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from 2001 to 2011, told The Grayzone that these markings were practically ubiquitous on official Iranian files.
“Iran is a highly bureaucratized system,” Rauf explained. “Hence, one would expect a proper book-keeping system that would record incoming correspondence, with date received, action officer, department, circulation to additional relevant officials, proper letterhead, etc.”
But as Rauf noted, the “nuclear archive” documents that were published by the Washington Post bore no such evidence of Iranian government origin. Nor did they contain other markings to indicate their creation under the auspices of an Iranian government agency.
What those documents do have in common is the mark of a rubber stamp for a filing system showing numbers for a “record”, a “file” and a “ledger binder” — like the black binders that Netanyahu flashed to the cameras during his slideshow. But these could have easily been created by the Mossad and stamped on to the documents along with the appropriate Persian numbers.
Forensic confirmation of the documents’ authenticity would have required access to the original documents. But as Netanyahu noted in his April 30, 2018 slide show, the “original Iranian materials” were kept “in a very safe place” – implying that no one would be allowed to have any such access.
Withholding access to outside experts
When a team of six specialists from Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs visited Israel in January 2019 for briefings on the archive, they too were offered only a cursory browse of the supposedly original documents. Harvard Professor Matthew Bunn recalled in an interview with this writer that the team had been shown one of the binders containing what were said to be original documents relating to Iran’s relations with the IAEA and had “paged through a bit of it.”
But they were shown no documents on Iran nuclear weapons work. As Bunn admitted, “We weren’t attempting to do any forensic analysis of these documents.”
Typically, it would be the job of the U.S. government and the IAEA to authenticate the documents. Oddly, the Belfer Center delegation reported that the U.S. government and the IAEA had each received only copies of the entire archive, not the original files. And the Israelis were in no hurry to provide the genuine articles: the IAEA did not receive a complete set of documents until November 2019, according to Bunn.
By then, Netanyahu had not only already accomplished the demolition of the Iran nuclear deal; he and Trump’s ferociously hawkish CIA-director Mike Pompeo had maneuvered the president into a policy of imminent confrontation with Tehran.
The second coming of fake missile drawings
Technical drawing from page 11 of David Albright, Olli Heinonen, and Andrea Stricker’s “Breaking Up and Reorienting Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program,” published by the Institute for Science and International Security on October 28, 2018.
In 2013, however, a former senior German Foreign Office official named Karsten Voigt revealed to this writer that the documents had been initially provided to German intelligence by a member of the Mujaheddin E-Khalq (MEK).
The MEK is an exiled Iranian armed opposition organization that had operated under Saddam Hussein’s regime as a proxy against Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. It went on to cooperate with the Israeli Mossad beginning in the 1990s, and enjoys a close relationship with Saudi Arabia as well. Today, numerous former US officials are on the MEK’s payroll, acting as de facto lobbyists for regime change in Iran.
Voigt recalled how senior BND officials warned him they did not consider the MEK source or the materials he provided to be credible. They were worried that the Bush administration intended to use the dodgy documents to justify an attack on Iran, just as it exploited the tall tales collected from Iraqi defector codenamed “Curveball” to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
As this writer first reported in 2010, the appearance of the “dunce-cap” shape of the Shahab-3 reentry vehicle in the drawings was a tell-tale sign that the documents were fabricated. Whoever drew those schematic images in 2003 was clearly under the false impression that Iran was relying on the Shahab-3 as its main deterrent force. After all, Iran had announced publicly in 2001 that the Shahab-3 was going into “serial production” and in 2003 that it was “operational.”
But those official claims by Iran were a ruse aimed primarily at deceiving Israel, which had threatened air attacks on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. In fact, Iran’s Defense Ministry was aware that the Shahab-3 did not have sufficient range to reach Israel.
According to Michael Elleman, the author of the most definitive account of the Iranian missile program, as early as 2000, Iran’s Defense Ministry had begun developing an improved version of the Shahab-3 with a reentry vehicle boasting a far more aerodynamic “triconic baby bottle” shape – not the “dunce-cap” of the original.
As Elleman told this writer, however, foreign intelligence agencies remained unaware of the new and improved Shahab missile with a very different shape until it took its first flight test in August 2004. Among the agencies kept in the dark about the new design was Israel’s Mossad. That explains why the false documents on redesigning the Shahab-3 – the earliest dates of which were in 2002, according to an unpublished internal IAEA document – showed a reentry vehicle design that Iran had already discarded.
The role of the MEK in passing the massive tranche of supposed secret Iranian nuclear documents to the BND and its hand-in-glove relationship with the Mossad leaves little room for doubt that the documents introduced to Western intelligence 2004 were, in fact, created by the Mossad.
For the Mossad, the MEK was a convenient unit for outsourcing negative press about Iran which it did not want attributed directly to Israeli intelligence. To enhance the MEK’S credibility in the eyes foreign media and intelligence agencies, Mossad passed the coordinates of Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility to the MEK in 2002. Later, it provided to the MEK personal information such as the passport number and home telephone number of Iranian physics professor Mohsen Fakhrizadh, whose name appeared in the nuclear documents, according to the co-authors of a best-selling Israeli book on the Mossad’s covert operations.
By trotting out the same discredited technical drawing depicting the wrong Iranian missile reentry vehicle – a trick he had previously deployed to create the original case for accusing Iran of covert nuclear weapons development – the Israeli prime minister showed how confident he was in his ability to hoodwink Washington and the Western corporate media.
Netanyahu’s multiple levels of deception have been remarkably successful, despite having relied on crude stunts that any diligent news organization should have seen through. Through his manipulation of foreign governments and media, he has been able to maneuver Donald Trump and the United States into a dangerous process of confrontation that has brought the US to the precipice of military conflict with Iran.
One intelligence agency renowned for its ruthless self-serving agenda is the MOSSAD. Having successfully co-opted the globe with their pre-emptive operations across all political and social domains the extraordinary influence this Israeli intelligence agency has had in the present and preceding century regarding geopolitical strategies, cannot be overstated. It has been at the centre of most of the state sponsored terrorist acts and the ensuing conflicts that have arisen from them.
Israel’s reputation as a haven for sexual slavery and Russian-Zionist mafia influence is well-documented and would suggest that the MOSSAD is involved in human trafficking, narcotics and arms as means for financing their powerful leveraging of the geopolitical scene. The enormous power of Israeli lobbyists in the United States as well as their traditional role in media and entertainment provide a reliable source for the furtherance of underworld financing of ideological objectives. The assassination of Canadian arms inventor Gerald Bull in Brussels on March 22, 1990, is instructive on this point and revealed just how cemented all three activities seem to be.
Gerald Bull was an internationally known astrophysicist, arms dealer, genius of military hardware and the inventor of the notorious “Super Gun” under Project Babylon. Bull’s friends and associates included major players within the CIA and he was not above using these contacts to secure favours in order circumnavigate legal problems or easing the passage of arms sales, though clearly, this did not always work. (His long term business dealings with South Africa landed him in jail for smuggling despite the CIA’s attempts to have his sentence quashed).
Although many of Bull’s colleagues and business associates thought his links to the agency were exaggerated, his final end suggests that this was not the case. In fact, Bull had contacts with both former CIA directors William E. Colby and Stansfield Turner, the latter dating back to the late 1960s before he became head of the agency. Colby, Like Bull, died under mysterious circumstances in 1996 while on a solo canoe outing in Maryland. What is even more interesting is that his death followed closely on from his dealings with John Decamp the Nebraska senator who came to notoriety through his determination in raising awareness of the paedophile rings thorough successive administrations, up to and including the present. (See The Franklin Cover up).
It is not by coincidence that Bull was based in Brussels, long recognized as a hub of illicit arms deals. Bull’s deal with Iraq had been bankrolled by the Société Générale, the banking arm of the Société Générale de Belgique, a holding company of the Belgian Royal Family which owns 40 percent of the country’s industry. Being the backbone behind Belgium’s financial prosperity it is a corporation that has considerable leverage in global finance said to have been established by William of Orange back in 1822 with the task of financing Belgian industry.
Aside from the Belgian Royals, the Vatican has been a faithful shareholder along with the powerful business interests of the Rothschilds, Solvays, the Boels and the Janssens. Prince Bernhard of Netherlands also had a slice of the pie, having his own substantial interest in the oil industry. With such dubious friends as Joseph H. Retinger, co-creator of the Bilderberg Group in Europe, the Elite membership was early on mired in petroleum interests and corporate colonialism.
The Belgian Royal family and the Solvay family appear to be the only major shareholders in SGB apart from cross holdings within the group, which inevitably led to a “self-perpetuating oligarchy” so favoured by the rising monolith of Russian mafia expansionism. Furthermore, SGB exerts considerable control over the second major arms producer, Fabrique Nationale, which produces the Browning pistol under licence from the United States. The US and Israel have had a special relationship with Belgium using it as a major supplier and broker for weapons sales. In 1989, Bull was working for Belgium’s premier arms manufacturer Poudrieres Reunies de Belgique (PRB).
There were also significant business dealings with the late billionaire and leading arms dealer Shaul Eisenberg, who had brokered a sale in Gerald Bull’s Space Research Corporation for South Africa’s state owned arms manufacturing company, Armscor. Eisenberg happened to be a high level MOSSAD operative and a key figure in Israel’s nuclear development programs, though his primary role had been to secure Israeli interests in China dating back to the Cold War. Eisenberg, (whose Wikipedia entry is periodically re-written by Israeli propagandists) also “… controlled Israel Aircraft Industries and Zim Israel Navigation Shipping Company” according to intelligence journalist Wayne Madsen, and “… was able to provide needed nuclear weapons components from Operation Phoenix to China and two of its major allies, North Korea and Pakistan.” 
His financial enabler and fellow agent was banker Tibor Rosenbaum, head of the Geneva based Banque du Credit international (BCI)  which during the late fifties and sixties was actively involved in laundering money from the criminal empire of Meyer Lansky. Like Rosenbaum, Lansky was a fierce Zionist. His financial contributions to the “cause” ensured his protection from the MOSSAD. Tibor Rosenbaum funded and supported Eisenberg giving the tycoon enormous financial leverage and covert influence over global business politics.  The corporations and companies owned by Eisenberg and now under his son Erwin’s control include: Iron Mt Recordkeeping, Iron Mtn mining, Rotron, Wackenhut, Israel Chemicals, Eisenberg Industries of Israel, Permindex, Legacy foundation of Nevada, Eisenberg Satellite and Telecom.
What should not be forgotten is MOSSAD’s well-known tactic of using front companies within the telecommunications industry for spying and blackmail. As we saw in a previous post, private security contractors in Iraq are used extensively by the US and make up a convenient resource for black operations. As Mark Shapiro, a spokesman for Wackenhut stated: “Security officers now outnumber law enforcement by three to one.” Wackenhut’s ease in collecting telephone records for its less than legal investigations from another Eisenberg owned corporation, AT&T, fuels speculation that this is a network of corporate businesses fused with Israeli intelligence interests, a mirror image of Eisenberg own dealings.
From the moment Donald Rumsfeld shook Saddam’s hand in 1983, delivering the promised chemical weapons shipments along with the CIA-led support for his regime, Gerald Bull was being groomed for chemical weaponry work in Iraq. Meanwhile, Eisenberg was busy expanding “Israel Chemicals” now owned by a Canadian company  With the rise of Neo-Conservatism, the infiltration of the Bush administration from die-hard Zionists took a major leap forward. As far back as 1988, Israel was busy implementing its plan to maintain the illusion that it was the only “democracy” in the Middle East and to ensure an end to any and all possibilities for lasting peace within the region. After all, they believed that such moves would eventually mean the corrosion of its military presence and the eventual demise of the State of Israel.
Feeding into the parallel force of the extreme right in America, the phony war on terrorism was beginning to take shape. A new bogey man was required and the Likud and Neo-cons were to begin an uncomfortable and complex fusion of interests which would culminate in the attacks of September 11th, the most audacious propaganda coup since Pearl Harbourand all doors for coercion, blackmail and information gathering would be open. If new doors needed to be unlocked, then new “keys” were made. Thus it came to be, that Saddam Hussein was considered a primary asset for CIA-MOSSAD tag-team and the assurance that Israel would maintain its military and ideological position in the region. Hussein was to become an integral part of the new deception to turn back the clock and prevent any emergence of “a leader who might be more palatable to the West and still be a threat to Israel.” 
Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein circa 1983 in relation to chemical weapons contract
Ex-MOSSAD agent Victor Ostrovsky outlines the background to the Iraq Invasion in his second book The Other Side of Deception (1995). He writes about the intelligence agency’s long-term project to portray Hussein as a tyrant and a “danger to the world” beginning in the late 1980’s and which was to continue right up to the Gulf war in 1990/91 and beyond. To that end: “The MOSSAD activated every asset it had, in every place possible, from volunteer agents in Amnesty International to fully bought members of the US Congress. Saddam had been killing his own people, the cry went; what could his enemies expect?”
Ostrovsky reveals the context behind the propaganda coup of the Kurdish massacre and its relation to Iraq:
The gruesome photos of dead Kurdish mothers clutching their dead babies after a gas attack by Saddam’s army were real, and the acts were horrendous. But the Kurds were entangled in an all-out guerrilla war with the regime in Baghdad and had been supported for years by the MOSSAD, who sent arms and advisers to the mountain camps of the Barazany family; this attack by the Iraqis could hardly be called an attack on their own people. But, as Uri said to me, once the orchestra starts to play, all you can do is hum along.
The media was supplied with inside information and tips from reliable sources on how the crazed leader of Iraq killed people with his bare hands and used missiles to attack Iranian cities. What they neglected to tell the media was that most of the targeting for the missiles was done by the MOSSAD with the help of American satellites. The MOSSAD was grooming Saddam for a fall, but not his own. They wanted the Americans to do the work of destroying that gigantic army in the Iraqi desert so that Israel would not have to face it one day on its own border. That in itself was a noble cause for an Israeli, but to endanger the world with the possibility of global war and the deaths of thousands of Americans was sheer madness. 
And it is in 2013 with Syria’s President Assad that we see the same tawdry attempts at PSYOPS with fake chemical attacks and media propaganda desperately trying to push through a new war in the Middle East. The Israeli lobby is beside themselves with frustration because at the time of writing this usually successfully tactic has failed as a direct result of public pressure in turn the exposure to alternative media exposing false flag operations for what they are. Yet, endangering the world with deception after deception is exactly what extreme elements in Israel’s government and MOSSAD operatives have continued to do from the disaster that was the Iraq invasion to the present day sabre-rattling and MOSSAD incursions into Iran – the next target on the map of a Greater Israel.
In order to follow through on their psychological operations the Israelis introduced the “Weapons of Mass Destruction” meme to the press and to further implant the idea of an imminent threat to all democracies from Saddam’s developing programs of nuclear chemical and biological weaponry. The propaganda train was set in motion, exaggerating and distorting Iraq’s true capability. The MOSSAD was about show its expertise in “false-flag” operations.
According to Ostrovsky, Gerald Bull was visited by Israeli friends from his past who were also MOSSAD officers, of which Bull was very probably aware. They had come to give him a warning having been thoroughly debriefed by MOSSAD’s psychological department and who had: “… studied the position Bull was in and analysed what was known about his character. It arrived at the conclusion that, even if threatened, he wouldn’t pull out of the program but would instead carry on his work with very little regard for his personal safety.” 
Ostrovsky believed that:
“Bull’s continuing with the program would play right into the MOSSAD’s hands. Through the bullet riddled body of Gerald Bull the world would be made to focus on his work: the Iraqi giant gun project. The timing had to be right though; Bull’s well publicised demise had to come right after an act of terror by the Baghdad regime, an act that could not be mistaken for an accident or a provocation. The hanging of the Observer reporter on March 15 was such an act.
After the reporter’s execution in Baghdad, a Kidon (MOSSAD assassination) team arrived in Brussels and cased the apartment building where Bull lived. It was imperative that the job be done in a place where it would not be mistaken for a robbery or an accident. At the same time, an escape route was prepared for the team and some old contacts in the Belgian police were revived to make sure they were on duty at the time of Bull’s elimination so that, if there was a need to call on a friendly police force, they’d be on call. They weren’t old of the reason for the alert, but would learn later and keep silent. 
Twelve years later in May 2003, a Belgian State Prosecutor considered reopening a probe into the murder having found new information that MOSSAD was indeed, involved. His consideration did not last long. In July 18, 1991, Belgian politician André Cools who had been investigating the murder of Bull a year earlier became the next high profile assassination. Two Tunisian men who carried out the murder were thought to have been employed by a Gladio group which in turn led back to the CIA/MOSSAD. André Cools had not only met and interviewed Shaul Eisenberg as part of his investigations into the case, but the Iraqi banker Abdullah Zilka. Foolishly, he announced that he would shortly be providing evidence on Belgian, Canadian and American corruption in the arms industry, the latter of which extended to some very elevated names within the British arms industry and the Bush Administration including Dick Cheney, Neil Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and certainly the enigmatic Frank Carlucci. His interviews with the two men were never published. The Belgian judge presiding over the murder case issued arrest warrants for mafia bosses connected to Toto Riina, the head of the Italian mafia.
Jean-Marc Connerotte, the courageous Belgian judge found himself dismissed from the Cools murder case before he could issue indictments on leading politicians. His removal was to be repeated several years later in the Dutroux case, when another similar list of high-profile names would appear, only to disappear into the night from whence they came. Alain Van der Biest, and a one-time political ally of Andre Cools and a shareholder in Poudrieres Reunies de Belgique, along with several associates, was accused of the murder by – you guessed it – an anonymous informer. By March 2002, while waiting to hear if he would go on trial in connection with the murder, Van der Biest was found dead from a “drug overdose” and with a suicide letter to his wife.
In October 2003 only five of the nine accused stood trial the others choosing to remain in various countries in Europe rather than to acquiesce to the law. It is not hard to see why. Finally, by January 2004 two had been acquitted and six men sentenced to 20 years in prison. They included his former aide, Richard Taxquet, chauffeur Giuseppe di Mauro, and two men tried in their absence, Cosimo Solazzo, Domenico Castellino. A “former aide” and his “chauffeur” with Italian mafia connections: this was hardly a resounding victory – rather a damp squib excuse that “justice be done.”
André Cool’s murder had thrown the Walloon socialist party into chaos and the subsequent investigation revealed not only several minor league sexual scandals but the payment of more than £2 billion in bribes made by French aerospace manufacturer Dassault and Italian helicopter firm Agusta to secure equipment orders from the Belgian armed forces, via socialist politicians. This bought down the Belgian Secretary-General to NATO and certainly put the spotlight on Belgian weapons manufacturing and the vested interests involved. But has anything changed? As in the Dutroux case, those on the outer ring of corruption took the rap and those who had a little more pertinent information were taken care of. And thus the world of arms, sexploitation and paedophilia continues to spin.
As we have explored, the manufactured nature of Belgium (not dissimilar to Israel) shows that Brussels and all its military agencies enjoy a disproportionate amount of power within the European Union. The 1970s and 1980s was particularly favourable for the development of institutional corruption and the fostering of ponerogenic networks. After the decision to set up the European headquarters of NATO otherwise known as Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) the CIA, along with the fascist network Gladio became concerned by the geo-political “prostitution” of Belgium to all and sundry, including Soviet spies. Gladio has all but been merged into the Zionist mafia consortiums that sub-contract assassins and various brokers within their respective fields.
With the collapse of the USSR the underworld is flowing freely into the Balkans; into Belgian’s military-industrial Establishment and fanning out across Europe. It seems that Brussels is a nexus point in the transference and brokerage of a major number of shadowy deals which extend far beyond the daily abuse of market capitalism. Israel’s MOSSAD and its extensive networks of sayanim * are central to this trade.
Federal Lawsuit Asserts That Protest of Zionism and Jewish Power Is Not First Amendment Protected
A brand new legal attack has been mounted by the Jewish community against the First Amendment.
Gerber v. Herskovitz, filed last December in the Eastern District of Michigan, claims that protests by an anti-Zionist group called Witness For Peace outside Ann Arbor's Beth Israel Congregation amounts to "group libel" of Jews, among other violations.
Witness for Peace is a small protest group founded by Henry Herskovitz, who is Jewish himself, to call attention to Israeli atrocities supported by Beth Israel. The group has peacefully picketed the Synagogue since 2003.
The lawsuit seems frivolous on its face, but organizations like The Lawfare Project which specialize in pro-Israel litigation have signed up as co-counsel for the plaintiffs, making it a formidable assault. The Lawfare Project sues institutions and governments around the world to prevent them from boycotting Israel or protesting Zionist brutality.
Many Americans are under the false impression that the First Amendment is safe on top of piles of Supreme Court precedents. The truth is more complicated.
The 1952 case of Beauharnais v. Illinois used logic similar to one of Gerber v. Herskovitz's complaints.
In Beauharnais v. Illinois, Jewish justice Felix Frankfurter authored the 5-4 majority ruling upholding the criminal conviction of a man who distributed leaflets calling attention to black crime along with a non-violent appeal for whites to politically organize. According to Frankfurter, Joseph Beauharnais was guilty of "libeling" the black race by referring to it as being more likely to commit crime, and this was thus unconstitutional. The legal concept of "group libel" is what underpins many "hate speech" laws in Europe. This landmark case has yet to be overturned.
Gerber v. Herskovitz is different in that it is also suing the Mayor of Ann Arbor Christopher Taylor for allowing the anti-Israel protests to continue. Aside from Witness for Peace engaging in "group libel" against Jews, the complaint states that both protesters and Ann Arbor city officials are violating laws that ban discrimination in public areas, flouting federal civil rights law, infringing on Beth Israel's religious rights, and that Mayor Taylor is failing to enforce a local ordinance that limits the placement of signs on grass near sidewalks.
The ACLU stepped in last March to file an amicus brief on behalf of the defendants, but the language used in their filing is peppered with attacks on the defendant's message, calling their anti-Zionist slogans "offensive, upsetting, and distasteful for activists to stage political demonstrations outside a synagogue." With over-the-top editorializing like this, the Jewish lawyers at the ACLU may be doing the defendants more harm than good.
Arguments in Gerber v. Herskovitz have been paused due to the coronavirus until June.
Hamas had been firing rockets into Israel for days at this point and Israel warplanes were now beginning to bomb Palestine.
The St. Louis Post Gazette reports:
The orders for the Givati brigade, an elite infantry unit, came in a typed, single-page letter.
“History has chosen us to spearhead the fight against the terrorist Gazan enemy who curses, vilifies and abominates Israel’s God,” Colonel Ofer Winter, the unit’s commanding officer, wrote in the letter to his troops. He ended with a biblical quote promising divine protection for Israel’s warriors on the battlefield.
The letter quickly circulated on social media and from there to the press. Secular Israelis condemned it, saying it broke a decades-old convention that kept religion out of military missions.
Two years on, the letter remains a symbol of a profound shift within Israeli society: the rising power and reach of religious nationalists. The change has set up a battle for the type of country Israel should be, a battle between the country’s liberals and its more religious nationalist camp.
In its early years, Israel’s two main centers of power — the military and the government — were dominated by the secular and mostly left-wing elite who had founded the state in 1948. But over the past decade or so a new generation of leaders that combines religion and nationalism has emerged.
Religious-Zionism differs from secular Zionism in its historical perspective and messianic undertones. For Religious-Zionists, caring for places like Jewish settlements in the West Bank — the biblical bedrock of Judaism, but also claimed by Palestinians as their home — is a way of fulfilling a religious obligation and building the Jewish state.
The community, sometimes referred to as the ‘national religious,’ has increased its presence in both government and the civil service. This year, for the first time ever, the heads of the national police, the Mossad spy agency and the Shin Bet domestic security service are all Religious-Zionists.
Nowhere, though, has the shift been more pronounced than in the military. Most soldiers in the Israeli army are secular or observant Jews, though Druze and Bedouin Arab citizens serve as well. But over the past two decades, academic studies show, the number of Religious-Zionist officers in the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has seen a huge increase. The military has also felt the growing influence of rabbis who have introduced matters of faith and politics to the battlefield.
Some politicians and military leaders have begun to push back.
In January, IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot announced he would remove a 15-year-old unit dedicated to “Jewish Awareness” from the military rabbinate — the department in charge of providing religious services within the ranks. The Jewish Awareness Branch has periodically drawn criticism from both inside and outside the military for pushing an ideological, right-wing and religious agenda. Some secular Israelis worry that too much religion in the military may lead to soldiers questioning who they should obey: their officer or God.
In a letter sent to IDF officers and published by the army, Eisenkot staked out the Israeli Defence Force’s position: A military divided over politics and religion can hardly fulfill its mission. “The IDF is the people’s army and includes a wide spectrum of Israeli society,” he wrote.
“A change is needed with the aim of keeping the IDF a stately army in a democratic country, nurturing that which unites its soldiers.”
Religious-Zionist politicians and rabbis vowed to block the change and have appealed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose governing coalition depends partly on support from such voters. Netanyahu himself is secular, though many of his inner circle of advisers and government appointments are Religious-Zionists.
The army chief has signaled he does not intend to back down. On April 3, the army said it was moving the Jewish Awareness Branch to the military’s Personnel Wing, even if operational details were still being worked out.
Rabbis have long served in Israel’s military, but historically they handled logistic issues, such as adherence to Jewish dietary laws. That began to change in the early 2000s. The military rabbinate demanded and won a new role connecting soldiers to their Jewish roots and infusing them with fighting spirit based on faith and centuries-old tradition.
The rabbinate established the Jewish Awareness Branch, which offers soldiers tours and lectures on Judaism and lessons that weave together religious teachings with military values like leadership, camaraderie and self-sacrifice.
The Israeli military does not hold figures classifying its soldiers as secular or observant. But a detailed study by the Defence Ministry journal Maarachot showed that by 2008, the percentage of national religious infantry officer cadets had increased ten-fold to 26 percent from 2.5 percent in 1990.
More recent research by specialists such as Reuven Gal, chairman of the Israeli Association of Civil-Military Studies, shows that trend continuing: Religious-Zionists now account for between a third and half of army cadets.
“This is over-representation,” Gal said.
“The IDF is the Israel Defence Force, not the Jewish Defence Force. It has religious and secular soldiers. If its values come from the rabbinate (The Jewish Awareness Branch), that’s warped. It’s wrong.”
NOT JUST PATRIOTISM?
Inside the seminary, the Bnei David academy, more young men sat in pairs studying the books by Jewish scholars that lined the classroom walls.
Israel’s first military prep school, the Bnei David was established in 1988 to encourage Religious-Zionist youth to take on meaningful roles in the conscript army at a time when the military had noticed a decline in recruits’ motivation.
The school boasts that nearly all its graduates volunteer for combat, half of them in elite units. About 40 percent of its alumni, Ofer Winter among them, become officers. The military did not respond to a Reuters request to interview Winter, who has been promoted since the Gaza war.
“We see military service as a great mitzvah (Jewish edict). It is a civil duty, but also a great mitzvah from the Torah,” said Netanel Elyashiv, a rabbi at the seminary.
One Bnei David graduate, an officer in an elite unit, said it was right for Israel’s national religious to do their bit for the country. “It’s not just patriotism, it is part of something far more spiritual, geared toward the future,” said the officer, who has just signed on for additional 10 years of service. “It is linked to deeper roots and a sense of being an emissary.”
Bnei David is now one of 46 military academies, half of which are religious.
Critics such as Professor Yagil Levy, who teaches civil-military relations at the Open University of Israel, see Religious-Zionism’s growing clout in the military as part of a wider push to keep strong Jewish settlements in the Palestinian Territories. Religious-Zionists are now the main backers of Israel’s settler movement.
Disappointment over the 2005 Gaza disengagement, when Israel pulled its troops and about 9,000 settlers out of the Gaza Strip, drove the Religious-Zionists to seek more powerful positions in politics, media and particularly in the security establishment, Levy said.
“The army is an important public arena in which they must fulfill a meaningful, active role … so that the shame of the 2005 disengagement does not recur.”
But Rabbi Eli Sadan, Bnei David’s founder, rejects such criticisms. In a paper published in January, he said Religious-Zionists had no desire to take over the military. He also said Levy and other critics were spreading hatred toward a community deeply devoted to the people of Israel.
‘THAT’S VERY BAD’
In 2012, Israel’s State Comptroller, an official watchdog, criticized rabbinate pamphlets that circulated among troops during the 2008-2009 Gaza war. The comptroller was particularly scathing of one pamphlet, which said that “not one millimeter” of land should be relinquished and that battle sometimes required cruelty to the enemy.
The growing concern of liberal Israelis was captured in an exchange in February in parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee meeting, called by Religious-Zionist lawmakers on behalf of the Jewish Awareness Branch.
Lieutenant Aharon Karov, a Religious-Zionist commander wounded in the 2008-2009 war, came to the rabbis’ defense when he explained how he had been injured and its effect on his squad’s morale.
“(It) was a head wound, nose, eye, mouth, I didn’t look human and my platoon saw me at that moment,” Karov told the committee. “My company commander asked himself, ‘What do I do with this platoon? They don’t want to keep on fighting.'”
The commander called the rabbinate, Karov said, which immediately dispatched a rabbi to Gaza. “He gave them the fighting spirit, reminded them why we were there, why we must go on, and at that moment my soldiers understood from within and went on fighting,” Karov said.
“That’s very bad,” replied lawmaker Omer Bar-Lev, who is the son of a former army chief and is himself a retired colonel. “If without a rabbi your soldiers were unmotivated, that’s very bad.”
‘ZIONIST, JEWISH AND PROUD’
The national religious vote goes mainly to two parties: Netanyahu’s Likud and the Religious-Zionist Jewish Home, which revamped itself under new young leadership ahead of the 2013 election. Jewish Home more than doubled its parliament seats in that vote, to 12 in the 120-seat chamber.
In the 2015 election, Jewish Home lost four seats to Likud, falling to eight. But it won greater gains inside the coalition government, for the first time holding the senior Justice Ministry, two other ministries and two security cabinet seats.
Jewish Home has changed considerably under its 44-year-old leader, Naftali Bennett. In the past it mainly safeguarded narrow sectarian interests. Now it openly wants to shape the country and has had some success doing so.
The party objects to the creation of a Palestinian state and wants Israel to formally annex most of the occupied West Bank. It toughened a law that means potential land-for-peace deals with the Palestinians must be put to a vote, and wrote another that limits the release of Palestinians convicted of killing Israelis.
Most Religious-Zionists oppose handing land to the Palestinians. As well as religious motivations, they share Netanyahu’s concerns that such a move would be a security risk.
Since the 2015 election, competition over the national religious vote has seen Netanyahu shift further right, often following Bennett’s lead.
“We want a state more connected to its roots,” Bennett told Reuters. “I am a Zionist, Jewish and proud. This is my land for the past 3,800 years. That’s the set of values.”
Bennett said that after the Holocaust, Religious-Zionism was in “survival mode.” It began to gain more influence from the 1970s, he said. “Now we are in the third stage, in which we see Religious-Zionism in leadership positions in all realms in Israel.”
Yedidia Stern, Vice President of Research at the Israel Democracy Institute and himself a Religious-Zionist, remembers the traumatic years that followed the assassination in 1995 of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a Religious-Zionist law student. Rabin had promised to hand back land to the Palestinians as part of the Oslo peace accords, upsetting many Religious-Zionists.
“The entire sector was labeled a danger to rule of law, irrational, insurgent. Religious-Zionism became borderline illegitimate,” he said. “Twenty years later, we’re in the opposite position: The entire rule of law is in the hands of Religious-Zionism. It’s astounding.”
© 2018 All Rights Reserved. All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. We are not responsible for content written by and hosted on third-party websites. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. We assume no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and servicemarks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners. .......Tags: "israel nuked wtc" 9-11 Truth jfk assassination "cultural marxism" "holocaust hoax" "fake news" "fake history" fed censorship "mind control" tavistock holohoax auschwitz deep state kabbalah talmud bush obama clinton trump russiagate spygate israel britain saudi arabia middle east rothschild cold war comey brennan clapper yellow vests populism nuclear demolition communism marxism socialism pedophiliacontact: firstname.lastname@example.org