Quite right, G.
Any government can pull in their media tabs and foster a story to bolster popularity to prop up a government that is doing poorly in the polls. Bush and Co. has done it how many times? Harper just did it here in Canada. Harper, Blair, who's next? The aussie PM? Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. Its hard to trust a crew of liars. "Saddam is a danger to the world with known WMD's!" Anyone remember that one?

Exactly Duncan. There will now be a rapid scramble to back off some of the more draconian rules - particularly the ones that restrict carryons such as purchases from duty-free shops and other rules which affect last-minute flying 'executives' who only travel with carryons.

One other thing to notice, anybody who makes a suggestion (a suggestion only mind) that the threat may not have been as serious as billed will get dumped on very quickly and harshly. My view.

I am still unsure what it is that the British police actually solved. After all, I can still recall that just over 3 years ago - on the very day that hundreds of thousands of British demonstators were out in the streets protesting what Blair and Bush were about to launch in Iraq - heavily armed British police surrounded Heathrow airport apparently to thwart another terror plot. Similarly, the Toronto arrests of a few months ago may not have been for what the newspapers were stating - we will see. As for the recent foiled plot, it is curious that it occurred at the very moment when many westerners were questioning what Britain and the U.S. (not to mention Canada) were up to with their backing of the recent Israeli invasion of Lebanon.

Call me a sceptic, but I simply don't fully trust Blair and Bush and their backers in the police and the media at this point in time. I am open to changing my mind, however.

Yah. It almost makes one wonder if the cold war of the past wasn't a construct to keep the war economy of the second war functioning full bore. It's functioning now, in spades. Our politicos have been crying "wolf" so often, these unproven charges just could be more lies.
Now that there is a hint of oil lying off Cuba's shores, I wonder where the future focus will be.

What intrests me is that the accused terrorists were planning to use a binary explosive, a very complicated device at the best of times. Certainly the point of the explosion would be where the chemicals were mixed, as in an aircraft lavatory.

It seems what we may have been dealing with is wannabe terrs; people who are really pissed-off with the establishment and forming psuedo terr cells. Of course Britian has a lot of experience with terrs, with the IRA.

I think we are creating a major problem with Muslims (a religion that seriously needs a reformation) and by treating them and their religion as a sort of anti-christs, exacerbate the situation.

Remeber, today's terrorists are tomorrow's heroes and history has a strange way of condemning yesterday's politicians.

The alarm with this potential threat, me thinks the Americans wet their collective pants first and forced the Brits to act - act on nothing.

Grumpy,

agreed that the binary explosive makes very little sense. Some reports claimed they had planned to "make" TATP on the plane, but that needs to be dried after mixing the chemicals (as far as I recall) and unless they planned on a marathon session in the lav I can't see it working out.

This "ring," and the ones in Florida and Ontario, sound more like teens and young adults puffing up for their friends. The lack of security and the plots themselves seem to indicate that these were loud mouthed kids who were only taken seriously by the people listening in.

And, don't forget, these are the same coppers who pumped several rounds into the innocent head of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Alcibiades,

as Gen. 'Buck' Turgidson said

Lets be very suspicious of this one..very suspicious.

Gerhardius
LOL.

God, do we ever need an update of that movie - too bad Terry Southern died in 1995. What he'd have done with the post 9/11 world.

This is an interesting piece by Craig Murray the former Brit ambassador to Uzbekistan: http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/archives/2006/08/the_uk_terror_p.html

He's been very vocal in the campaign against torture, hasn't he?

Dunno if you ever check Andrew Sullivan's blog. I stopped by there this morning and came across this:

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/08/the_uk_terror_p_2.html

This too is interesting:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Warrantless-Surveillance.html?hp&ex=1155873600&en=a4e06f77e4a3c6a0&ei=5094&partner=homepage

I think Canada is doing the right thing (for once) and keeping a low profile in their anti-terrorist investigations. All this 'red alert'- 'code blue'; security ratings are stuff and nonsnse and are more 3rd rate television than anything else.

I'm worried that we will be treated to another "terrorist" incident in order to sway the November elections in the US.

Here's the link to Alex Jones video "Terrorstorm" which explains some of the false flag operations throughout history.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3710767957407328313&q=terrorstorm

What a bunch of conspiracy theorists you are!, next you'll be telling me that Oswald didn't kill JFK and that the Warren Comission was a coverup.

Bush & Blair's fear factor again!
It's all so conveniant so that they can go and invade Iran, Syria etal.
The bush, israel, blair are the real evil in this age of empire building.
harper is their trained lil lap dog!
me, A peace-nic

climber
Apparently there's a newly dusted off theory, I'm not making this up, which is being discussed more or less openly now that Castro appears to be in God's waiting room for the moment, that blames the Cubans all over again - go figure. This stuff is not my cup of tea but, although
I might not agree with much that Nana posts, she is one of the most credible spokespeople for the widest range of conspiracy data of anyone I've ever encountered. Her ability to summarize and post from a wide range of authorities is quite impressive.

Don't be too tough on her until you've heard her out. She may not have the goods to convince me – or you for that matter – but you can’t just dismiss her as a flake.

Climber,

Not conspiracy theorists, conspiracy realists. This is not speculation, the neo-con conspiracies have been proven, to all but the complicit and the indifferent, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Which one are you?

The problem with terrorist attacks in the world, is that seldom were given much press in the West. 9/11 changed all that and every fart is now considered big news.

The Americans ignored the IRA attacks in the UK, while quietly funding them. What has happened is the norm is now considered abnormal. There will be devestaing attacks in the future and many will be killed, but this is the real world and it's time to get our collective rose coloured glasses off.

Isreal's destruction of Southern lebanon, is a massive act of terror, designed to get the public stop supporting Hezbolah, It has backfired as public support of Hezbolah is far greater.

The US anti-free trade punitive duties on Canadian softwood lumber is the best example of ecconomic terrorism around. But it is not polite to call the USA a terrorist nation.

On and on it goes!

I though it was kind of weasly how they released all the names "as required by law" when their bank acounts were frozen.

Waiting until they are charged or arraigned doesn't cut it anymore.

It would be hard to demonize anonymous conspirators.

I was joking, I too call bullshit.

Thanks for the compliment,Alcibiades.

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=522
Bomb Plot “Key Player” a CIA-ISI Asset

Once again, it is transparently obvious the latest supposed terrorist threat was concocted by the usual suspects, the intelligence apparatus in the United States and Britain, expressly devised to ram through yet more draconian legislation—to wit, a further undermining of the Bill of Rights, as Chertoff recently suggested (increased surveillance and longer detention of citizens without formal charge), a cynical ploy to rob Americans of their birthright, as the fascist elite has decided they can no longer tolerate constitutional law, a tradition stretching back to Magna Carta.

Check this out re: the practicality of actually pulling off what these guys have been accused of:
http://www.theregister.com/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/

Just like the Ricin scare in the UK a while back - only an idiot would get into hysterics about it. An idiot, or someone who can use their "success" to lobby for more anti terrorism funding.

Not at all surprising to see a member of a western intelligence agency involved in this. I'll bet they have dozens of agents out there who have recruited groups of gullable people, waiting for their orders to carry out some ridiculous plot whenever the political need arises for a big bust.

Taking soda pop and lip balm away from people getting on planes is way up there on the list of the stupidest things I have ever heard of.

What a waste.

Just discovered this terrific site:
http://www.falseflagnews.com/why_monitor_drills

Because rogue elements inside the military, not loyal to the Constitution, can use these drills as a cover for their synthetic, false-flag terror attacks which are later blamed on their stables of patsies, dupes, and double agents. Currently those patsies come in the form of the myth-drenched Al-Qaeda.

During the terror attacks of September 11, the U.S. military ran over 15 drills and war games. This was the highest concentration of military drills ever in one day. These included:

Vigilant Guardian, Northern Guardian, Vigilant Warrior, Northern Vigilance, Amalgam Warrior, Global Guardian, Crown Vigilance, Apollo Guardian, the NRO plane-crash drill, and AWACS drill over Florida and Washington DC, FEMA’s TRIPOD II and Timely Alert II drills in NYC, and the Fort Meyer, VA fireman drills near the Pentagon.

The hijacking drills successfully confused the FAA and NORAD into thinking that as many as 29 jets were hijacked on the morning of September 11. With so many radar blips going across the screen and simulated hijackings running, many low level NORAD and FAA employees did not know that the attacks were real. Then, upon discovering they were real, they had to take precious time to separate the fake radar blips from the real ones.

Other 9-11 drills suggest that the 4 hijacked planes that morning were part of a drill that was flipped live. For example, we can examine OPERATION VIGILANT GUARDIAN. This exercise simulated hijacked planes in the north eastern sector and started to coincide with 9/11.

Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, NORAD unit's airborne control and warning officer, was overseeing the exercise. At 8:40am she took a call from Boston Center which said it had a hijacked airliner. Her first words, as quoted by Newhouse News Service were, "It must be part of the exercise." This is another example of how the numerous drills on the morning of 9/11 deliberately distracted NORAD so that the real hijacked planes couldn't be intercepted in time.

There is also a page on the next scheduled war games and terror drills.

Half of New Yorkers (49.3%) who were polled on the subject by Zogby said they believed the Bush junta had advance knowlege of 911. That is not fringe.

911 is a fraud. Al Qaida is a fraud. The War on Terror is a fraud.

It was widely reported that the Israeli soldiers who were "kidnapped" by Hezbollah were on the Lebanese side of the border when they were taken into custody and yet this is something you will never read in Canada's "mainstream" (that is, Zionist-controlled) media. We only get to read about "Hezbollah's cross-border raid." Now Canadian taxpayers are coughing up $30 million to help repair Lebanese infrastructure as a result of Israel's abortive attempt to occupy and then annex Lebanese territory south of the Litanni River for the purpose of stealing the river. The Shebaa farms region was also illegally annexed to Israel for its water.

Israel is thirsty and has no future without Lebanon's water.

[Edited for failing to meet Tyee comment standards. Please refrain from racist and defamatory comments. Tyee editor]

You are a terrible anti-semite kjc, you should be charged with hate crimes, the Jews are Gods chosen people, they are beyond reproach. I'm joking of course, some people believe this kind of shit.

New Yorkers know everything? Just because 49.3% of New Yorkers believe something means that is the truth?
The Israeli captured soldiers were not in Lebanon. This fact hasn't been hidden from you. It's simply a lie.
kjc is out to lunch. It takes all kinds to make up our society, but people like kjc are hateful of our society, and I give him,her or it no respect.
It's simple. We are the good guys.
People like kjc are the bad guys.
Is that nuanced enough for you?

IAMC:

Define "good". Define "we".

You've already proven that.

" We guys " are the standard Western, Judaeo Christian, democratic, peaceful, straight, non violent, raised in North America or elsewhere, that believe in the right to the pursuit of happiness types, who believe in motherhood and Elvis Presley.
Can I be anymore clear than that?

Can I be any more clear than this: Ron, you are the biggest hater of all...nobody's idea of a good guy - a true product of the anti-intellectual right wing looney fringe.

IAMC:

One of ten separate entries at http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israeli_solders.html from sources that also include the Hindustan Times, the Bahrain News Agency, fr.news.yahoo, news.monstersandcritics, AFP, chinabroadcast, Asia Times, voltaire.net, SFGate and . . . the Jerusalem Post.

Editor:

Mike Davis, from ‘WHITE PEOPLE ARE ONLY A BAD DREAM’ an essay from DEAD CITIES AND OTHER TALES, 2002, The New Press, New York

There are no secrets anymore, just censorship.

Even if I am wrong about where the Israeli soldiers were when they were kidnapped ( I could have said "captured" )
It doesn't matter. You are an agent against me.
I must defend myself.
But I don't think that they were in Lebanon kjc.
If that was true, we would have heard about this from the MSM, who are a largely liberal group of fellows.

Defend yourself, Ron, how so? No one needs to defend themselves against the desire to have greater knowledge about anything. Have you read Seymour Hersh's piece in the New Yorker? I'd say that's pretty main stream and it's also very clear that Israel seems to have been looking for a provocation.

Can you think why?

KJC,
The Israeli soldiers captured INSIDE Lebanon also was reported by the Christian Science Monitor.

The Apocalypse is right here in these posts.

Simple minds think in simple terms.

I took my nephew to see "The Ant Bully." In order to create a story children around the age of 6 can understand, they had to centre the story line around ants taking on a villain exterminator. In other words, immature, unintelligent, innocent minds can only see black and white arguments in which there ia an absolute right and wrong.

The complexities of the world require one to contextualize moral problems. There are times when I too take an absolutist position of good vs evil....like when my Lakers are playing.

Here’s what’s dangerous about absolutism, however, when it comes to the real world:

1. People are fallible (ie: electing a leader with the IQ of a bologna sandwich).

2. There are many more ways to be wrong than right.

3. Absolutists who are wrong stay wrong.

4. Absolutism causes people to act more drastically than they would otherwise, sometimes much more, as in bombings which kill innocent women and children.

Tom Joad

LOL - still, I think you're being far too harsh toward bologna sandwiches.

I would wager that IAMC has trouble tying his shoes.

standard not if you believe right wing writers such as Mark Steyn who say birthrates are causing rednecks to go the way of the dodo.

Western read Orientalism by Edward Said (a non-Muslim). I dare you.

Judaeo Christian According to Arthur A. Cohen, there is no such thing as Judeo-Christians, and it was invented by US politicians. He says there is no theological commonality between the 2 faiths.

Now idiots like you would argue that the term seperates these two faiths from Islam because these faiths helped Western civilization develop. Well, moron, so did Islam! In fact, Islam helped Europe! out of the Dark Ages into the Age of Enlightenment, through the culture and sciences that the Europeans learned from the Muslims during that period.

peaceful/non violent I guess the 1000 plus Lebanese civilians, and the 4 million civilians killed in the vietnam war, the over 40 thousand civilians killed in Iraq in the search for those elusive weapons of mass destruction (where are they by the way?), the 4000 Afghan civilians dead from US airstrikes, the 3500 Iraqi civilians in the gulf war who were murdered, along with the mass graves found in Panama after the US left don't mean anything. Oh yeah, and Israeli occupation forces have killed over 3,000 Palestinian civilians since the last Intifada began.

raised in North America or elsewhere Umm, is the Middle East not elsewhere? I think that could mean anywhere in the Universe.

By the way, wasn't Salman Rushdie raised in Pakistan?

Yes IAMC, you are wrong. And so is anyone who believes CanWest Global on the subject.

And yes, it does matter. It matters very much because it reveals the moral highground Israel claims as an utter sham, dare I say it, a lie.

Also, according Noam Chomsky in an interview aired on Democracy Now:

from http://democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258

But this is not the story we are hearing from CanWest Global or from the CBC for that matter.

Oops there I go, risking getting "edited" again.

Oh yeah I forgot one: straight

I actually think you are united with the Ay-Rabs on this one, IAMC! A Saudi Professor said that the Tsunami was God's punishment for Queers. I guess since you and Mr. Harper believe the same thing about Aids, you can ride your camel down to Mecca.

I don't know where the hell to post this but it's frightening - since indoctrination is nominally part of what we're talking about here, perhaps it's not entirely out of place.
Jeez, look at the age of the kids in this program:

http://journal.davidbyrne.com/2006/08/american_madras.html

Well thank you Nana. There you go IAMC, the Christian Science Monitor. It is hard to imagine a more impeccable source.

Tom Joad if you have an opportunity take your nephew to see some of Japanese master animator Hayao Miyazaki's films although you might want to view them first as there are some scenes that a very young child might find frightnening. The Japanese world view does not bifurcate the world into absolute good vs absolute evil the way that IAMC, CanWest Global and more standard Disney fare does.

In particular I recommend Princess Mononoke. Everytime you decide, aha, he's the bad guy or, I thought she was good but now I can she is really bad, something else happens to make you see they are really only imperfect human beings whose motivations, although they may arise from good (or bad) intentions, in execution become something quite different.

The Methodists just toasted America too.
So what is the point of liberals mission of anti-religion stance?
To me, it's not very comfortable.
I am normally more liberal than that.

And when and where did this 'toasting' take place?

What anti-religion stance are you talking about?

No, you're not liberal.

Thanks for the Byrne article, G West. You're right - if that isn't the scariest thing in this hemisphere, I don't know what is. That's wayyyyy worse than weapons of mass destruction - wait a minute - those ARE weapons of mass destruction!

This particularly is why I have such an ugly on against Christian Zionism and rabid fundamentalism, and miss no opportunity to speak against them in my church. It's a long road, but one day soon, our church may be able to take a stand against these in such a way as to encourage others to work with us to remove the tax deductability of these so-called religions, and to eventually have them exposed for what they are, hounded out of legitimacy, and made as illegal as Hizbollah.

More are reevaluating their long-held beliefs all the time - Bruce Waltke from Regent College here in Vancouver is only the latest and best-known of a large number of evangelical theologians who have come to realize publicly that Christian Zionism and rabid fundamentalism are antithetical to the Christian message and deserve no support.

I don't hear enough about these small victories...

I don't think Climber really knows where or what he is . He's all over the place in how he sees the world.

He doesn't even know, aparently, that the Palestinians and other Arabs are all so-called Semites.

A little history lesson for this confused fellow. Though one can accept his sincerity at face value.

The Jews are from the same Semite family tree historically, but 2000 years removed of course, after being forcibly evicted from Palestine by the Romans. And having ove that intervening time inter-bred and produced a family tree that makes them more Asian, Russian, Amerikan, but especially European, if you can recall Climber.

The question is, are the Jews a religion or an ethnicity?

I would say that it is a serious debatable point.

Oh, and being anti-semite then actually makes one more anti-Arab. Such as you seem to be.

Which isn't the only thing you seem to need to get sorted out, seriously.:-)

As Coyote pointed out, there is very little of the Semite in European Jewry.
See:http://198.62.75.1/www2/koestler/

The Thirteenth Tribe

The Khazar Empire and its Heritage

Arthur Koestler

This book traces the history of the ancient Khazar Empire, a major but almost forgotten power in Eastern Europe, which in A.D. 740 converted to Judaism. Khazaria, a conglomerate of Aryan Turkish tribes, was finally wiped out by the forces of Genghis Han, but evidence indicates that the Khazars themselves migrated to Poland and formed the craddle of Western (Ashkenazim) Jewry...
The Khazars' sway extended from the Black sea to the Caspian, from the Caucasus to the Volga, and they were instrumental in stopping the Muslim onslaught against Byzantium, the eastern jaw of the gigantic pincer movement that in the West swept across northern Africa and into Spain.
Thereafter the Khazars found themselves in a precarious position between the two major world powers: the Eastern Roman Empire in Byzantium and the triumphant followers of Mohammed. As Arthur Koestler points out, the Khazars were the Third World of their day, and they chose a surprising method of resisting both the Western pressure to become Christian and the Eastern to adopt Islam. Rejecting both, they converted to Judaism.
The second part of Mr. Koestler's book deals with the Khazar migration to Polish and Lithuanian territories, caused by the Mongol onslaught, and their impact on the racial composition and social heritage of modern Jewry. He produces a large body of meticulously detailed research in support of a theory that sounds all the more convincing for the restraint with which it is advanced.
Mr. Koestler concludes: "The evidence presented in the previous chapters adds up to a strong case in favour of those modern historians - whether Austrian, Israeli or Polish - who, independently from each other, have argued that the bulk of modern Jewry is not of Palestinian, but of Caucasian origin. The mainstream of Jewish migrations did not flow from the Mediterranean across France and Germany to the east and then back again. The stream moved in a consistently westerly direction, from the Caucasus through the Ukraine into Poland and thence into Central Europe. When that unprecedented mass settlement in Poland came into being, there were simply not enough Jews around in the west to account for it, while in the east a whole nation was on the move to new frontiers" ( page 179, page 180).
"The Jews of our times fall into two main divisions: Sephardim and Ashkenazim.
The Sephardim are descendants of the Jews who since antiquity had lived in Spain (in Hebrew Sepharad) until they were expelled at the end of the fifteenth century and settled in the countries bordering the Mediterranean, the Balkans, and to a lesser extent in Western Europe. They spoke a Spanish-Hebrew dialect, Ladino, and preserved their own traditions and religious rites. In the 1960s, the number of Sephardim was estimated at 500000.
The Ashkenazim, at the same period, numbered about eleven million. Thus, in common parlance, Jew is practically synonymous with Ashkenazi Jew." ( page 181).
In Mr. Koestler's own words, "The story of the Khazar Empire, as it slowly emerges from the past, begins to look like the most cruel hoax which history has ever perpetrated."

As for GWest's and other's point, the reality is there are many competing "conspiracies" likely loose in the world. (It's the reason all states have "intelligence" services-, in order to have accurate information for their conspiracies and counter those of others.)

So I accept that "conspiracies are fact of life in the world-, though there is a constant need to separate fact from fiction around them. (Like the Nazis burning down the Reichstag in order to justify attacking the Communists. And the many attempts contemplated by the CIA to assasinate Castro.)

Only the naive, in my view, would rule them out as a fact of life.

But the main, and most dangerous "conspirator" in our modern world is the United States and its Empire alliance with especially Britain and the Zionists. (Canada is just an insignificant toady state to the Empire. A sychophant state.) And they are so largely because of their near monopoly lock on weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons which they don't want anybody else to have, and to here anyway, the manpower, cash and technological resources available to them to carry out their empire conspiracies.

Which doesn't mean they don't have their own vulnerabilities, because they certainly do. The main one being, they have bloatedly outgrown and/or depleted their own land and resource base, and now need the resources of the rest of the world for their own never ending capitalist growth expansion.

All of which is what makes them so fuking dangerous to the rest of us.

Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean there isn't a conspiracy out to get me/us. :-)

Among others.

I am myself descended from Sephardic Jews who genuinely converted to Christianity five hundred years ago and this is part of the reason I am so deeply disturbed by the claims and activitities of the Ashkenazi Khazars in Palestine.

That and the fact that members of mother's family were murdered by Jewish Bolsheviks in Russia.

Nobody can say that we haven't been warned about the Khazars:

Revelation 2:9

"Right and wrong are the same in Palestine as anywhere else. What is peculiar about the Palestine conflict is that the world has listened to the party that committed the offence and has turned a deaf ear to the victims.”
--British History Professor Arnold Toynbee

http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/2006/08/844957.shtml
A good background piece.

It is important to remember that when the UN recognized Israel in'48, it violated its own charter.

As for the MIT thingy we're supposedly commenting on...MIT lost its credibility a long time ago. John Tirman is just another obfuscator masquerading as a truth teller.

Interesting stuff, Nana. Thank you.

You should meet up with Avicenna if you have not already. She also sometimes delights me with the interesting little historical tidbits she drops in here from time to time.

:-) A good day to you.

Of all the ignorant, small-minded, and downright stupid things the Tyee’s usual suspects post, the racist notions have got to be the worst.

At least when it comes to your dimwitted views on alternative health practices I have the comfort of knowing that when you get yourself killed, it will improve the breed.

But with your clueless ideas about “race” – it’s a social construct that developed out of ignorance and prejudice, you morons – you might just get someone else hurt. And you don’t have that right.

I see some of you jackasses are whingeing about your offensive remarks being removed. It may come as a surprise to you, since you get away with spreading hate on so many threads, but it is the obligation of responsible publications to present accurate information and intelligent commentary. Not delusional rants, racist conspiracy theories, and vitriol from people who haven’t the nerve to attach their real names to their views.

One other thing. Since most of you claim to be lefties, your postings can lead me to only one conclusion: With a brain trust like this, no wonder the NDP is in so much trouble.

Keep it up: Gordon Campbell needs more support.

More on the Khazar Empire.

http://econc10.bu.edu/economic_systems/NatIdentity/FSU/Caucasus/khazaria.htm

Shannon Rupp
WHat exactly are you talking about?

Seems to me that's tarring with a pretty broad brush.

Clearly you are more adventurous than I, Alcibiades. :-) A wingnut or Zionist raver, for sure.

I find this stuff about the Khazarian Empire very interesting, not having heard of it before I 'fess.

From the site I link to above, just by way of indicating its possible credibility, re the demise of the Jewish Khazarian Empire:

"What is clear is that the same factors that drove Jews to Khazaria from the Byzantine Empire and the Muslim lands must have doubtless drove them to Eastern Europe as well. Jews were already present in eastern Europe though were largely augmented by the Khazar migration. The Khazarian Empire thus fell, its fate similar to many empires before its time. Its hand in history is great, as the evolution of civilization could have been greatly altered had Khazaria not held back forces intent on destroying each other, the same forces eventually responsible for destroying it. Its story is remarkable, unfortunately not widely known. Nathan Ausubel, a Jewish historian, summed it up best when he stated “OF all the astonishing experiences of the widely dispersed Jewish people none was more extraordinary than that concerning the Khazars” (Brook, p.1)."

Another indicator which points in favour of the view that already by then, the 8th to 11th Century, the Jews who had at the time of the Romans been driven from Palestine, were already well on the road to being Europeanized, and becoming more a "religion" and less an "ethnicity".

Again Nana, thanks for pointing me towards this interesting historical material.

Rather than Jewish Khazarian Empire though, it would be more accurate to say the Judaist, Khazartian Empire. Very interesting.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/#Content

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/c/cat-ballou-script-transcript-lee.html
"Shalom Aleichem, Jackson Two-Bears. -Why'd you say Shalom Aleichem?
I'm full Sioux lndian! I'm not of the Chosen People.
Be stubborn if you want to.
-I ain't stubborn. -Not much you ain't!
An ex-congressman of these United States...
...said at the Chautauqua this winter...
...lndians is the Lost Tribe.
-But he won't admit it. -Just ain't true!
He was an ex-congressman of these United States!
-Papa, maybe he was mistaken. -Why no, he was not!
Jackson's just got a mean, stubborn streak in him, is all.
I brought Mr. Bernstein, the telegraph operator, out here last month.
And he stood right here...
...and spoke Hebrew at Jackson for minutes.
And Jackson pretended he didn't understand a word.
Now I call that stubborn!"

By way of information to kjc, when I was in the Communist Party in this country, we're talking starting in the early 60s, there was a strong "Jewish" support base even then to it. And I gathered, from participation in a number of national CP events that this was true right across the country, perhaps nowhere more so than in Winnipeg, I understand.

By then, the CPC being far from the independant body it could have and should have been, the Party in the USSR was already by then committed, along with the West and the UN, as someone else here said, in violation of its Charter, to the Zionist's State of Israel. Which of course involved the dispossession of the native Palestinians.

It was one of those "accumulations" of things which later took me out of the Communist Party in fact, for I never did support the founding of the State of Israel, contrary to "party policy". (And though I did not speak of it, and indeed toed the party policy, don't give me that "party line" shitt. All parties have a "line", once established, which they expect their members to "toe up to". It's in the "elitist" nature of "The Beasts".)

Shannon R. where DO you get off pulling that hissy fit? If HISTORY is offensive to you, you're in a lot of trouble.

Coyote, there is an extensive bibliography in Arthur Koestler's book. The Kingdom of the Khazars existed.

Sephardi tended to look down upon the Ashkenazim because of the conversion factor. In Israel, the Ashkenazim rule, and the Sephardi are discriminated against.

Haaretz broke the story a few years back, that during the early 50's,
Sephardi children were treated for ringworm with incredibly high doses of X-rays.
see:http://www.barrychamish.com/html/ringworms.html

now this:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/business/business-retail-walmart-young.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

might be construed as racism, as was Mel Gibson's rant - but what's been written on this thread...well?

Just so you know I'm not making this stuff up...there is a film which has been shown around the world, but to date not in Israel.

The Ringworm Children
director: David Belhassen & Asher Hemias
nation(state): Israel
runtime: 45 minutes
contact:

language: in English & Hebrew w/English subtitles

In the early years following Independence, approximately 100,000 immigrant children, primarily from North Africa, received X-ray radiation treatment for ringworm. At that time, the medical world was influenced by race-based misconceptions of Eugenics and perceived ringworm as a degenerative illness that represented a danger to humanity.

In fact, it was a mild fungus infection that, left to its own devices, would clear up after puberty. However, under the direction of Dr. Sheba, the former head of the Ministry of Health, the disease was treated differently. An ardent believer in the new science of Eugenics, Dr. Sheba set up detention stations for administering powerful treatments of radiation.
Later on, it was discovered that the radiation treatments caused high rates of infertility, cancer and mortality. This tragic affair was hidden from the public eye for decades… until now.
in competition as a Feature Film

http://indyfilmfest.org/realshorts.html

I don't recall Coyote outing himself as a 'former' communist before.
Maybe I don't always read all the words he posts. But then who can?
And Nana, thanks for digging up an obscure story that confirms your believe that the Jews are no better than the Nazi's. No surprise there.

Ron.
Where do you get that? Certainly not from Nana's post. Are you incapable of reading anything responsibly?

Then again, why do I ask - your heroes are Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

If you had any sense you’d realize there was an active Eugenics program in your beloved Alberta too. IN fact, Preston Manning's brother was sterilized, on purpose, as part of the program. And that's just a tiny part of the history of eugenics in North America. Why would Israel be immune from such aberrations?

Shake your head man. Don't be such an utter fool. The world is not now and never has been black and white.

Nana,

I appreciate yourinformation.

As you are doubtless aware, it is extremely difficult to maintain an objectective analytical and critical dialouge about the Jews, and that particular militant manifestation, Zionism. Unlike any other national, religious, political or ideological element, they get a special pass card which keeps them protected from isolation. At least that has been the case to here.

But increasingly, there are indications that is beginning to break down, and there is a greater receptivity to a more objective and critical examination of the Jewish historical record. Which I think is a good thing, though the detractors of this process will continue to play the racist and national chauvanist card, as they do here, to continue their being "above" criticism, or critical examination.

I think all things, ideas, and groups, indeed individuals should be fair subject of discourse and examination, excluding none. It is a critical component of the democratic process. And it is a critical piece in understanding the particular character of our time and the forces at work within it, and the real histories that have brought us to here.

I do not intend to be silenced on the subject, and I hope yourself likewise.

For it really is true, that those who fail to understand history, real not sanitized history, are not only likely destined to repeat it, but be its victims as well.

IAMClueless,

I have never hidden the fact that I was once a member of the Communist Party. Indeed, in many regards, with my own additions and subtractions to the content and meaning of the concept, I remain a kind of small "c" communist-, with what are likely strong "anarchist" tendencies. 8-D LOL.

Nothing whatsoever that I feel the need to either apologize for or regret there. Indeed I consider it to have been a valuable learning experience in my life.

Suck it up, babe. I'd rather that in my background resume than be where you are now.

Fer bloody sure.

Why I Don't Live In Israel
By Orit Weksler, AlterNet
Posted on August 17, 2006, Printed on August 18, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/40388/

This war is not different from the others. It's just the same. It reminds us of the wars that preceded it. I was born into the Yom Kippur War and lived through two other "official wars": the first Lebanon war, the first Gulf war. I remember as a kid: lists of soldiers killed in battle read on the radio after the hourly news; knowing the next name could be one of my friends' brothers or fathers. I remember as a teenager: sirens, gas masks, and fireworks shows of patriot missiles chasing Scuds in the sky. I remember as a mom: driving in the farthest possible lane from a city bus, just in case it was the one carrying the suicide bomber that day.

Wars are all the same and this one is no different. For Israelis, they all go back to "that" war. That war that turned my great-grandparents into smoke, that horrible, monstrous act of genocide that keeps creeping up on us.

Jews were not a party in World War II. They were victims -- they had no army and no choice. But Israel does have an army and a choice. Israel is choosing to endanger its citizens and soldiers, to ruin once again the lives of many civilians in Lebanon, in order to prove its strength and to keep "that" from happening again.

I think it's not only a mistake, it's a suicidal path. Nothing can ensure us "that" won't happen -- the gas chambers, the concentration camps, the ghettos. All that. Since it happened once it might happen again.

Some people justify Israel's actions by arguing that Jews need a place to go to when anti-Semitism breaks out somewhere in the world. But as Yeshayahu Leibowitz, the philosopher and outspoken public figure, once said: the most dangerous place for Jews in the world is the state of Israel.

What does Israel have to offer Jews who come to find shelter? Right now it's offering grief, fear and shame. If we're doomed to be a nation that lives by the sword, as is commonly proclaimed on the streets of Tel Aviv these days, then I opt out.

And I did. When my son was born five years ago in Tel Aviv, the nurse complimented his good health by saying: "He'll make a good soldier." That gave me the chills. The babies he shared the nursery with will, in 13 years, be fighting the third, or fourth or fifth Lebanon war. I will do anything in my power so that my son does not become one of them.

This is one of the reasons I don't live in Israel. In many ways I feel I'm in exile. I'm glued to the Internet and I cry for every civilian -- Lebanese and Israeli, who is killed, wounded or traumatized by this war. I also cry for the soldiers and their families. I believe they are making a huge mistake and I don't know how to make them stop.

Not that I agree with Sheik Nasrallah. In fact, he scares me. I think Israel should defend itself from Nasrallah and his kind. Israel should defend itself by joining all the people and governments of the Middle East who are concerned and threatened by fanatic Islam to figure out a way to disarm those guerilla warriors. Israel should join its neighboring countries to find a solution for the Palestinian refugees, it should take some responsibility for their situation and find a way to compensate them for their losses. And now it should also take responsibility for the damage done in Lebanon.

Some might say that I'm naïve. I'm not naïve -- I'm desperate. This might be our last chance to put down our guns. I think becoming a responsible participant in the Middle East is Israel's only chance of ever becoming a safe place for Jewish people. My children's friends in Israel fear the hourly news followed by the list of today's casualties, just like I did 25 years ago. This war is no different from the others. It isn't another war that will make Israel a safe place to live.

Orit Weksler, a psychotherapist living in the East Bay, emigrated with her family from Israel to the United States in 2003.

Why not read that, just above, Ron, and then think for a few minutes about what she's saying.

Coyote,

People who were once a part of the Communist party have far less to be ashamed of than those that were in the Reform Party.

No kidding Tom Joad.

Communism is meant, at it's best, to create a better world for all. Reform was a way to shut out the 'other' and reward your friends...to return to a never never land of the past and tell everyone who doesn't like it to screw themselves.

People who were once a part of the Communist party have far less to be ashamed of than those that were in the Reform Party.

I agree, brother.

And I always viewed myself as a "Canadian" communist, first and foremost. A very important distinction. (Unfortunately, "the party" in those days really did hew to the Soviet Party line. Which is a big part of the reason for its demise. What its postions are on most of the major issues of the current time, and how they have adapted, if they have, to the changed reality, I am completely out of touch with.)

Canadian conservatives can't and don't take responsibility for what conservatives do in other parts of the world. Neither did I. I can make enough mistakes of my own, thank you very much. 8-D LOL

Now, Mrs Coyote is complaining and calling me to bed. And a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. And the first thing he has to do is keep his woman happy-, 'cause when she's happy, he's happy.

A busy day tomorrow, so its unlikely I will be around.

Well, Nana, I suppose I have to allow that you may genuinely be so stupid that you don’t realize Arthur Koestler’s hypothesis about Ashkenazi Jews not being “real” Jews is the worst kind of racist nonsense.

But I’m astounded that the rest of you would swallow this absurdity in the era of DNA testing.

Historians have always used linguistics and cultural artifacts to trace the migration and settlement patterns of different cultural groups. But DNA testing has made the job easier, confirming -- or in Koestler’s case discrediting -- earlier theories.

For example, it turns out that, despite the legends, Vikings in England were less about rape-and-pillage and more about settlement. A 2000 study of haplotypes of Y- chromosomes show that both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are of Middle Eastern origin.

Not that it’s relevant to contemporary Middle East politics where the current residents came from. They were born there; it’s their home.

Nana, you deliberately posted disinformation from a book that’s three decades out-of-date: Why?

That’s not a rhetorical question: Is it because you don’t know any better?

The alternative is that you’re arguing the Zionist conspiracy? Is that the case? Do you believe there’s a Jewish conspiracy? Are you a racist?

Koestler’s 30-year-old musings are a favourite among racists. For example, you’ll find him cited on Klu Klux Klan leader David Duke’s websites and used by some of the world’s most virulent anti-Semites to argue that Israel has no right to exist. Familiar with Radio Islam? How about some of those loony Christian groups in the U.S.? They all trot out The Thirteenth Tribe to support their anti-Semitic views.

And while I realize that you may think that if a celebrity does something it must be okay, don’t let Mel’s outburst fool you. Using the latest spat in the Middle East as an excuse to spout hatred is NOT okay.

Wars are always about real estate — or gold if you prefer. Never about race or religion, these are just convenient scapegoats.

2000 years ago there was no real differentiation between religions, as there are today between Muslims, Jews and Christians — it was a foreign concept to the times. You were either a pantheist or you were monotheist, and the latter were known as "god-fearers." Nero's wife was a "god-fearer" — at least until he beat her to death for being pregnant with another man's wife. But like all Roman emperors Nero was a cruel but cagey little man. For example, after Rome burned he conveniently chose to blame a small sect of Jews called Christians for the fire and he dipped them in pitch and used them as human torches in his garden for his recreation. The screams must have been bloodcurdling. There were far too many Jews (god-fearers) in Rome, and they were quite popular, so it was easier to pick on a small and obscure group that were seen by many as trouble-makers.

It was after Nero's demise that the Romans sacked Jerusalem, 70 AD, when the empire started falling apart. But Jerusalem has been the heart of god-fearers since time immemorial. That's where Solomon's temple was before it was sacked.

Today Jerusalem is pivotal for Jews, Muslims and Christians, and I just wish they could learn to get along. They have more in common than they care to admit.

Pardon my tired eyes. I meant to say Nero's wife Poppea was pregnant by another man... Oops.

Shannon Rupp
1.Koestler was himself of Ashkenazi Jewish parentage. He was, during his lifetime, also a Zionist, a Stalinist, a fierce anti-Nazi and eventually, a fierce anti-communist. Not that this means the Thirteenth Tribe couldn't be put to evil use. However, there seems little about the fact that Nana posted the material that indicates she deserves the vicious and uncalled for swipe you've taken at her.

2.Surely the common DNA shared by Sephardim and Ashkenazi Jews proves little in any case - a great deal of time and a great many generations of intermingling have gone on since the time this debate began. There are also, you must know, significant differences between the DNA of Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews - for example in the relative incidence of Crohn's disease in the two populations – among other things.

3. Conflicts and tension between Ashkenazi and Sephardim are a matter of record;

4. If the idea that a significant portion of European Jewry might have descended from a mixed population that intermarried with groups who 'chose' to become Jews is hardly relevant. It has nothing to do with a Zionist conspiracy. Living Israelis are more than entitled to call themselves Jews. A great many Sephardim also converted, under the gentle persuasion of the Catholic church – would you be surprised to find a lot of Sephardic DNA among current Spaniards?

5. The question of how best to solve the problems in the Middle East today is quite another matter. Surely, it is possible to criticize the actions of a State without being accused of making racist connections with people like David Duke.

6. I noticed that much of the criticism of Mearsheimer and Walt's recent paper on the strength of the Israeli lobby in America followed pretty much along these same lines of guilt by association…instead of actually dealing with the material they published.

7. If you'd taken the time to read a few more of the postings above, you might find that Mel Gibson's ravings were also mentioned - critically…as were Andrew Young’s appalling statements on behalf of Wal-Mart.

8. Your own critique of Nana's post was as uncalled for and ad hominem as anything I've ever read in these pages. I don’t actually know what her reason for posting the material you are so exercised about was, but, I am absolutely convinced that your reaction was both extreme and uncalled for. Most of the rest of your post was completely off the wall, full of extreme and uncalled for generalizations and insults: Hardly the stuff of rational debate.

I don’t know if Nana has an agenda. It certainly appears that you do.

So, G West, you think Koestler’s biography is relevant?

Then I suppose it’s worth noting that Koestler was what we would call a New Ager and became fascinated by all sorts of mysticism and pseudoscience including levitation and telepathy.

What is this persistent connection between fuzzy New Age thinking and racism? Is it just that the breakdown in rational thought opens the door to all sorts of stupidity? Or is it something more sinister?

Come on: you’re a conspiracy theorist. You must have some paranoid delusion to explain it?

As for Koestler’s character, one biographer uncovered his unsavoury habit of beating women, and evidence of at least one rape. But his personal behaviour and his ever-changing political affiliations are irrelevant to the question at hand which is the reliability of his book.

It’s outdated and has a discredited hypothesis.

Yet it’s frequently cited by racists, including people like Duke, as evidence of the Jewish conspiracy. Palestinians and their supporters use it to argue that Israel has no right to exist.

So let me ask you why you’re defending the spread of disinformation?

Incidentally, unless you’re a geneticist, or can cite legitimate evidence, no one is interested in what you have to say about DNA.

Actually, I suspect no one has any interest in what you have to say about anything, which would explain why you feel compelled to inflict your dimwitted views on Tyee readers day after day.

As for my agenda: I think it's wrong stand by a say nothing when morons like yourself spout ignorance and hate.

Now let Nana speak for herself.

I suppose I do have an agenda...I'd like to help North American Jews get past the Disneyesque mythology of "Israel the Good, Israel the Blameless." To that end I recommend that Ms. Rupp should seek out writings by the late Israel Shahak.

As C.Hitchens said in the obituary he wrote for the Nation:

I am writing these lines in memoriam for my dear friend and comrade Dr. Israel Shahak, who died on July 2. His home on Bartenura Street in Jerusalem was a library of information about the human rights of the oppressed. The families of prisoners, the staff of closed and censored publications, the victims of eviction and confiscation – none were ever turned away. I have met influential “civil society” Palestinians alive today who were protected as students when Israel was a professor of chemistry at the Hebrew University; from him they learned never to generalize about Jews. And they respected him not just for his consistent stand against discrimination but also because – he never condescended to them. He detested nationalism and religion and made no secret of his contempt for the grasping Arafat entourage. But, as he once put it to me, “I will now only meet with Palestinian spokesmen when we are out of the country. I have some severe criticisms to present to them. But I cannot do this while they are living under occupation and I can ‘visit’ them as a privileged citizen.” This apparently small point of ethical etiquette contains almost the whole dimension of what is missing from our present discourse: the element of elementary dignity and genuine mutual recognition.

Shahak’s childhood was spent in Nazified Poland, the Warsaw Ghetto and Bergen-Belsen concentration camp; at the end of the war he was the only male left in his family. He reached Palestine before statehood, in 1945. In 1956 he heard David Ben-Gurion make a demagogic speech about the Anglo-French-Israeli attack on Egypt, referring to this dirty war as a campaign for “the kingdom of David and Solomon”. That instilled in him the germinal feelings of opposition. By the end of his life, he had produced a scholarly body of work that showed the indissoluble connection between messianic delusions and racial and political ones. He had also, during his chairmanship of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights, set a personal example that would be very difficult to emulate.

continued:
He had no heroes and no dogmas and no party allegiances. If he admitted to any intellectual model, it would have been Spinoza. For Shahak, the liberation of the Jewish people was an aspect of the Enlightenment, and involved their own self-emancipation from ghetto life and from clerical control, no less than from ancient “Gentile” prejudice. It therefore naturally ensued that Jews should never traffic in superstitions or racial myths; they stood to lose the most from the toleration of such rubbish. And it went almost without saying that there could be no defensible Jewish excuse for denying the human rights of others. He was a brilliant and devoted student of the archeology of Jerusalem and Palestine: I would give anything for a videotape of the conducted tours of the city that he gave me, and of the confrontation in which he vanquished one of the propagandist guides on the heights of Masada. For him, the built and the written record made it plain that Palestine had never been the exclusive possession of any one people, let alone any one “faith”.

Only the other day, I read some sanguinary proclamation from the rabbinical commander of the Shas party, Ovadia Yosef, himself much sought after by both Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon. It was a vulgar demand for the holy extermination of non-Jews; the vilest effusions of Hamas and Islamic Jihad would have been hard-pressed to match it. The man wants a dictatorial theocracy for Jews and helotry or expulsion for the Palestinians, and he sees (as Shahak did in reverse) the connection. This is not a detail; Yosef’s government receives an enormous US subsidy, and his intended victims live (and die, every day) under a Pax Americana. Men like Shahak, who force us to face these reponsibilities, are naturally rare. He was never interviewed by the New York Times, and its obituary pages have let pass the death of a great and serious man.

I am not a conspiracy theorist.

If you had actually taken any time to look at the sort of thing I tend to post at Tyee I think you'd find your words condemn yourself far more than they describe me.

Of course Nana can speak for herself - as I see she has done.

Where have I defended the spread of disinformation?

My words speak for themselves. I can cite the data on Crohne's disease as well as data on dissimilar rates of colon cancer between the two populations. I'm also aware of the work of the scientists who used DNA analysis to describe the similarities between the two populations so I won't bother to have you post your evidence. If you're interested in making this a real discussion and not continuing the kind of name calling you've just indulged in above I'm more than prepared to overlook the fact that you aren't coming across as exactly rational yourself.

Just for your information, and that of others who might be interested, I'll post herewith (it will have to be in two sections) the original New York Times review of Koestler's book when it first appeared in 1976. [We can hardly expect everyone here to read the actual book]. I do this to show that your contention about what's happened subsequently is as much a red herring as the rest of your attack on his writing. Koestler, whatever else he was, was no anti-Semite.

Your assumption that subsequent use of Koestler's book by agents of a philosophy we both abhor is a reflection upon what Koestler actually said is unjust. He may well be incorrect - but his book was a work of legitimate scholarship and subsequent uses to which it has been put hardly reflect upon him. Any more than your jaundiced view does because you think he happens to fall into a group you disagree with. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen: You're no Arthur Koestler.

In any case, with that as an introduction, I'll post the review immediately following this.

August 29, 1976
Shalom Yisrah
By FITZROY MACLEAN
THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE
The Khazar Empire and Its Heritage. By Arthur Koestler.

There are few more fertile fields for controversy than the ethnic background and makeup of European Russia, though for true connoisseurs of academic mayhem I can also strongly recommend the Caucasus. In his latest book Arthur Koestler plunges into both these professorial battlegrounds with great courage and an astonishing measure of success. Aided by much careful research and a penetrating intelligence, he successfully dispels the prevailing aura of scientific (and ideological) humbug and emerges from the fray with a new, tenable and highly intriguing theory.

For centuries what is now Eastern Russia served as a stamping-ground for a kaleidoscopic succession of tribes, who, as a result of their own nomadic and aggressive tendencies and the absence of any serious natural barriers, overran each other and were, in turn, overrun in a constantly shifting pattern of races. "Their names," wrote Edward Gibbon, with evident distaste, "are uncouth, their origins doubtful, their actions obscure."

How, one feels bound to ask, did the Russians ever emerge from this unpromising racial tangle? It is in seeking an answer to this question that most of us first encountered Mr. Koestler's Thirteenth Tribe, the Khazars. They appear, in succession to the Huns, as overlords of the East Slavs in about the fifth century of our era.

But, as we learn from Mr. Koestler's excellent book, there is much more to the Khazars than that. Turkish by race, they came originally from a good deal further east. Having established themselves in a strategic position to the north of the Caucasus between the Black Sea and the Caspian or Khazar Sea, they built up a considerable empire which at one time included Kiev. In the seventh century they effectively blocked the advance westwards and northwards of the Arab conquerors, while 200 years later the Byzantine Emperors were glad to claim them as allies against the Vikings or Varangians who, having succeeded them as overlords of the East Slavs, now emerged aggressively with the latter under the new name of Russians.

(conclusion)

Meanwhile, towards the middle of the eighth century, a curious thing had happened to the Khazars. They had been converted to Judaism. Despite a special messenger from heaven, who enabled them to claim that they, too, were Chosen, it is hard to resist Mr. Koestler's conclusion that their decision was also politically motivated. As Christians, they would have become dependent on Rome; as Mohammedans, on the Caliphs. As Jews, they were dependent on no one.

The Khazars remained independent for several hundred more years. The end came when they were overrun by the Mongols towards the middle of the 13th century. It is at this point that Mr. Koestler produces his startling new theory. The Khazars, he claims, cannot just have disappeared. Most of them, he argues, must have been absorbed in what is now the Soviet Union, others in Hungary and Poland. Nor, after 500 years, were they likely to abandon their Jewish faith and traditions.

Though Turkish by race, they almost certainly remained Jews, greatly outnumbering the racially Jewish Jews who had reached these areas by other routes and at other periods of history. From this it would follow, first, that racially the great majority of Eastern European Jews were not Jews at all, but Turko-Khazars, and second that, as most Western Jews came from Eastern Europe, most of them are not Jews either, that in fact there are probably very few truly Semitic Jews anywhere. The conclusion is as disturbing for racially-minded Jews as for racially-minded anti-Semites, though, as the author wisely points out, it in no way invalidates Israel's claim to statehood.

Mr. Koestler's book is as readable as it is thought-provoking. Nothing could be more stimulating than the skill, elegance and erudition with which he marshals his facts and develops his theories. It is filled, too, with unusual and pleasing scraps of knowledge. For my part I shall always be grateful to him for at last elucidating to my satisfaction the provenance of that improbable tribe, the Dagh Chufuty or Mountain Jews of Daghestan, who, I am glad to be able to report, were, only this summer, reasonably well and still living in Daghestan.

Fitzroy MacLean is the author of the "Concise History of Scotland" and "To Back and Beyond," a narrative of a journey through Central Asia.

(the bold text is my emphasis)

Thanks Ms Rupp for having so perfectly illustrated why people are afraid to express their opinions on the Israel/Palestine issue. Your attack on G. West is classic.

As to racism...
http://www.socialistworker.org/2001/373/373_13_IsraelShahak.shtml

In 1965, he(Israel Shahak) recalled, "I had personally witnessed an ultra-religious Jew refuse to allow his phone to be used on the Sabbath in order to call an ambulance for a non-Jew who happened to collapse in his Jerusalem neighborhood."

Shahak called a meeting with members of the Rabbinical Court of Jerusalem to ask the state-appointed rabbis if the man’s refusal to help violated Jewish religious law. The rabbis ruled that the man had acted properly.

When Shahak heard this, he publicized the story and the Rabbinical Court’s decision in Ha’aretz, Israel’s leading Hebrew-language newspaper.

The story "caused a media scandal," Shahak recalled. "The results of the scandal were, for me, rather negative. Neither the Israeli, nor the diaspora, rabbinical authorities ever reversed their ruling that a Jew should not violate the Sabbath in order to save the life of a Gentile."

As if to show up the pompous rabbis, Shahak--an atheist--became an expert scholar of Judaism. His wide knowledge of the Talmud, rabbinical rulings and Jewish history helped him to challenge the Zionist concept of a "Jewish state."

Shahak concluded that any state based on the domination of one religious group would lead to the oppression of other groups.

Israel is an apartheid state and it is the Talmud which is the scriptural basis for the atrocities committed against Palestinians. Shahak's book, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion," shows how there is one set of rules for dealing with another Jew and quite another for dealing with a Gentile. Secular Jews have no idea that this is true.

G
Such a personal attack by the hateful Rupp..

" Yet it’s frequently cited by racists, including people like Duke, as evidence of the Jewish conspiracy. Palestinians and their supporters use it to argue that Israel has no right to exist."

Koestler stated that part of his intent in writing The Thirteenth Tribe was to defuse anti-Semitism by undermining the identification of European Jews with Biblical Jews, with the hope of rendering anti-Semitic epithets such as "Christ killer" inapplicable. Ironically, Koestler's thesis that Ashkenazi Jews are not Semitic has become an important claim of many anti-Semitic groups.

Okay, let me get this straight.

G West and Nana, you believe a 30-year-old book with discredited hypothesis about who the “real” Jews are is relevant to a discussion about this article.

Or have you forgotten the article? The one that points out that policing is effective in dealing with terrorists, whereas invading the countries where some of them might be living, not so much.

You are obsessed with the genetic difference between Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews as if it tells us something other than when different waves of migration out of the Middle East happened and where they settled.

And now, you two anonymous posters with curious views and a lot of time on your hands, claim that you know more about the Jewish religion and its nefarious goals than many Jews.

But you’re not racists. Oh no.

How about you just take your views elsewhere and save the Tyee editors the effort of having to delete the nonsense you spew?

btc:
Best laid plans I guess.

I don't think she means to be personal. Race is a useless and outmoded concept - best dumped once and for all on the ash-heap of history.

Not at all Shannon Rupp. By the way, have you actually read Koestler's book?

One wonders if the fact that the majority of the Jews liquidated by the Nazis were Ashkenazim has any ironic impact at all. I do not think that the fact (if it is a fact) that Ashkenazi are not purely Semitic would have saved even one of them from the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Furthermore, it is a strange world indeed whereby an aspect not far from the hateful doctrine of blood purity becomes the sine qua non of Jewish identity.

I wonder how much Torah my interlocutor has studied.

Abraham, in addition to Sarah is recorded as having cohabitated with Hagar who was an Egyptian. My recollection is that Joseph married Asentha, whose father was, I think, an Egyptian priest. Moses, if memory serves, also married outside the tribe - to the daughter of a priest of the hated Egyptians. David, Solomon and Sampson were also associated with, or in fact were not born Jews. I think Sampson was a Philistine, wasn't he?

Pretty hybridized bloodlines in my view - and better for it too.

Have a great weekend.

As for deletions, I think if you check with David Beers - if he keeps records of such things - you'll find that's never happened.

A little more research on your part might be advisable before you put your foot any farther down your throat.

ONLY according to you is the "hypothesis"
of the book discredited, my dear Ms. Rupp.
The historical record of the Khazars conversion is there for examination. You just choose not to examinine it.

G. West is NOT posting anonymously. I do
so because I know from experience how expressing certain ideas can lead to anonymous harrasment and retaliation.....and how do we know that you are using your real name?

In the meantime, Israel has violated the ceasefire, and has been shown to have used DU weapons in Lebanon....as if DU stays where it falls. Israel itself will suffer from its effects in years to come. Just how rational is that?

As for my so-called "obsession" with the difference between Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews, I brought it up to illustrate how racist the policies of Israel have been over the years even against their co-religionists of differing ethnic origin.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAN20060807&articleId=2918

New and unknown deadly weapons used by Israeli forces
'direct energy' weapons, chemical and/or biological agents, in a macabre experiment of future warfare

by Prof. Paola Manduca

New and strange symptoms are reported amongst the wounded and the dead.

Bodies with dead tissues and no apparent wounds; 'shrunken' corpses; civilians with heavy damage to lower limbs that require amputation, which is nevertheless followed by unstoppable necrosis and death; descriptions of extensive internal wounds with no trace of shrapnel, corpses blackened but not burnt, and others heavily wounded that did not bleed.

Many of these descriptions suggest the possibility that the new weapons used include 'direct energy' weapons, and chemical and/or biological agents, in a sort of macabre experiment of future warfare, where there is no respect for anything: International rules (from the Geneva Convention to the treaties on biological and chemical weapons), refugees, hospitals and the Red Cross, not to mention the people, their future, their children, the environment, which is poisoned through dissemination of Depleted Uranium and toxic substances released after oil and chemical depots are bombed.

Blackened, shrunken bodies inside untouched clothing showed up in both the first Gulf War and the illegal US invasion of Panama.

So, anonymous Nana, you admit you lack the courage of your convictions.

Doesn’t that just say everything about you?

Here’s a tip: in a liberal democracy, if you don’t have the nerve to attach your name to your views, then you shouldn’t be airing them.

Freedom of speech isn’t just a right, it’s a responsibility.

If you consider yourself an ethical person, you are obligated to speak as accurately as you possibly can in a public forum. And no, spewing your delusional feelings is not speaking the truth – it’s what schizophrenics and paranoid personalities do and it’s considered mental illness.

If you can’t accept the responsibility and use your real name, well then, shut-the-****-up.

You’re just wasting everyone’s time and preventing intelligent discussion of the articles.

Shannon Rupp
You seem concerned with the fact that people post anonymously here at Tyee.

By all means, if you wish, send a private email to

I'll be happy to reply to you privately if that's your wish...although I can see little reason for it. I've been quite frank about my views and I'd express them no less politely in private than I do in public.

Cheers.

Shannon....you are a piece of work.

Just how relevant is my name compared to the information I have posted from reliable sources? Your attempt to smear me is just nonsense. I haven't posted my "feelings"...you're the one doing that. I've just posted information you don't want examined.

I don't think either you, or I are "wasting everyone's time." You especially, continue to demonstrate the irrational and unquestioning support Isreal gets from a certain segment of the population...so keep up the good work!

Well, nameless Nana, resurrecting an old book about who the “real” Jews are, which relies on a hypothesis rendered ridiculous by subsequent information about DNA, doesn’t actually make your sources credible.

And you still haven’t explained how any of this is relevant to the article above?

Why did you bring up Koestler’s book?

Unless, of course, you’re just looking for any hook on which to hang your nutty racist views.

I don’t believe I mentioned anything about Israel, by the way. Or Lebanon. But for the record, I don’t discuss Middle East politics, or anything really, with people who are as ignorant as you. I actually studied Middle East political history, so your cocktail of half-truths, misinformation, and racism actually turns my stomach.

But I think my astute colleague Charles Campbell sums up my own view best: “Taking sides in the Middle East is a little like taking sides in a Greek tragedy.”

Now why don't you and your pals go talk among yourselves, privately. You're wasting everyone's time here.

Actually Shannon, it is only one "of you jackasses . . . whingeing about your offensive remarks being removed and yes, given their nature, I was surprised.

I first referred to Israel by the oft-quoted description (2,830,000 Google hits for "shitty little country" in 33 seconds) given it by the French Ambassador to GB at a 2001 dinner party hosted by our very own Lord Crossharbour in London

My next comment referred to the admitedly Zionist head of CanWest Global by name in connection I made about the outright lies to support the state of Israel being pushed in their overarching media outlets.

As a published writer, I am unaccustomed to having my work edited and I understand there are libel and laws that llimit free speech in this country (a formidable weapon in the hands of someone of wealth and influence) in this country. In future, perhaps the editor could frame his deletions in these terms rather than seeming to judge opinions and observations as "racist" or "defamatory".

The Khazarian origin of Ashkenazi Jews is hardly limited to The Thirteenth Tribe and is the explanation for the disappearance from history of such a powerful and pivotal people. As was noted by another commentator, the star of David or more rightly translated "the shield" of David (Israeli version of the Red Cross is the called the Magen David Adom which translates as Red Shield of David and its symbol is a red star of David) is a Khazarian in origin. The orginal symbol for Judaism is the menorah.

The use of the star of David first became associated with Asheknazi Jews in medieval Prague when Jewish printers house started using it as a trademark on its material. Later it was adopted by the moneylending Bauer family in its Yiddish version - Rothschild. The presense of a star of David on purported antiquities is a tipoff that an item is forged.

There is also a good deal of misunderstanding of what the term Sephardic means. Technically it means only the Jews of the Iberian penninsula (Bibical Sephardia) who settled there after the first Babyonian exile in 800 BC. The Jews who remained in the Middle East and North Africa (like Jesus) are Mizrahi.

Hard to believe, isn't it Coyote, that even suggesting the fact that Communism is historically a disproportionally Jewish funded and supported movement and might have something to do with the brutal enslavement and murder of tens of millions as yet uncounted Russians, Ukranians and other nationalities as a result of the Bolshevik takeoverr of the Russian Empire is risk prosecution in this country.

Ms. Rupp, you are WAY out of line here, and should apologize. My reasons for choosing to remain anonymous are none of your business, but clearly I feel the need to remain anonymous. This should tell you something about the society we live in. Or is it your contention that wrongs never happen, and innocent people are never sent to jail, or otherwise harrassed by the state?

Shannon

The article we're supposed to be discussing is about a bomb plot nobody except IAMC bought into...read the postings. What is referred to as "Islamic Fascism" is a construct to divert attention from the actuality of Zionist fascism. It's a hard truth for those with a sentimental attachment to Israel to face.

You keep accusing me of racism when I'm pointing out the inherent racism in the State of Israel itself.

You claim an expertise that we have no way of verifying. You also claim a collegueship with Charles Campbell...but would he with you?

“Taking sides in the Middle East is a little like taking sides in a Greek tragedy.” rings true, but it is far too fatalistic a position to take when people like Gingrich talk about WW3 and Bernard Lewis says it will start Aug 22'06. That's next Tuesday! We must discuse this stuff now.

Speaking of editing the above piece could use some. Among other typos, spelling errors etc. I actually meant to say that I was "accustomed" to having my work edited not the opposite.

Sorry, I am used to a forum format where you can preview your work before it is posted. I'll try and be more careful in future.

BTW, contrary to your accusation Shannon, I have not been a regular participant at the Tyee.

Back over to the main point in the article. There seems to be a growing opinion that there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE against the people arrested in Toronto and most recently in London for plotting terror. It sure would be nice if CanWest would talk about this, especially after all the hype they cause when these arrests take place. Remember - the same mega-arrest event happened in England on February 15th 2003, the day of the largest anti-war demonstrations in world history. Several weeks later, everyone arrested was freed (but the media didn't think this was a good enough story for the front pages).

Anyway, I can only comment briefly, but what an incredibly interesting discussion. I really do wish I had more time to contribute here. Though Nana, GWest and others are displaying incredible competence and depth of understanding, I think.

Even Shannon, as hysterical as she comes across, actually herself help create and fuel this extremely important discussion and dissemination of real historical knowledge-, relevant to our time.

Thank you all. It is a pleasure to read you.

Though Shannon, why any of us chooses to use a nom de plume is really none of your business, and the good reasons unknown to you. You will just have to trust that we know how to look after our own interests. Like it or not, frankly. :-)

Besides, it is precisely the very device which allows for the openess and frankness of discussion associated with this forum-, and allows for its liveliness, and many, many others on the internet. (And like Nana say, we don't or can't know what your name really is anyway, so I too could spin any name that might please you.)

Now, if in addition to your name you want and were prepared to post your actual home address, such that we could check up on who you really are and track you down, that would be another thing, and indeed make you more credible. But then, I agree, that would be the height of foolishness on your part, such as I would certainly not be tempted to copy either.

You tend to your own identity and interests, while we other folks will do likewise. (Though in the right time and situation, were the benefits equal to or greater than the risk, I would certainly not hesitate to post my real name and address here, in a wink. It's all just a cost/benefit analysis that we each have to make for ourselves. :-)

kjc,

Actually kjc, I was not thinking even at the time of plugging into the communist-jewish conspiracy, just indicating, as was true enough, though certainly not a majority ever, Jews were an important part of the early Communist movement, even in this country.

That the likeliest being from whence the Nazis may have gotten their early notion of this so-called conspiracy, for sure. Most of us though were doubtless thoroughly Anglocized white, blue eyed and brown eyed Euro-Canadians-, simply with a generous sprinkling of Russian, Ukranian, Italian and other European accented immigre-, fair numbers of whom were also Jewish.

But whilst these Jews certainly did have an influence within the Party, that they were not a dominating influence was equally true. (During the Second World War, which was before my time as an aware adult, I cannot speak for. Though it was my impression that especially working class, such as "needle trades" Jews, likely Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern Europe I presume, from which many had fled waves of Czarist and other pogroms against them, for example, had always been an important part of the early Communist Party in this country.)

Paul in East Van

I enjoy your realist thinking as I do 98% of these posts. I will never buy/watch anything Canwest especialy when all the media is owned by one source = "NoTruth"
The rags were full of Toronto's big terrorist bust but as U stated, now Zilch?
Same as BC Scandal? Nothing.
Canwest was very much part of Gordo's re-rigged election.
But NDP porch scandal "look out" it's all over the rags for weeks+!
Try this site this http://www.iwtnews.com/home I’ve joined and am looking Very forward to the January opening as it gives me “HOPE”!

Discrimination is natural. If you are walking down a dark alley at night, and you face a fork in the road. Lining one road is a gang of ethnic types not familiar to you. The other road is lined with Nuns.
I would probably walk down the Nun road, rather than the dangerous dudes road.
That kind of prejudice is personal and perhaps logical.
When I see Nana use discrimination against Jews, I wonder where it is coming from.

Keep us on track Paul in East Van. People are starting to catch on. The PTB actually don't have any new ideas and their patterns are becoming more obvious all the time.

It has become like George Orwell said, "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionay act."

Coyote,

Statement of President Richard Nixon in 1971, as recorded at the White House on tape and released by the National Archives in 1999. The reference is to Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss. (Sources: N.Y. Times, Oct. 7, 1999 and Newsweek, Oct. 18, 1999, p. 30)

"It is legitimate to adopt a critical attitude toward the relatively large number of Jews who particularly in the first decade after the Bolshevik revolution collaborated with the Soviet Government in the persecution of other peoples."

Statement of researcher Michael Mills, an official of the government of Australia at Canberra. (Source: Forward, March 10, 2000)

Judaic Professor Arno Mayer of Princeton in his important book, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? states that the German invasion of Russia was carried out with the intention to eradicate Bolshevik (Soviet Communist) ideology. The Germans were hardly the only ones in the West to believe that, "Soviet Russia is a dictatorship of Jewry."

On Feb. 8, 1920 a young British writer made a similar observation in the Illustrated Sunday Herald:

"There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews."

The writer was Winston Churchill.

Churchill expressed the crucial insight that the crimes perpetrated by Jewish communists against Germans and Russians instilled in those people a desire for retribution:

"In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed, the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses.

"...The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with villainies which are now being perpetrated...Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people." (End quote from Churchill).

Many of whom, Nazi theorist Alfred Rosenberg among them, fled to Germany.

It is also a fact of history that, in 1917, Trotsky (real name: Bronstein) was arrested aboard the SS Christiana when it sought refuge from a storm in Halifax harbour after he set sail for Russia accompanied by several hundred "Jewish revolutionaries." At the time, Czarist Russia was Canada's (and the US) ally in WWI but, at the behest of the US government, Trotsky was released and let go on his merry way to slaughter tens of millions of Russian and Ukranian Christians. The number is yet to be officially rounded off to the nearest ten of million.

The Judaic Communist epoch of mass murder has disappeared into history in one of the great vanishing acts of all time . . .

Source of Quotations: http://www.revisionisthistory.org/communist.html

IAMC

Please point out where you have seen me 'use discrimination against jews" in anything I have written.

My ire has been directed against Israel, which all Jews do not support either.

BC Dude

Thanks for that site - what good news! I too will look forward to this much needed service in Canada.

Nana; it seems to you that hatred can be justified, when directed toward Israel.
Discrimination isn't hatred. I hope you aren't confused here.
Of course all Jews don't support Israel.
Not all Americans support the USA.
Not all Canadians support Canada.
Not all Brit's support Britain.
Not all Spaniards support Spain.
Not all Iranians support Iran.
Not all of Southern Lebanon supports Hizbollah.
Not all of us support you ( or me ).

Anti-Semitism is an evil thing.

Always was, always will be. Anyone who suggests that there is now, or ever has been, a 'Jewish' plot to dominate any part of the world is smoking funny tobacco and is no different from a Nazi revisionist.

I don't care whether the statements came from Richard Nixon, Franklin Roosevelt or Winston Churchill - the suggestion is abhorrent whether it comes from the right, the left or the middle of the road.

That does not mean that the actions of Israel in respect of the situation in the Middle East are not valid subjects for criticism. It does not mean that the behavior of the western powers since the first world war in respect of the Palestinians in particular and the Middle East in general are not as illegitimate and essentially evil as anti-Semitism itself is.

It is also important to point out and criticize violence and terror whoever is perpetrating it – Hezbollah, the IDF, Hamas or the USA. If Israel tends to behave in an unconscionable way toward its Palestinian neighbours and toward citizens and residents of Israel who are not Jews, it is equally clear that members of violent Islamic and Palestinian groups could also learn important lessons from the example of Martin Luther King.

That Canada could actually do more to promote real peace and reconciliation in the region – instead of wasting its resources and spilling the blood of Canadians and Afghans in service of the naïve dreams of the current Prime Minister is the real tragedy and shame of this country. We must do better – not by pretending either Israelis or Muslims have the keys to the kingdom – but by saying to both parties: It’s long past time to stop this madness.

Religious extremism, of any stripe, is as evil as Anti-Semitism.

Well of course Alci, you are being an arm chair quarterback.
Canada got into this under the Liberal Govt.
Now, I am very willing to continue support for Israel, I am not for Iran/Syria.
We have to be strong.
We are strong.
We don't have to be ashamed of that.

It is pretty to obvious to most people that there is indeed 'a Jewish plot' to dominate the part of the world encompassed by Israel's magic expanadable borders.

Aside from that, the passages were cited in support of the hypothesis that Jews were disproportionately over represented in the Communist party. Coyote was speaking from his own experience and I from research.

The way things stand, it is illegal in Canada to make any connection between Jews and the Bolshevik Holocaust of the Russian Empire and thus, ironically, holocaust denial is actually legislated here.

As Nana pointed out, Israel is using banned chemical and depleted uranium weapons for no other reason than to terrorize innocent people into leaving their homes so they can occupy them.

It's true, it's about real estate, in particular, well-watered, fertile real estatae.

But regardless of what their historic role in the deaths of tens of millions of people in post-Czarist Russia was, the whole world is witnessing the Jewish state's unconscionable acts now.

kjc
Obviously, I have no problem with criticism posted here concerning Israeli efforts to dominate the Middle East by force and to deny the human rights and territorial objectives of Palestinians. I do not extrapolate from my criticism of some Israeli acts (and the behavior of some radical religious groups) to suggest that they are the only guilty or negligent party in the Middle East at the current time - clearly violence is equally worthy of criticism and innocent victims of violence on either side bleed equally freely. It's long past time for all the violence to stop and long past time that the USA and Canada take a much more critical approach toward their relations with the Israeli government and toward working for a lasting and equitable settlement for the main problem in that area – the second-class status of Palestinians.

On the other hand, I do not accept that Bolshevism was a Jewish plot simply because a number of Jewish intellectuals were involved in its early years. In so far as Stalinism is almost the equal evil of Nazism it would be naive to pretend that Russian Jews were not very numerous among the purged - from Trotsky himself to the predominantly Jewish targets of the post war Doctors' plot.

So, that being said, I would assert that much of Israel's current behavior is questionable and certainly deserving of criticism - it is totalitarian and exclusivist. However, I see these things as inimical to the principles of Jewish moral philosophy and, with the strong criticism of a great many Jews both in Israel and around the world I have no problem concurring.

I think you’ll find me fair in my remarks and clear in my feelings…that there is a big and clear difference between criticizing a national government and demonizing a people. So long as those distinctions are observed you’ll find me a supportive ally. I’m no knee-jerk apologist for those who would excuse the Israeli government of any wrongdoing, no matter what.

In truth, I still have a problem with your last paragraph.

IAMC has the insight of Larry the Cable Guy

Indeed the point in this situation, Nana, and even kjc though I think he sidles up dangerously close to a narrower "anti-Jewishness".

But re, more accurately what should be called "anti-Jew" than "anti-semitism".

I significantly share GWest's view here, with likewise important differences.

There were also, at one time, especially pre and during WWII, in this country, significant numbers of Christians within the Communist Party as well as, of course, we athiests and/or agnostic secularists, this latter group who I am sure made up the vast majority of "Communists". Indeed, there is no doubt. A fair number of Jews, especially secular Jews, there indeed were, but never of a number greater than the "secularists". Yet, I would certainly not have described the Commuist Party in this country as anywhere near a Christian or "secularist plot".

Ditto, for example, Italy, which has long had an influential Communist Party made up of certainly large numbers of Catholics, as does Cuba today and Venezuala, and additionally supported by large numbers of Catholic voters and close supporters. It is not there in Latin America a "Catholic plot" either.

So while criticism of Jews and especially Israel is certainly a legitimate part of scholarly and critical historical and political examination and discourse, I think, one does have to be aware of how one frames it, how far one carries it, and the conclusions one draws. For there is always a danger of becoming and worse than what you criticize, when one slides beyond all rationality and reason, and slips into simple blind hatred and prejudices. (And few if any are entirely immune.)

About which concerning the latter, IAMC knows about as much as he does anything here. Which is nothing, zip, zero, nada, save fauning loyalty to the US Empire and the Neoconazi cause, and all those who serve its interest in the world, such as Britain and Israel.

And I am no more narrowly anti-Amerikan or anti-British, or for that matter, anti-Canadian for all my criticisms and anger towards my own country, than I am anti-Jewish per se. There is enough blame to go around, though the US Empire still leads the current imperialist parade.

That the criticism of Israel and the Jews may "seem", or in fact even "be" a little over the top in these latter days, is largely a consequence of the fact that ever since the Holocaust we are unaccustomed to hearing any, and it is foreign to our ears and sensibilities. No criticism of them has been allowed or tolerated.

But, in part as a result of that lid having been held in place for so long, there is a huge pressure built up, and matters have evolved to such a point where the need to finally criticize Israel and look at it and the Jews in a new, more historically objective and critical way has simply become inescapable. The lid is about to blow.

The peace of the world, let alone justice for the Palestinians and all the Arabs of the Middle East, hangs dangerously in the balance.

But again, the main antogonist (protagonist ??) here still is the US Empire, though it does itself have a powerful "Jewish Lobby", no doubt, using them and us all to play in favour of their Empire interests in the Middle (East). (And there is currently in place, no doubt, a close "identity of interest" that has formed here between the US Empire and the Zionist Occupation of Palestine.)

Coyote:
Excellent points, Coyote, well-put and important to express and underline.

Progressive voices and efforts, many of them from the mouths and pens and efforts of Jews and Christians ( I know a lot less about Muslims but I'd be happy to risk a wager that the same is true of them and other 'religions') - as well as a lot of secular folks, socialists, humanists and communists (even maybe including from time to time the odd enlightened capitalist and plodding ‘liberal’ (who couldn't care less for the hereafter) - have been, and will continue to be important allies in the battle to make and re-make this place, Canada, and the rest of the world into something better than it currently is.

In addition, yes, the pressure is building, most especially in the United States where lies and obfuscation are official and seemingly organic products of the government in that country.

However, even there, as we see one after the other of the spokesmen and women of the Bush Government reach the absolute bottom of the barrel of compromises with reality and truth, there is hope.

Much still needs to be done and it's important not to be distracted by certain voices, the sounds of which are not unheard of here, who'd pretend that that the critics of the system are responsible for its shortcomings.

The lid is not just about to blow Coyote, it is in the process of blowing, hence all of the historians in jail. And as far as the accusation that my recounting of the role Jews played in the death of tens of millions of as yet uncounted victims of Bolshevism in the post Czarist Russian Empire (with not a single museum, special education program or internationally sanctioned special day to remember them) constitutes (or comes close to) "anti- Jewishness" as I am myself descended from the Portuguese Sephardim, I would actually fall into the "self-hating Jew" category.

A while ago, I read Starhawk's book Webs of Power and in it she described her feelings about attending a neo-pagan event in Germany. She wrote that she felt uncomfortable there because (although she has constructed a public identity as a witch, a Goddess worshipper, all these years) she was Jewish. Given that the event occured more than half century after the end of WWII, can her comment not be interpreted as being racist, defamatory and (god forbid) anti-German? But somehow the accusation of being anti-German does not carry the same weight as being smeared as an "anti Semite" as soon as one lifts the lid of official history and begins to discuss the seething cesspool of lies and more lies that lies beneath it.

I am actually not interested in using this thread to outline the role specifically played by individual Jews in the Bolshevik holocaust of the Russian Empire or the Rothschlds international banking syndicate's financing of it nor am I really interested in the role they may or may not have played in Communism elsewhere. There is ample accounting of that elsewhere on the internet for anyone who wants to research it.

I've also, for the moment, run out of time.

Good point!

Last night there was a re-play of Norman Finklestein's talk at the library from May 15,2004. He's the whistleblower on the "Holocost Industry."

He made the point that according to studies done 2000-2004, there is little or no "ant-semitism" either in Europe or North America. He also talked about how every 10-15 years, somebody publishes a book called ,"The New Anti-Semitism" with a forward or dedication to Abe Foxman of the ADL. (My own feeling is that anything called the "New Anti-Semitism" should refer to the demonization of Arabs rather than Jews.)

The whole talk can be watched on-line at workingtv.com He's very funny and very sane and I reccomend it

This morning the Sunday Edition started with a conversation between "Joshua Landis,an assistant professor of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Oklahoma. His blog, Syriacomment.com, is an authoritative source of information on the history and political regime in Syria. Afshin Molavi is a journalist and fellow with the New America Foundation. He was born in Iran, and moved to the U.S. at a young age. He recently returned there to write a political travelogue, "The Soul of Iran" which was published by Penguin last year."

Unfortunately, there is no audio available at CBC's site. but the point that was made by both speakers was that
the sentiments of the populations of both Syria and Iran differed from that of their governments. (where is that not true?)

Israel has been offered peace for a role-back to its '67 borders numerous times and has consistantly refused. Maybe they'll see the handwriting on the wall this time...I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but I'm not holding my breath.

Nana, I saw a Finklestein talk on cable 4, I think. Brilliant!

I thought I was the only one who even realized that there is a holocaust industry. So much for conceit, eh!

And G. West, that,"It's important not to be distracted..." blurp was definitely your finest hour...er... few seconds.

I'll be doing due diligence on google for that marvelous little juxtaposition of words! Just kidding!

Kjc, much understand and appreciate your comments immediately above, and the special position from which you come in expressing your analysis. Extremely interesting as well.

I hope we will continue to hear from you here, on this and other subjects.

My view exactly. That this is not the case to here, is a measure of the extent to which the European, US and Israeli view of Palestine and so-called Israel's "right to exist" has been succussful in setting, framing and controlling both the language and discussion, and the agenda, around this issue. Which, as kjc correctly points out I think, if not is about to, then has already broken down and the lid come off, so to speak. (That we can even have this discussion here now, over the objections of the likes of such a pro-Zionist as Shannon Rupp, for example, when in another time we would have almost certainly been shut down and censored out, is an indication that indeed the lid upon this issue has already flown off.)

It is interesting watching the new "behaviours" emerging in the Middle East now, for the first time in my life, the sudden background tone of uncertainty and hesitation behind the still old aggressive talk of the "Israeli" spokespersons, and the increasingly defensive sounding Bush adminstration, alongside the new found boldness, openess and in your face voices and behaviours coming from Iran, even the Shia dominated government in Baghdad, Syria, and even the official Lebanese government (though also treachery), as well as the continuing defiance and insistance of Hizbullah.

The stage is being set, in my read of the tead leaves, for an even more dangerous next stage of this Middle East situation. Especially watch Iran and, oddly, the new threatening tone of this Iraqi so-called government. And Syria. The risk of a much wider war is peeking out from behind this stage curtain.

And if the Shia world suddenly moves enmasse against the US Empire in Iraq, and more aggressively even against Israel, perhaps even with Syria, a suddden new "war reality" long threatening will be in full flight.

(And I think, there is a growing danger that if Muqutada El Sadr's Mahdi Army moves against the US in Iraq, as part of this, that the US may leave and lose a large part of its army strewn across the path of its flight attempt to the Gulf. The Mahdi Army has been preparing for this, and is likely only awaiting the nod from Iran, in my view. And this scenario likelihood is the real reason why Hizbullah is unlikely going to be willing to disarm as well.

And we haven't even talked about the growing boldness and effectiveness of the Taliban yet.

The forces arrayed against the US-Israeli interest are continuing to be emboldened and gather across the Arab world and the Middle East. Watch for it.)

The impression I got from the talk on CBC this morning is that the populations of both Iran and Syria would respond to an attack, but would not go along with an initiation...they want stability.

Also, both populations are enamoured with US culture.

And, just in case anyone who might be reading this had thought that Nana was blowing smoke the other day when she mentioned Bernard Lewis and the apocalypse, here's a wee excerpt from the

The end of the world, maybe

There may be a slightly greater chance than usual that the world will end on
Tuesday.

That, at least, is the conclusion of the eminent Middle East scholar Bernard
Lewis, who raised the apocalyptic alarm in a recent Wall Street Journal
op-ed essay.

In this doomsday scenario, Iran and its belligerent president, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, loom large. According to Lewis, Tuesday, Aug. 22, corresponds
on the Islamic calendar this year to the night in which Muslims "commemorate
the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq," to
Jerusalem and then to heaven and back.

Coincidentally, or not, Aug. 22 is also the date that the Iranians have
promised to deliver their final answer on whether they'll accept a generous
offer by the European Union and others to suspend their nuclear program.
Might that answer come in the shape of a mushroom cloud somewhere?

Lewis thinks so. "This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the
apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from
certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for
Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind."

As I've written before, I'm not a conspiracy theorist - but it is important to know what's being said...and to wonder and try to understand why.

Nana,

I agree, that is probably an accurate assessment.

The popular attitude in my read of it is, that while their is a widespread state of being "enamoured" of US culture, likewise likely similarly widespread throughout the so-called "third world", this at the same time exists alongside an understanding that they are also "threatened" by this same United States.

We all want a "good life". "The poor" everywhere find nothing attractive about their poverty and being "unfree" materially and culturally.

This country is widely and deeply enamoured still with US culture. (Though there is much about that culture that is beginning to break down.) Which poses problems for both the environmental and nationalist movements, for example.

A really important thread...with some of the best commentary ever....and while Rupp's quest of late seems to be to target Tyee lefties...it is her own raging rant that is full to the brim with rude hateful spite, while Nana clearly outclasses her as a serious person asking serious questions.

Mr. Tirman's article is largely about half-fictions. He consistently edges hesitantly towards the truth, then draws back, refusing to look at the abyss. If this is supposed to be an alternative or more radical viewpoint...it is not...it is just a lamely reticent one.

For instance when Firman questions the knowledge about those liquids in the latest terrorism attempt -"How did Homeland Security let that slip by he asks?" Ohhh... they knew about the dangers of liquids, Mr. Firman... anti-terrorism researchers would know this...else they wouldn't be much of an anti-terrorism agency, would they? Even little ol' unscientific me knows this one.

No, Mr. Firman, believe me, they know. Thing is, they also know when is the most politically opportune time to release the liquid dove from up their sleeve. So patience, Mr. Firman, all things will be revealed in due course. Lots of other dark Orwellian magic tricks we will undergo yet ....the question is who are the real magicians/terrorists in this mad circus and who are the clowns/stooges set up to take the fall?

Really, this war on terror is a truly stupid concept... there is no winning it...as long as there is innovation there will be terror. Terror of the unexpected is the dark side of innovation. It's with us to stay.

But ultimately what Firman doesn't get is that the war on terrorism is largely not about protecting citizens, it is about controlling them through fear. So for now the "handy" and conveniently overlooked mixing of liquids will conveniently "divert and distract" from what the PNAC presently needs diverting and distracting from...wars they are losing, wars they are inciting, plummeting public opinion polls, bills that need passing, elections to be won.

Next time it will be something else..and the powers-that-be will all appear appropriately shocked by it all...while behind closed doors they further stir terrorism's pot of profits.

In this article Tirman suggests effective police work is foiling terrorism. But is it really? How can we tell? A better question would be how is it working....and to whose benefit... and where are the all important evidence and details? Where [I]is the necessary information that the public needs to know in order to come to any kind of fact-based conclusion?

Terrorism... real or manufactured? Without access to information it's all a blur. Which is the point, after all. Both kinds do the trick, anyway...inducing fear and creating a climate where limitations on personal freedom and thought are more easily swallowed and accepted. It is the same "savior" concept religions are often fueled on...
a blurred world of fictions imposed on top of fictions, of lies upon lies...from which you are miraculously saved...or waiting to be saved...and thus ever-grateful. All in the interests of control.

What we really need is some clarity of information in this world and some courage to bring it to light.

But sadly what is now often flaunted as an alternative view appear more as Tirman's above, with those like Rupp applauding him on. They hug the safe ground of half-fictions...the territory of the lukewarm.

Soooo....since there seems little interest expressed by world powers (meaning no profit) in an effective way of decreasing terrorism through the creation of a world of empowered citizenry (that would ultimately help to diminish terrorism's ability to flourish) ...these deadly contrived games are unfortunately the war game we are in. May we play our part well enough to survive them.

Reducing terrorism by about 90% is a piece of cake: 1. treat Palestinians and Israelis in an even-handed fashion.

2. support a REAL evolution towards democracy in the Muslim nations by withdrawing clandestine support for despotic regimes.

3. understand that in the absence of these, fanatical hatred and a love of revenge will continue to foster clandestine and suicidal violence.

Not rocket science!

Outstanding, Lynn. Your perspective on things is much needed here.

All good points you make, Truman but I think terrorism has morphed into something else...it is also about fabrication. As Paul from East Van questions in his asute comment...the evidence doesn't even have to exist for it to be believed....the idea of terrorism is now being manipulated..it doesn't have to be based in any reality to be effective.

Yes, of course, lynn. You're right, but I think unless it's understood that the war in Iraq was really in the defense of Israel, and the possible attack on Iran will be in defense of Israel, the real and phony terrorist plots will continue.
The goal is to manufacture a constant state of fear and loathing of Muslim terrorists so the tilted Middle East foreign policy of America and Britain will seem justified.

So, I think its this constant tilt towards Israel that allows all of this nonsense.

Just back in from an evening with friends - glad to see you're back - hope it was a fine holiday.

Missed your contributions; especially during the little eRUPPtion that happened here last night. Still trying to get a bead on what that was all about - clearly more than meets the eye.

Apparently I left my head somewhere else - the message above was meant to have included a salutation for lynn.

The idea of fabrication should also be applied to past actual incidents of terrorism. In both 7/7 and the Madrid subway bombings, the metal floors of the cars were bent into the cars...showing the the explosives were placed under the cars and could not have resulted from backpack bombs inside
the cars. Check out Terror Storm http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4757274759497686216
next time you have almost 2 hours.

I love listening to western leftists theories that attempt to paint us all as evil conspirators, with the goal of subjugating Muslims and exercising our superiority over all.
It's true. As a self defense mechanism, we should distance ourselves from these leftists.
They are not friends of Western Democracy.

Oh IAMC, I do adore you so. You are so off the wall, it's wonderful!

By the way, who is the "us" you identify with, as in "paint us as as evil conspirators?'

Me, too, G West...since I just realized I referred to Mr. Tirmin as Mr. Firmin through most of my comment...must be due to too much salt and sun... I guess. If you don't mind I'll borrow your "that's my story and I'm sticking to it" from another thread. ;-)

Great to read you, Coyote, Truman, Nana and everyone again...although I read today somewhere on the Tyee that they prefer that we don't converse in a personal way with one another...I always thought that was part of the Tyee's unique charm but apparently not. I dunno but I often enjoy reading the personal volley of conversation between other posters...usually the twists and turns bring some freshness to the threads and often interconnect in an interesting way with the main topic once again.

Just a thought...Oh no...does this mean the end of the evening threads "nighty-nights"? ;-) (I'm sure I've heard Peter Mansbridge (once or twice) sign off for the night in a similar fashion.) ;-) Anyway, just to further annoy the night police...love and kisses to all. xoxox

Who the hell is Shannon Rupp? I just found this article, and was impressed by his/her pomposity, hubris, and aggressive prose.

It's been a long time since I've seen such bile and high-falootin' nonsense.

And yes, some people do believe the formation Israel was a terrible mistake.

One more interesting piece by an Israeli:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n16/laor01_.html

critical of his own government and the IDF.

Here's the first paragraph (emphasis mine):

As soon as the facts of the Bint Jbeil ambush, which ended with relatively high Israeli casualties (eight soldiers died there), became public, the press and television in Israel began marginalising any opinion that was critical of the war. The media also fell back on the kitsch to which Israelis grow accustomed from childhood: the most menacing army in the region is described here as if it is David against an Arab Goliath. Yet the Jewish Goliath has sent Lebanon back 20 years, and Israelis themselves even further: we now appear to be a lynch-mob culture, glued to our televisions, incited by a premier whose ‘leadership’ is being launched and legitimised with rivers of fire and destruction on both sides of the border. Mass psychology works best when you can pinpoint an institution or a phenomenon with which large numbers of people identify. Israelis identify with the IDF, and even after the deaths of many Lebanese children in Qana, they think that stopping the war without scoring a definitive victory would amount to defeat. This logic reveals our national psychosis, and it derives from our over-identification with Israeli military thinking.

And, for anyone who's interested, some more information about Hezbollah and the background of the situation in Lebabon:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n16/glas01_.html

written by Charles Glass and published August 3 of this year, the article ends with the following words (again, the emphasis is mine):

"If the UN had any power, or the United States exercised its power responsibly, there would have been an unconditional ceasefire weeks ago and an exchange of prisoners. The Middle East could then have awaited the next crisis. Crises will inevitably recur until the Palestine problem is solved. But Lebanon would not have been demolished, hundreds of people would not have died and the hatred between Lebanese and Israelis would not have become so bitter.

On 31 July, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said: ‘This is a unique opportunity to change the rules in Lebanon.’ Yet Israel itself is playing by the same old unsuccessful rules. It is ordering Lebanon to disarm Hizbullah or face destruction, just as in 1975 it demanded the dismantling of the PLO. Then, many Lebanese fought the PLO and destroyed the country from within. Now, they reason, better war than another civil war: better that the Israelis kill us than that we kill ourselves. What else can Israel do to them? It has bombed comprehensively, destroyed the country’s expensively restored infrastructure, laid siege to it and sent its troops back in. Israel still insists that it will destroy Hizbullah in a few weeks, although it did not manage to do so between 1982 and 2000 when it had thousands of troops on the ground and a local proxy force to help it. What is its secret weapon this time?"

In the light of actual events, not a little ironic.

What's this about a "holocaust industry?" Nanananaheyhay,,,

THE HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY: REFLECTIONS ON THE EXPLOITATION OF JEWISH SUFFERING (Second Edition)
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/content.php?pg=3

LOL. He truly does provide some comic relief around here, doesn't he. The classis, stereotypical neocon wingnut.

I even delight in him from time to time. Though back of that is quite a darker s.o.b., which one is probably wise not to forget either.

And frankly gkam, I am one of those persons. I'll lay it right out there, if it is not already known.

My first reaction to it all many years ago now was, "...now this was a mistake that will come back to haunt us." Though then I must confess, I promptly filed it somewhere, and didn't pay a whole bunch of attention to it for a long time as well.

At the end of WWII, in my view, frankly, what was generally described as the situation of the Jews which was there in Germany, Poland and Europe generally, was just that primarily, a "European problem" which should have had a European solution. It was not entirely innocent Palestine which should have been forced to pay up their land for the evil of the Holocaust brought down upon European Jewry. If there was land to be surrendered for a Jewish homeland, it should have been there in defeated Deuschland Uber Alles at the top of the list of candidates. (Though there were others as well, who had their fingers in the Holocaust pie as well.)

It was inevitable and entirely forseeable that the Arabs with "Semite" Palestinians would sooner or later resist their expulsion from their native land. Indeed, they resisted from the beginning and continue to have "the right of defence" of their homeland. (Regardless of whatever decisions by outsider UN forces.)

But the Western Allies at the end of WWII, especially the rising new world power already then, The United States was already looking to the coming conflict with the USSR. For which it was then already planning. And it wanted a postwar Germany that was friendly to it, as an ally in the coming war against "Communism".

Which goodwill the West got, of course, by lifting this particular compensation burden off the German people and facilitating its exit from Europe and dumping it onto the Arabs generally and the Palestinians in particular.

And knowing and understanding this today, can we really feign surprise at what we have as a world effecting situation in Palestine (so-called Israel) and the Middle East generally.

No.

The problem yet awaits a European solution and a picking up of the legitimate cost of it initial error/crime. It is part of what they yet even owe to the Jews-, for the Holocaust.

That, or eventually, as the so-called Middle East "moderates" lose their power base, as they are, and are marginalized and replaced by the rise of a more aggressive and creative "Arab power", the Jews are finally going to be driven back into the Mediterranean and towards Europe anyway.

My modest prediction is, which is not particularly an advocacy of it, this last scenario is being prepared now. (Some Jews, as there has always been in Palestine as well, will survive the cut, of course. But like post the US defeat in Vietnam, post the US defeat in the Middle East, Europe needs to be thinking about the "new boat people" who are likely to be coming their way one day in the not too distant future, once this period of history finally resolves itself. Unless Israel changes course awfully quickly here, and looks at the 1967 borders solution awfully quickly; an opportunity that is fast slipping from them amidst the bitterness and rancor they are creating.)

Another great site for real http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/who.htm

This morning, Bill Good closed a segment of the show with a caller and Norman Spector accusing Hezbullah of war crimes for sending rockets into Israel, completely ignoring the fact that the rockets were retaliation for the Israeli bombardment of both civilians and roads and bridges....a perfect example of the "You Are Terrorists, We Are Virtuouus" mindset that is exposed in the article of the same name from the LRB posted by G.West last night.

I was so impressed by it I past it on to
whatreallyhappened.com which posted it this morning. Thanks, G.West.

Here's "Losing its morals and marbles: Israel’s fight in Lebanon"
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=12283

Spector might have said that, Nana, but what you don't know is that he was rolling on the floor laughing as he said it. He's far too intelligent to believe what he says on this issue.

You see, a normal person (Louis Arbour, for instance) might have trouble with whoever sends rockets and bombs and missiles into civilian areas, killing little children, but not Spector and Dershowitz.

He's trying to outdershowitz Alan Dershowitz, who apparently isn't 100% sure that Lebanese kids feel pain.

These guys are intellectual warriors--They have no requirement that what they write or say is true, only that it is in the service of their tribe.

Truman
Oh yeah!

Spector's a lot more than that too. He gets very upset when someone points out he's wrong or disagrees with him. I think the term is ideological warrior – intellectual is far too complimentary.

In a public forum he's usually quite civil - in private, the knives are out and truth and civility has nothing to do with it. He's just another of Hoffer's 'true believers' to be sure. I get a kick out of the fact they call 'socialists' ideological.

Spend a little time looking at his website if you want a new definition of arrogance. According to him his little term as Conny Black’s man at the Jerusalem Post and his short stint as Mulroney’s Ambassador to Jerusalem makes him the only expert worth his salt on the whole Middle East Question. Personally, I wish Harper would appoint him to something or other so he’d have to get his elbow out of everyone’s eye.

Good on you Nana for posting the LRB link!

Did you know Norman used to be a regular around here on the Tyee forum, G? In fact I'm feeling a wee bit guilty for mocking him as he once addressed me as:

"With the greatest of respect, Truman..."

But not THAT guilty, eh.

Must be before my time - whenever anyone uses that 'greatest of respect' line - ever - it's a lead pipe cinch that:
1. they don't mean it, and
2. they have a shiv in the hand they're holding behind their back.

Ahmadinejad wants your vote
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has started his own blog
By Oliver King / Internet/ World news 03:41pm

Fancy averting the third world war? Ever wanted to cast a vote in the Islamic Republic of Iran but feared how your degenerate western opinions might go down?

Well the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who started his own rather tedious blog this week, is giving you a unique chance to do exactly that.

In an online vote, the hardline Islamic president is asking in badly translated English: do you think that the US and Israeli intention and goal by attacking Lebanon is pulling the trigger for another world war?

So far the vote is not going the way some of his more zealous revolutionaries would wish. Some 139,986 people or 55% are currently saying no, while 45% or 113,047 say Israel and the US have pulled the trigger.

This result could mean that Iranians with internet access are mainly moderates horrified at their own president's views (for the full anti-Zionist tirade see his official site), or the vote has proved hugely popular with bloggers in the United States and Israel determined to scupper any propaganda value he might gain in having thousands agree with his bigotry.

Slate has thankfully done a round-up of some of the better blog comments about the president's musings on his humble origins and on the rightness of the Islamic revolution.

The best one comes from reformist Ali Eteraz, who writes: "What is most fascinating about it is how, over and over, he appeals to his poor background, and links it to the poverty endemic in Iran.

"Obviously, the attempt is to paint the west as responsible for that poverty. It is the same trick that the Muslim Marxists of the past employed to sow loyalty and allegiance among the Muslim masses during their hey-day in the 60s and 70s.

"That, to me, is further proof of the theory that today's political Islam is yesterday's Marxism in different clothing."

So far, the only comment allowed to be posted on the president's blog itself (well, on the English translation, which you can find by clicking the flag top right) is from a US reader called Hani.

Any thoughts on a third world war or the Iranian nuclear programme, Hani? No - he simply asks if the president can make the font bigger.

-from The Guardian

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=528

"In fact, it appears the American public is turning against the all-war, all-the-time mantra of the neocons. “The latest nationwide survey shows that most Americans believe that the Iranian threat ‘can be contained with diplomacy now.’ According to a CBS News survey released June 12, 55 percent of respondents said the Iranian threat could be contained, 21 percent said the threat ‘requires military action now’ and 19 percent said Iran was ‘not a threat at this time,’” reports Hearst Newspapers. Of course, Iran poses absolutely no threat to Israel or the United States, but even so, these numbers, if they can be believed, are significant."

Iran never has and never will pose any threat to the United States. Even if it does get nukes, it will never attack the US because the US will retaliate so powerfully that modern Iran will become only a memory--and everybody--even what's his name--knows it.

However, it is conceivable that a nuked-up Iran might be a real threat to Israel. It is, afterall a tiny country and could be completely obliterated. (The Israeli's biggest fear is that a nuclear suicide bomber might get into office in the government of one of its many enemies) and that's what's got the American arm of the Israeli government (otherwise known as the Bush administration) so freaked out.

Of course, this might all be moot if the American citizenry ever figure out that those 2800 hundred dead American warriors actually gave their lives for Israel, and not for the United States. Except for Rapture-waiting Christians, of course. They'd welcome the news.

Funny how none of them actually sell their houses and suvs, though, while waiting for the big day.

That LRB link by an Israeli is a very powerful piece.

As I watched CBC's Sunday Report last night... the Canadian military's assault on the Taliban in Afghanistan was referred to by the host as the "mighty forces of the Canadians" ..not that I am defending the Taliban in anyway but I thought how insidiously persuasive and powerfully alluring are the words of war...how a military mind-set so easily takes hold... and how it can far too easily change the face of a country known for peace such as Canada is.

In regards to Israel and the Hezbollah -here is an incisive excerpt from a piece by Stephen Gowans I found:

"The standard operating procedure, where Israel is concerned, is to turn the truth on its head. And the chief truth inverter is the Western media.

Rule #1. The “who started it?” rule. It is always the Arabs who attack first, and always Israel that retaliates in self defense. The current Israeli assault on Gaza is attributed to the capture (called a kidnapping) of corporal Gilad Shalit, by a group of Palestinians who tunnelled under the border and attacked an Israeli watchtower. But the day before Shalit’s capture, Israeli forces crossed into Gaza and captured (that’s captured, not kidnapped) a Palestinian doctor and his brother. Israel has kidnapped 64 Hamas members, including cabinet ministers, mayors and legislators. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Rule #2. The terrorism rule. When Arabs kill Israelis, it’s called terrorism.

Rule #3. The self defense rule. When Israelis kill Arabs, it’s called self defense.

Rule # 4. The reaction of the international community rule. When Israel kills too many civilians all at once, the West calls for restraint. Israel pledges it will take care to limit civilian casualties, then goes about its merry way, blasting apart civilians, blaming the deaths on the militants. “We had to take out the civilians. They were in the way. But we didn’t mean to.”

Rule # 5. The kidnapping rule. Palestinians do not have the right to capture Israeli soldiers, not even a limited number, not even one or two.

Rule # 6. The war on terrorism rule. Israel has the right to capture as many Arabs as it wants. There is no limit. Israel doesn’t kidnap Arabs, it arrests them. This creates the impression of legality, and that Israel is simply carrying out a police action. Legitimate authority arrests “suspects” and “terrorists.” Criminals kidnap.

Rule # 7. The David vs. Goliath rule. When you say Israel, never say “supported by the US and Britain.”

Rule # 8. The destablizer rule. When you say Hezbollah, always add “supported by Iran and Syria.” Iran and Syria are a “destabilizing” force in the region, in the same manner Venezuela is a destabilizing force in Latin America. They resist the hegemony of the US and its subalterns. That’s why they’re destabilizing.

Rule # 9. Things we don’t mention rule. Don’t mention the occupied territories, ignored UN resolutions, or violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Rule # 10. Amplify the voice of the Israelis and minimize the voice of the Arabs. Let Israelis speak out as much as possible, so they can explain rules one through nine."

I came across this by Shannon Rupp while rereading the posts on this thread:

"In a liberal democracy if you don't have the nerve to attach your name to your views then you shouldn't be airing them."

And: "Freedom of speech isn't just a right, it's a responsibility."

And of course I agree with this 100%. It's always been a complete mystery to me how anyone could ever post a comment to this forum without posting their real name. It's seems to me to be the worst kind of cowardice, especially when the opinions--sometimes including my own--are so combative, and condemning.

Why this isn't seen as basic decency remains far beyond my comprehension

But is ‘Shannon Rupp’ (his/her) real name Truman?

We've had this debate before you know. There are a variety of good reasons why one might use a pseudonym and even more good reasons why one ought to be civil whether or not one posts in one's own name.
A rose after all, as Shakespeare says.

Shannon Rupp’s hidden (or not) identity certainly didn't restrain a number of her other egregious and unfair, not to mention bombastic postings…and not just in respect of this matter – as you well know. Not much basic decency I'd say.

I realize this is a bit of a pet issue of yours – I still think you’re missing the point.

Unfortunately, because of existing "hate" laws, freedom of speech is something we no longer enjoy here in Canada and one only needs to cite the really shameful Ahenakew case as an example.

In the US, although he was convicted for DUI, Mel Gibson faced media censure, but not legal proceeedings for uttering the same words in his drunken ramblings that Ahenakew did, that is, their shared belief that Jews were responsible for all the wars in the world.

Ahenakew was also convicted for referring to Jews as "disease" yet a Vancouver Rabbi was quoted on the front page of the Vancouver Sun as referring to Hezbollah as "a cancer" that must be cut out and removed from Lebancon and or very own Minister for Foreign Affairs Peter Mackay also used the same word, cancer (i.e. disease) to describe Hezbollah on the front page of the National Post with impunity. Should they not face hate crime charges?

Bit of a double standard there but what it comes down to is either we have free speech in this country or we don't. Face it, we don't.

BTW - Thank you for your kind words and support Coyote and others. I have been a member of a US based free-speech forum for quite some time now, but lately I have had the urge to discuss world events in a more local way and there are some very good heads at Tyee.

Alcibiades, you say there are a number of reasons why people use a pseudonyn. Well, what are they?

And do they not all have to do with fear of reprisal?

That's called cowardice! People are laying their lives on the line all over the world, and you guys can't even lay your names on the line. It's disgusting!

Somebody suggested once that for all they knew Truman Green isn't my real name either, to which I invited them to look it up in the phone book, or google it, whatever. You're suggestion that Shannon Rupp isn't her real name is equally as specious. And why bring in her "civility" or opinions. That's hardly the issue.

It's about shooting your mouth off without being willing to accept the consequences.

Regarding free speech, well there's no free lunch; or haven't you guys noticed, things come with a cost. Somebody fought for everything we've got. Maybe it's time to come out in the open as a kind of tribute.

Trying to mock my opinion as "a pet issue," should be beyond you Alcibiades.

Truman, I know people who have had their houses/offices burnt down. My self appointed job is to get information out to people that is hidden or ignored by the media...that makes me dangerous. I'm an old lady with a broken hip...I'd be real easy to take out.
There is absolutely no point in taking unneccesary chances.

As I said Truman, this is an issue we've chased around before.

People have family members who have jobs and positions whose status and continued employment could be called into question from time to time for no other reason than that someone in their family had posted something critical - let's say of the Federal Government - on this website. As a matter of fact I'm highly suspicious that posts to this site 'are' being monitored.

Those with nothing to risk will risk it willingly. I don't mean that to be personal either, but it is true.

If I were being paid to express my opinions it would be a different matter, although I still think the concept of using a nom de plume is both honourable and of long standing in this culture and in B.C. historically as well.

And, in respect of how responsible one's remarks are, I'd say that Shannon Rupp, if that is what the person in question is called, thinks she/he deserves any respect from those who disagree with her (however they sign themselves) she'd be wise to extend a little of it toward her interlocutors too.

Having posted his/her real name certainly didn't, in this case, create a more reasonable or mature dialogue - did it?

although I appreciate the spirit and context in which this article was written, the author could have used the term "alledged" in front of "plot" and "conspiracy".

in canada we are still waiting for the evidence and facts pertaining to the alledged plots to do various alledged violent actions in canada and the us.

do we trust our police anymore than we trust our military and political leaders who send our young to war?

one thing is clear, one should not talk to others about how one could possibly conduct violence against the states of canada uk and the us unless one wants to make the international press and have folks from MIT writing about the alledged circumstances.

let's all get off the fear bandwagon and get our troops out of the "theatre" of war. After all, isn't it all a bit contrived?

read craigmurray.com

Getting back to the topic....

Only 20% Of Britons Believe Blair On Terror Threats
Neo-Fascists need to stage real attack to reclaim credibility and obedience

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/220806believeblair.htm

A Guardian/ICM poll today reveals that just 20% of British voters believe the government is telling the truth about the threat to bomb transatlantic airliners using liquid explosives - meaning 80% of the country do not trust Blair and the war on terror agenda. Blair's re-election itself was carried with a majority of just 33% and since only half of the country actually voted, that means only just above a quarter of British citizens actively support their government.

The fact that a significant majority of British citizens are completely distrustful and skeptical of their government's motives coalesces with gradually building anger in Britain over continually increased interest rates, mortgage and loan repayments, energy prices, government taxes, allied with resentment concerning overzealous bureaucratic infringement on personal behavior such as hosepipe bans and water regulation.

This crescendo has not gone unnoticed and the Blair cabal will do everything within its reach to manufacture fearmongering distractions, including staging another terror attack in London, attacking transport systems in major cities, or releasing bio-weapons targeting their most organized and effective opposition - the farming community which is based mainly in the north. The 2001 Foot and Mouth outbreak led directly back to Porton Down, the government's own bio-weapons research facility.

cont'd

Reading Nana's above posting, I was reminded of my own experiences with "free speech" in a smal BC town a number of years ago when I took a public stand against the practice of clearcut logging. Shortly afterward, when I returned home from a weekend camping trip there was a message on my answering machine from my employer telling me not to come into to work the next day. When I called him to clarify this, he said that he had received five anonymous telephone calls that weekend saying that if he did not fire me, members of the local forestry support group (created as splinter of the US public relations firm created BC Forest Alliance) would boycott his store.

I got fired. When I filed a complaint to the human rights commission because I wanted to have it on record that I was being targetted by the loggers and their supporters), he lied to them (I was entitled to read his written staement) and then wrote a letter to the local paper calling me a liar and saying he'd fired me (on a Sunday night!) for other reasons.

When I wrote a brief letter in response, it was not published.

Nothing ever came of my human rights case.

So much for free speech in Canada and the rights my father (among others) supposedly fought to protect.

At the moment, with the phoney "war on terrorism" as an excuse, we are careening down a slippery slope straight into a totalitarian future.

First they came for the Muslims . . .

Alcibiades, Nana, comes out and tells the truth; she's afraid. And it's more honourable to admit fear than to keep up with all these goofy rationalizations--about not being paid; about people who give their names--like me,I suppose--having nothing to lose; pretending that the issue is whether Shannon Rupp is reasonable or mature--or civil; about the maturity of the dialogue.

This is called dissembling and using non-sequitors and straw dogs. It has nothing to do with identify disclosure.

When you put your name on your opinions, you're tacitly offering protection to people with unpopular ideas. There's no strength in anonymity; only weakness.

Look what we expect from our journalists and writers; we rant and rave against them; point out their faults and weaknesses; call them stupid and even occasionally suggest that they're shills or stooges. But 99% of them could be traced in the phone books.

So you're highly "suspicious that posts to this site are being monitored," eh. Duh! Of course, they're being monitored. Are you kidding? Every blog is automatically monitored for key words and phrases, as is every cross border telephone conversation--and probably even domestic calls.

Of course, the big joke is that if anybody with bad intentions really wants to find out who you are, they'll find out. So you're really not hiding, anyway. I'm actually a lot safer out here in the open than you guys are sniping from behind your silly names.

Truman,
If one's actions may have downstream consequences for someone other than oneself - and I assert they do - then it is not fear but responsibility to and for those others that may inform the decision to remain anonymous.

As far as the paid thing is concerned, it was a general comment that might well apply to others - legitimately. In other words, someone like Shannon Rupp, who is concerned with attracting a certain kind of work as a 'journalist' may well feel it is to his/her advantage to post remarks which take a certain approach to things and establish her/his membership in a certain group of critics. For example, she/he may well be thinking of submitting work to Ezra Levant and may be simply establishing her bona fides.

As for snipers, that's uncalled for and you know it. Virtually all of the ad hominem sniping that’s been leveled on this thread came from a direction you well know was not anonymous.

Everyone has things they’d prefer kept private, as for example, where they went to high school. LOL.

I'll stand by what I've posted and assert the right (and obligation in some sense) to identify myself how I please. What I say and how I express it ought to be the focus of a forum like this - nothing else. I expect to be judged on my words and not on my name.

In fact, most of the time the people who do not post under a pseudonym are also trying to attach some additional credibility to their words because of "who" they are. And I have examples - notably, not you Truman if you should consider these words as a personal affront – I’ll negate that impression at the outset.

Reading Nana's above posting, I was reminded of twice losing jobs for publically expressing my opinion of the BC forest industry and its practices. And the anonymous threats to myself and members of my family. And friends who told me that they could no longer be seen with me.

It is not necessary to publish under your real name to get charged with "hate" crime, although surely I have encountered few people more hateful than Shannon Rupp online. There have now been a number of cases where people posting under usernames to US forums have been convicted of here in Canada so it is a non issue.

Anyone who posts their honest opinions, experiences, beliefs and research results, anonymously or not, now does so in the knowledge that standing up for the truth and free of speeh is to risk prosecution.

So much for the rights my father fought to protect.

With the phoney "war on terrorism" as an excuse, we are careening down the slippery slope and unless we take a stand and put on the brakes, straight into a totalitarian future.

First they came for the Muslims . . .

Further to the original subject of this thread:

Only 20% of Britons Belieive Blair on Terror Threats
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/220806believeblair.htm

kjc, I wonder if you think there ever is an appropriate time that anyone should ever be charged with a hate crime for expressing an opinion?

You wrote that "anyone who posts their honest opinions, experiences, beliefs and research results...is risking prosecution."

Do you think that anything posted on this site will result in prosecution or put people at risk of being prosecuted for a hate crime? Is that not what you have suggested might happen?

Do you believe in hate crimes legislation?

Truman, just check out the information below for your answer.

http://www.revisionists.com/revisionists/zundel.html

http://www.germarrudolf.com/

http://www.rense.com/general68/adl3l.htm

Zundel, Nana. Surely not! I suppose you'd defend David Irving too? There are limits.

As far as I can tell, what he did was question the numbers and whether there was a deliberate policy of extermination.

As to the later, the only documentation of it came from a Soviet provided copy of what was supposed to be the minutes of the Wannsee Conference at which the "final solution" was alleged to have been arrived at.

Given the facts that it was the Soviets who constructed what were supposed to have been the crematoria at Auchwitz, that the sign at the camp telling of the number of victims has been revised down from the original 4 million to 1.2 million and that the massacre of Polish officers originaly blamed on the Nazis was later found to have been the work of the Soviets...there is room for doubt.

Zundel finally did win his case in Canada, remember?

"Holocost Denial" seems to be mostly about questioning the numbers.

Reparations paid to Israel by Germany are based on that 6 million figure. As of the year 2000, Germany has paid out $55 Billion US. So what would you make of all that?

I haven't paid much attention to Irving who seemed to have a will for self-destruction, but both Rudolf's case and the treatment of Zundel while jailed in Canada are outrageous.

Irving lost his libel case in England and is currently serving time in Germany. I won't debate Zundel with you. I think he's a hateful character and I'm glad he's gone.

The Germans, thankfully, seem for the most part to have sucked it up and come to grips with what their fathers and grandfathers did.

I know (knew would be more accurate they're mostly dead now) some servicemen who saw the camps and the corpses in '45.

Anyone who tries to soft sell that - or what happened in Dresden, Hamburg, London and Coventry - not to mention Japan, Hong Kong and the Philippines - is beyond the pale, in my view. The Allies did a lot of hateful things during the war too that are ignored – or seen as somehow justified. We also pretend that we fought the war to save the Jews – equally wrong – we could have saved the Jews before the war ever started. There’s enough blame to go around.

Alcibiades,
I agree, but the point you missed is that Zundel never said people didn't die. He doesn't think it was a deliberate policy of extermination, escecially as there was documented Zionist collaberation with the Nazis. They both wanted German Jews out of Germany. see:
http://www.counterpunch.org/brenner1223.html

My late mother-in-law told the tale of a high school friend of hers who was active in the US in the rescue effort. I don't remember which organization he worked for, but it had worked out a deal with the Nazis to ransom Jews for $15 a head. The money was there. He understood it was Zionists who made sure that the doors were closed to Europe's Jews, so that they would be forced to go to Palestine.

Malnutrition,starvation,overwork and brutality made the camps fertile ground for killer typhus which when it broke out toward the end, was impossible to control. That's what was seen when the camps were liberated.

I don't think the above lets Germany off the hook, but it is different than the commonly believed tales of gas chambers and crematoria.

After Abu Graib we know that ordinary people can be turned into moral monsters by the tacit approval of those in charge, All the more reason that re-examination of history should not be forbidden.

Nana,
People make all kinds of excuses. No doubt there were Jewish collaborationists - so what? The Holocaust was real and it is a blot on human history that can't be forgotten and shouldn't be excused.

I don't just blame the Germans but they were the instrument - I think the German people I know have accepted that. German Jews were German citizens – the Nuremberg Laws, if the war and the camps had never happened, were enough to condemn Hitler and his government for eternity anyway. Any other conclusion is absurd and trying to make excuses – just like the Americans are in the middle of doing right now. I don’t accept Bush’s excuses, why would I accept apologists for Hitler?

As for the Zionists, there were several efforts by Zionists to get the information about the camps out to the west after 1943 - eventually some of these stories made the back page of the New York Times - but nothing was ever done. The details are out there – and you of all people know how to find them.

We shouldn't pretend there isn't enough guilt for all of us. It wasn't the Zionists who turned back the St Louis and it wasn't the Zionists who animated Frederick Arthur Blair's racism here in Canada either.

That is why the current militaristic bunch in Jerusalem is such an irony.

I'm all in favour of re-examining history but I've read enough of Zundel and Irving's garbage to be certain that's not what they're up to, quite the contrary.

We had plenty of opportunity to permit Jews to come to Canada and we let in less than 5000 from the 30s until after the war. Of course the German war machine 'used' as much Jewish labour as they could…why wouldn’t they?

Well don't blame yourself Alcibades. And no, I do not believe in "hate" crime legislation. I believe in freedom of speech. Hate is a human emotion like love, greed or lust. Should we criminalize these?

If the Germans have paid out $55 billion US they've paid enough. Maybe its time someone started paying them for the slander all these years that they made soap and lampshades out of Jews like it says in such popular histories such as Jews, God and History. Why has Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem withdrawn these items from public view and admitted that the claim was false and most likely the product of Stalinist propaganda mills? Since DNA testing has determined that no human beings were harmed in their making, they have to.

On the subject of Stalin, he was the mass murderer of tens of millions but he was our ally, remember? In fact, after WWII we delivered a few million more up to him, many of whom had been away from the Russian Empire since they fled the firing squads during the Bolshevik takeover for being bourgeoise. If my grandfather had not been able to immigrate to Canada in the 30s, my mother would have been one of them.

How about some compensation for what they and those aforementioned tens of millions of their countrymen lost? Not too likely any of that will be forthcoming. Some victims are more equal than others.

The holocausts of past century cannot be used to justify the holocausts of the present. If anything we should have learned from them. But it seems we haven't learned a thing and here we are again, before the deluge.

The Israelis won't keep the ceasefire and they'll do more false flag ops (that's how Mossad operates) The object is to make the Litanni River Israel's northern border. The original Zionists planned for a much more, shall we say spacious Israel than at present.
http://www.canpalnet-ottawa.org/Zayid_Zionism.html

Israel is committing war crime in Lebanon and corporations are entitled by the same system that entitles Israel to invade its neighbour to lie to the public. A Zionist owned newspaper is just another corporation.

Whoever started WWI & II should be a matter of open and honest debate, but everyone can see who is starting WWIII.

This is not about being an apologist for Hitler.

If one can go to jail for the crime of "Holocoust Denial" by saying that the figure of 6 million is wrong because the sign at Auschwitz itself would allow for a revision of at least 2 1/2 million less...then we are dealing with something very, very strange.

The 55 billion that Germany has been forced to pay in reparations and the 100
billion that the US has supplied Israel
has allowed the victims to become the abusers. Maybe it's time to reassess the situation.

The USSR lost a total of 20 million people, soldiers and civilians, in the Second World War. Germany's total losses were 6.5 million. Japan lost 2.35 million and Chinese deaths amounted to 10 million. Whatever terrors Stalin was responsible for, his people suffered miserably for it, and the west couldn't have won the war without feeding on the blood of the Red Army. That much too is unavoidable. I have family from the Ukraine too. Comparing the relative horrors of two of the great dictatorships of the 20th century is a mugs game.

American casualties amounted to 274,000 - less even than Czechoslovakia. They may think they ‘won’ the war – but they didn’t – even Great Britain lost more men and women than the Americans did.

I have no problem criticizing Israel and its collaborationists; I do have a problem with anyone who tries to make it an issue of race or religion. Both concepts have been behind far too many tragedies already. Israeli will begin to find a way to live in and be a real part of the Middle East when the western powers, especially the US, begin to withdraw their support and encourage the Israelis to normalize their relationships with the Palestinians. Until then everything will be the same and more innocent people will suffer.

It's a complex world and anyone who suggests there are simple solutions to these things is the intellectual equal of IAMC.

Hate, whether it is hate for the Jews, or for the Arabs or for the Americans is evil. Although I believe in free speech, I also believe that sometimes, not often, people go too far. Finding a balance is never easy.

Nana
There is all kinds of independent scholarship confirming the number of Jews who 'disappeared' between 1936 (when the Nuremberg Laws were passed) and 1945. Whether the total is 5.5 million or 3.5 million or 10 million is of absolutely no interest to honest people. The fact that the modern German state has accepted the essence of the charges levied and proved against the Nazi state is more than enough evidence that this is an argument being waged by cranks and racists. The German people have moved on. We should do the same.

This does not mean that there is not a Holocaust industry which often misuses and misappropriates the voice of that tragedy.

It is the same kind of argument that excuses Europeans here in N America for what they did and are doing to Native People; that tries to pretend that slavery wasn’t a crime against humanity. If only one Jew was killed merely because he or she was a Jew, it is an evil thing - if it was any part of German policy to practice Racism against the Jews, it was an evil thing. Those things are facts. The details can’t change the essence of what happened any more than the details of what’s going on in the Middle East will excuse both parties for the terror they are sowing among the lives of innocent people – both Arab and Israeli.

I agree with you....but I still think that making it a crime to question anything about the Holocoust is outrageous.

I think there is a big difference between questioning 'details' about the Holocaust and denying the thing ever happened. As a matter of fact there are many Jewish writers and researchers who've spent careers debating these issues - without ever denying the reality of the historical record.

Anyway, enough for tonight - morning comes early.

My point throughout that questioning any of the details of what happened is consistantly inflated into "Holocaust Denial" and in the meantime:

above quote from: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/808/op13.htm

and for balance: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=753203

People are going to jail for questioning 'details' the soap and lampshade stories being an example of a 'detail.' Another description might be scientific evidence. The problems are arising from the fact that scientific evidence trumps anecdotal testimony.

The fact that someone doesn't like what I have to say doesn't outweigh my right to say it but there is a huge difference between freedom of speech and bearing false witness.

The 20,000,000 the USSR lost in WWII was just a cap on the multi millions lost in WWI, the Bolshevik takeover, the Civil War, the Terror, the Gulags the Famine . . .
http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters/margolis1.htm

There were between 7.000,000 and 9,000,000 starved to death in the Ukraine alone by Stalin's willing executioners Jewish mass murderers Lazar Kaganovitch & Genrikh Yagoda.

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_constitution&Number=294884503#Post294884503

Koba the Dread: Laughter and the Twenty Million by Martin Amis ". . . addresses itself to the central lacuna of twentieth-century thought: the indulgence of communism by intellectuals of the West."

Who turned a blind eye. And a media blackout.

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/a/martin-amis/koba-dread.htm

Nana
Obviously, I have no problem criticizing Israel and much of what the government of that country has done and is doing. However, the other side is far from blameless. My point really is that the Holocaust as a justification for Israel's behavior today is an enormous and rotting red herring; but, that does not mean that the Holocaust and Anti-Semitism are not important factors of western history. Just because such arguments don't hold many lessons for relations between Israel and the Palestinians doesn't mean that anyone has the right to deny the 'fact' of the Holocaust and the role all the western democracies played in its tragedy.

So let's get the Holocaust off the table and start insisting that both parties to this conflict start talking once again. It is a demographic battle that the Israelis can't win - as numerous writers in Ha'aretz are always pointing out - and, if they continue to use military force to keep the lid on the kettle this will never be settled without a blood bath every few years - I see today Israel is being investigated over evidence that they used cluster-bombs against the Lebanese.

Eventually, Israel is going to have to become a pluralistic state and there is eventually going to be a Palestinian state beside it.- or inside of it.- where Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims generally (not to forget Christians) are equal democratic members of Israeli society - .not unlike what's slowly happening (after 70 odd years of conflict, hatred and murder) in Ireland. That may mean it is no longer a Jewish state – but so be it. If people stopped shooting and blowing each other up at every opportunity it seems reasonable to think that eventually Israelis would begin to recognize that a pluralistic state is better than what they have now – a continual state of war.

That's what I believe and hope for. If a few more commentators from the right and some Americans in positions of power would adopt a similar realism there might be a chance. But people from the left can learn a thing or two about these issues as well.

Let's leave the hate and the invective to the right wing - where I think it properly belongs.

If it will make you feel any better, kjc, my attitude toward the other great dictator of the 20th century and the neglect of western intellectuals of the plight of Stalin's victims is pretty much summed up in the writing of the first western journalist to tell the truth about the matter - Malcolm Muggeridge.

That's my last word on this subject and on this thread.

As to actual 'lessons' from the London Bombing plot, Gwynne Dyer is usually a good place to start if you're looking for independent and thoughtful analysis. There are still a few good journalists around:

Here's his August 10 column (in two posts):

By Gwynne Dyer

"I used to know when I was being deeply cynical and when I wasn't,"
said a friend who just made it into London before they closed Heathrow
airport for the terrorist scare. "Now, I don't."

Back in February 2003, when Prime Minister Tony Blair was trying to
persuade a reluctant Britain that invading Iraq alongside the United States
was a really neat idea, tanks suddenly appeared on the perimeter road
around Heathrow to guard against an impending terrorist attack. It wasn't
clear what they were supposed to do -- crush the terrorists under their
treads? -- and no actual terrorists ever showed up, but it helped to shape
public opinion. So how different is it this time?

Hundreds of flights delayed or cancelled. Twenty-four alleged
conspirators arrested in East London, Thames Valley towns and Birmingham,
many of them described by neighbours as bearded Muslims wearing traditional
dress. Shocking revelations that they had a new technique for blowing up
to ten aircraft on the heavily travelled London-US routes out of the sky
simultaneously by smuggling explosive liquids aboard. All cabin baggage
banned on flights out of Britain. And in a classic case of panic envy, the
US Department of Homeland Security declares a red alert in the United
States, too.

That should scare the public into supporting the "war on terror" a
bit longer, even if the real wars are about something else, and are going
seriously wrong: Iraq sliding into civil war, the Taliban coming back in
Afghanistan, Israel flattening Lebanon without making any significant dent
in Hezbollah's capabilities. Most people will assume that with all that
smoke, there must be some fire.

Of course there's some fire. Terrorists of various sorts have been
in business for about forty years, and the current crop of Islamist
terrorists are especially dangerous since they are willing to kill
themselves along with their victims. But in the United States more people
die on the roads every single month than Islamist terrorists have killed
since the year 2000, and in Britain it's more people every week. Yet
neither country has tried to restrict access to cars.

and here's the rest of it:

After the arrests in Britain on the night of 9-10 August, Peter Clarke, head of Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist branch, assured the media that "during the investigation an unprecedented level of surveillance has been undertaken....We have been looking at meetings, movement, travel, spending and the aspirations of a large group of people....The investigation reached a critical point last night when the decision was made to take urgent action in order to disrupt what we believe was being planned."

Fair enough, although this is the same organisation that took "urgent action" to kill an innocent Brazilian called Jean Charles de Menezes in July 2005 "in order to disrupt what we believe was being planned," and earlier this year shot and wounded another innocent person in London in the course of a raid on a Muslim family in east London based on
manifestly unreliable information. So maybe 24 terrorist plotters have been arrested in Britain, or maybe 24 innocent British Muslims with full beards, or more likely some combination of the two. But whatever the truth of that, why the panic?

British Home Secretary John Reid boldly asserted that the "main players" had been accounted for, and Scotland Yard Deputy Commissioner Paul Stephenson proudly announced that "we are confident that we have disrupted a plan by terrorists to cause untold death and destruction and commit mass murder." Well done, lads -- but if you have them all locked up, why are you closing the airports and bringing in all these draconian security measures now? A couple of months ago, when you first uncovered this plot but didn't know all the "main players," I could understand such drastic
precautions, but why now?

Maybe it was those explosive "liquid chemicals" they were planning
to smuggle aboard the planes. After all, it's only 160 years since nitroglycerin was invented. It's a mere eleven years since al-Qaeda associate Ramzi Yousef plotted to blow up 12 airliners flying across the Pacific at the same time with nitro carried aboard in contact lens solution bottles. Who could have foreseen this? Quick! Bring in new security measures!

They really aren't that stupid. They have been checking liquids that people want to carry aboard flights at airport security checkpoints for years. There would be no need for drastic new security measures even if the alleged British terrorist ring were still on the loose. This is all hype, designed to frighten the British and American publics into supporting the wars of their deeply unpopular governments (and the war of their Israeli ally as well).

Or am I being too cynical? Maybe they're just stupid. I really don't know any more.

Those last lines could have been written by Truman Green.

...thanks for posting that exceptional piece by Gwynne Dyer, G West.

Cynicism is sometimes a saving grace. ;-)

That is why the assumption made in this article by the author that it was about good police work (and that incidentally Ms. Rupp championed while slinging mud at others for not recognizing what was soooo clear to her) falls flat on its face in comparison to Dyer's article, its lack of hysteria and sense of proportion...not to mention Dyer's ability to question that which has been specifically prepared and served up in a ready-made sauce for pretend journalists to swallow.

Now, that WAS weird, G. West, when you said, "That last stuff could have been written by Truman Green."

While I was reading the Dyer piece and got down to the end I started thinking: "Jeez, didn't I just post this stuff a couple days ago?"

Thanks for noticing!

Great minds think alike, I guess.

Either that, or you're a regular Dyer reader!

Not for about six months, G. Very funny!

Oh, my...the terror plots have another use beside getting us ready for the ultimate police state....they are also profitable to those in the know.

Did Insiders Milk Terror Plot For Criminal Trading?
Indian newspaper highlights suspicious patterns, 9/11 and 7/7 were also preceded by insider trading

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/240806criminaltrading.htm

Though the report can be quantified as nothing more than speculation at this point, it mirrors murmurs we've been receiving from stock brokers who also claim potential foul play.

If true it would also dovetail with similar activity prior to the 9/11 attacks and the 7/7 bombings in London.

9/11 was preceded by suspicious put options in large quantities placed on American and United Airlines which betrayed advance knowledge of the attack. The investigation as to who was responsible for authorizing the transactions led directly back to former CIA director Buzzy Krongard.

Nana, do you really think there are people on this planet so evil that they'd do "put options," then wait for the stocks to fall and happily collect their money knowing that 3000 people had to be terrorized and murdered so they could get a couple of beamers and a downpayment on a place in Palm Springs?

You do? So do I.

"It would be a very gullible and/or innocent person who takes the State at its word in anything to do with terrorism. The State and its agents lie as a matter of course - "State security" trumps everything, including any form of morality and honesty. When the stakes are as high as they are now, when the State is on the verge of achieving complete surveillance over the UK population - a perfect condition every State aspires to but only the UK and US States have approached realising (a bit like what the State of Grace is for Catholics, or Communism is for Marxists) - then anything goes. A few lies and 'terror alerts' are small potatoes - this is Big League stuff, and if the State loses now it'll never get another chance to impose total control for decades at least."

Fred Riley (This England)

Lynn Your words are exactly what I've been following up on the net, as the msm is a total waste of free intelligence!
The last bitter pill the usa, harper, olmart etc, was the total loss to the israel aggression against the Sovereign Nation of Lebanon. Could we be next?
Last night on CBC Documentry "Why War" a real eye opener about cheney, bush, rummy, rice (auntie tom) powell all wanna be Emperor!
I think, harper thinks he will win a majority government (not if I can help it) Canada will become a police state & be usa 51st state. sad
our own so called terrorist bust of 17 home grown Ottawa bunch, media went wild on this now nothing?
Liquid explosives another BS FEAR facter!
Scientists proved it to be a hoax & impossible to make, only in Holliwood movies!`
Bird Flu FEAR facter!
We, U & I, have got to see past this fear facter BS & see it for what it is first get rid of Harper & his gutless mla's for a start!
The fibs are a bunch of criminals who got/are getting away with 100's of millions of our tax $$$!
A homeless man was given a 9 month jail sentence for sleeping in/on public property, go figure?

http://www.democrats.com/liquid-explosive-plot

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_1097.shtml

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=80

So true what you say, BC Dude...I am constantly amazed, like you, at the total corruption that is being allowed to proliferate all around us...the complicity of a silent MSM in it all... and the number of journalists who simply do not question what they are being served up by the powers that be...so that citizen journalists in blogs -(to mention a few) like The Legislature Raids here and The Uk's Fred Riley's This England are saying what the MSM is too lame to say... and questioning where the MSM are quite content to just go ahead and swallow the ready-made sauce.

(Much agree also, a majority for Harper means the end of this country...believe nothing this man says or promises...every word of his a well-calculated ploy towards gaining that end.)

As Fred Riley says in that same blog from the UK:

"What we all need is a good dose of this scepticism, to question the cops and the spooks and the politicians who're herding us with cattle prods into our Big Brother pens, before we're locked in for good. When the next "terror alert" comes along, instead of taking the State's word for it, as so much of the compliant and complicit print and broadcast media has done, we should demand habeas corpus - produce the evidence."

Then Riley goes on to quote Damian McCarthy, in a brilliant letter to The Saturday Independent:

Is it too much to expect that we get some balanced (even cynical) reporting rather than over-excitable, sensationalist "terrorism porn" that the Government and police require from a compliant media to push through their political agenda?

thanks for the links also, BC Dude...wish I'd seen that CBC documentary you referred to.

Cheers, lynn

You guys are on the right trail, but I'd consider voting for Harper if the alternative becomes Ignatieff.

I think he comes ready-made with a fifty-first state mandate from his AIPAC and American Empire handlers who he worships. It's not so much "sheep in wolf's clothing," but rather, "wolf in wolf's clothing," since he's pretty well come clean about where his loyalty lies.

Ignatieff = Harper with brains!

Is that what you're suggesting Truman. Why would you vote for either?

Does the term, "lesser of two evils," ring a bell at all, G.

So you're finally getting my point on Ignatieff, eh.

No Truman, not really; what I said about Ignatieff - and the material is still out there if you want to check - is that he deserved to be criticized on what he actually said and wrote and not just because he'd spent a lot of time outside the country...or because he ended up on one side of a particular debate.

Unless you're willing to forgo my point, and not vote for either, then I haven't yet convinced you. Actually, I'd marginally prefer Ignatieff, but only because I don't think he's a religious fanatic - which I'm convinced Harper is. But I still wouldn’t vote for either.

In the end, Harper is far more dangerous, in my view, than a self-absorbed intellectual.

World leaders are never religious fanatics, G. They only USE religion for their own purposes. There hasn't been a single world leader in a 100 years who even believed in god--maybe not in a thousand years.

Even the Mayan priests who personally ripped peoples' hearts out as a sacrifice to god were, in fact, atheists.

Therefore, Harper, being a national leader could not be a religious fanatic.
He's just a guy who wanted to be Prime Minister and was smart enough to do it.

But to get that far in life and politics you're going to notice somewhere along the line that the world with its $100,000 hummers and millions of children rotting to death before they get to six, could never be constructed by a benevolent god, only a demented one. The religious fanatics are all blowing themselves up or thinking that the Rapture's coming next Tuesday. And none of them are running countries.

G, your last comment doesn't make any sense.

Disagree...completely. Harper is far more dangerous than Ignatieff...in my view...the kind of God religious fundamentalists believe in isn't a benevolent god but a god that they think takes pleasure in lording it over some groups while catering to others. Just the kind of thing George Bush believes in. Last time I checked both he and that crackpot Amhadinejad were both running countries Truman.

And here's how Maureen Dowd puts it in tomorrow's NYTimes - which I just read:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/ahmadinejad.htm

I saw the interview with Mike Wallace, and Ahmadinejad is far from crazy.

Harper/Ignatieff is really just a question of style. As far as the NWO goes, I think they are on the same page.
I don't know how many people would be able to see what Ignatieff is because he is pretty slick in a literary way. I hope he doesn't get the nomination.

So Ahmadinejad doesn't believe in the imminent return of the 12th Imam?

Strictly speaking Bush isn't crazy either but I put him and Ahmadinejad in the same fundamentalist category Nana.

If the only two choices (and thank God that's not the case) were Harper and Ignatieff, I know where my support would go...I don't think it's 'just' style - I think Ignatieff is rethinking, in a tortured and attenuated way, his position.

That's something I can't imagine Harper ever doing. In any case, I suspect it's moot because I don't think Ignatieff can win.

Amhadinejad is a much better statesman than either loonies w bush,=lapdog harpo, or olmart!
Bush shows him as a crazed lose cannon, huh look at the 3 stooges cheney (Haliberton, KBR), bush, rummy, conda (auntie tom)
Why did/does bush/olmart murder civilians in Gaza?
Amhadinejad sent Bush an 18 page dialog & bush wouldn't even acknowledge it.
USA needs war for their war machine profit as there isn't any profit in "PEACE"
Now Canwest & msm is pushing Green Party propaganda just to take NDP votes away just like they did in BC, that's the only way Campbell got back in neocon msm!

Come on G. West, how much different it the return of the 12th Imam from the Rapture, the return of Christ or waiting for the Messiah? I'd take the word of a civil engineer from a working class family of seven any day over a Yalie Scull and Bones member who pretends to be a cowboy, but is afraid of horses.

Okay, G, I'll see if you can figure this out. Language has a kind of mathematical entrenchment. You can't really escape it.

You said, "Ignatieff is Harper with brains." Right?

You said. Harper is "dangerous." Right?

Therefore you MUST think that Ignatieff is similar to Harper, only smarter.

Otherwise, you must not really believe your own description of Ignatieff, as just a smart Harper.

Now would it not be logical for me to conclude that, according to the inevitable progression of your thesis, Ignatieff would likely be more dangerous than Harper?

Else (quoting George Bowering), why say Ignatieff is "Harper with brains?"

"Auntie Tom." Perfect, BC Dude. Thanks for a great laugh this morning.

Nana - not different at all in my opinion - that's what I said in fact. 12th Imam - rapture - second coming - all nonsense spun out by ideologues not willing to undertake the hard work of living together in the here and now. Fundamentalist American vs Fundamentalist Islamist. There’s a Hobson’s Choice if ever I saw one – they both need a good shaking.

Truman - I think Ignatieff is capable of learning; Harper - not so much. I don't know why you keep at this, it's pointless. All I've ever said is judge both men on what they say and write, period. What I said was, and is, perfectly clear. No need to parse it three ways from Sunday: You obviously don't agree - so be it.

Hi G. The definition of a narcissist is a guy who argues right along but claims the other guy is being goofy for keeping up the argument.

For instance: "I don't know why you keep at this. It's pointless."

Well, G. Is it only pointless for me to keep at this, or is it also pointless for you to keep at this?

Just wondering-- and having a little fun's all.

Fun's important, eh.

Fun's good Truman. Have you read Heather Mallick's latest on the CBC website - search CBC for her? The title is Dogville - worth a look.

G.West, I guess you didn't ferret out the real reason for the demonization of Ahmadinejahd from the excerpt from Global Security I posted.

He's not all that fundamentalist...he doesn't care about enforcing the chador on women. He's socialist in that he wants to concentrate on jobs and housing,doesn't buy into the utility of the WTO except for a the chosen few and most of all....[B]he doesn't really want ro do deals with western oil companies.

Sounds like Mossadegh to me...or a religious Chavez.

What about this Nana?

source:http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_10945.shtml

Sounds pretty messianic to me!

I'm not trying to say he's worse than Bush, pretty much the same though.

Or this:
http://roozonline.com/11english/012416.shtml

So what...it is an article of faith for RCs to believe the host is the actual body and the wine the blood of Christ.

Do you really believe that W believesanything except he and his family have a right to steal elections? Piety is part of the act. The man has a lot more in his closet than his suits.

So what!... You're the one that's been making a federal case of it.

I don't care whether he (Bush) and Ahmadinejad are both liars about what they believe in...that's clearly not the point. You were trying to suggest one of these two cranks is preferable to the other and I think that's deluded thinking.

Bush is more dangerous because of the powers that he has under his control - whether he is a puppet of the Pentagon and the right wing is of very little consequence - just as Ahmadinejad may well be nothing more than a puppet of Iranian religious fundamentalists.

I think both Bush and Ahmadinejad "believe" in the rightness of what they're doing - all fanatics do.

That's why there needs to be a complete separation between church (any church) and the state.

Faith is a personal matter, when it gets tied up with government one is always, always in trouble. Bush/Ahmadinejad, whatever.

I don't think Ahmadinejahd is a fanatic, but I do think Bush & company are all crooks.

I've pointed out what makes A. dangerous to the interests of those who run the world, and it ain't his religious views....it's his nationalism and his unwillingness to get with the globalist program!

If the road to vilification of him is to call him a fanatic...that's what almost everything printed in English will emphasize...no matter what its source.
Belief in the 12th Imam is no loonier than anything in Christianity.

Iran became a theocracy in response to the evil and corrupt Shah put in place by the Brits and Americans. The mullahs who replaced him became corrupt in turn. Ahmadinejad seems to be genuinely interested in the welfare of the population and also would seem to be gradually moving to a less restrictive society.

Right, Nana. "Belief in the 12th Imam is no looner than anything in Christianity."

I don't think these leaders believe in anything except power and survival and will use any program at their disposal.

They're both pandering to their power base whether's it's appeasing a religious loonocracy in Iran (12th Imam, yeah, right) or being front man for the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, which now has massive influence in the presidency, both houses of Congress and both parties.

In fact, I read somewhere that the motto, "E Pluribus Unum" will be replaced by "Marching To Zion" as the motto for the Great Seal of the United States.

Just kidding.

Think beliefs as tools, guys.

In fact, if you go to "United States Government" in Wikipedia you'll now see the following entry:

"First government in the history of the world to have as its main foreign relations policy, the preservation of another state."

Not to worry, though. There's a Democratic party movement afoot to call for the limiting of spending by future New York City mayoralty candidates to a paltry 950 trillion dollars, US.

The shadow trilateral commission of Shrum, Spector and Dershowitz are said to be doing an op-ed for the New York Times in which they describe these new controls as "blatant anti-semitism."

And I've said it is?

You need to read what I've written a lot more carefully Nana.

Seriously though, folks, did you you see Barry Zwicker on the "Standard" last night accusing the Bush administration of doing 911? He was surprisingly invited on to talk about his new book, "Towers of Deception."

Right or wrong, good on the tv station for being willing to air alternative political theorists like Zwicker. (Omni 10, I think) I don't think Zwicker will be on Global TV, for some reason.

Yep, Truman I did see it and you're right, it was surprising. Don't hold your breath for Global to pick up the 'story' except as a jibe.

Not that I agree with the full-blown conspiracy explanation, but - as I've stated several times before - it shouldn't just be dismessed as wild ravings of the lunatic fringe.

It's important to be aware of a wide range of thought and it helps keep everyone on their toes when people are ready and willing to question received wisdom. I think eventually there will be another inquiry...but it won't be because of the vigilance of the main stream media...the 'Standard' is pretty much out of the loop from what I've seen of it.

G.West, you called Ahmad. a "crackpot" in one post and then posted a long excerpt from a piece on A.'s speeches about the Mahdi, so no, you didn't actually say...what?
In the meantime read http://www.juancole.com/

"Ahmadinejad said, "Iran is not a threat to any country, and is not in any way a people of intimidation and aggression." He described Iranians as people of peace and civilization. He said that Iran does not even pose a threat to Israel, and wants to deal with the problem there peacefully, through elections:

"Weapons research is in no way part of Iran's program. Even with regard to the Zionist regime, our path to a solution is elections."

Ahmadinejad seems to be explaining what his calls for the Zionist regime to be effaced actually mean. He says he doesn't want violence against Israel, despite its own acts of enmity against Middle Eastern neighbors. I interpret his statement on Saturday to be an endorsement of the one-state solution, in which a government would be elected that all Palestinians and all Israelis would jointly vote for. The result would be a government about half made up of Israeli ministers and half of Palestinian ones. Whatever one wanted to call such an arrangement, it wouldn't exactly be a "Zionist state," which would thus have been dissolved.

The schlock Western pundits, journalists and politicians who keep maintaining that Ahmadinejad threatened "to wipe Israel off the map" when he never said those words will never, ever manage to choke out the words Ahmadinejad spoke on Saturday, much less repeat them as a tag line forever after.

Nana, this is very interesting regarding what Ahmadinejad did or did not say. I don't usually think of myself as gullible--and usually don't automatically believe anything I read, but I admit I actually did believe that he said something about "wiping Israel off the map."

I remember when it first came out I thought that this seems like a very stupid thing for him to say--and he can look forward to seeing F16s flying overhead any minute on their way to Iran's nuclear facilities--even if he did harbour that kind of sentiment.

Similarly, my biggest suspicion about 911 is that I find it hard to believe that the muslim radicals would do anything so stupid and automatically invite the wrath of the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Do you mean Ahmadinejad said nothing like that?

If he hasn't said that then that's a major scandal indeed, because I bet 95% of the American and Canadian public believes that he did.

Nana
I didn't say that Ahmadinejad was the 'only' crackpot.

I clearly, go back and check - called Bush and Ahmadinejad both cranks and certainly religious fundamentalists...you imply that I'd criticized the Persian and ignored the American. That’s simply not what I wrote, or what I believe.

As a matter of fact, I agree with you that the construction 'wipe Israel off the map' is a decidedly western one and it's used as a club to beat every middle eastern group with which the west including our truth challenged Prime Minister and the Israel lobby don't agree.

But, all that being said, I do have real problems with anybody (whether it's george bush or an Islamic fundamentalist) who expects the very real problems of living together in the here and now are going to vanish in a poof of post-millennial smoke on the day their particular ‘savior’ arrives back in town.

Furthermore, if Iran and its government are sincere about a 'real' two-state resolution to the Palestinian question and are ready to renounce the 'admittedly tendentious' goal of pushing the Israelis into the sea, then now would seem to be the time for him to say it in unequivocal language.

Don't you think? At this time, with Israel in disarray from its disastrous foray into Lebanon, with an international force arriving mostly from Europe and with some indications that Hamas and the PLO are starting to get along, a gesture from the current target of the Americans’ most vehement ire might actually be constructive.

Even people of the progressive left need to recognize that every problem has complexity and requires compromise from both directions.

G. West, I agree with your last paragraph especially, but my point is that when it comes to religious belief, it's all[B] irrational. That is the nature of belif, isn't it. I'm saying cut the man some slack when his religion is as irrational as all those taxpayer supported things we subscribe to here! OK?

Even Norman Spector - whom Truman places in his ‘shadow trilateral commission’ above here - noted on his website recently that many commentators' observations about Louise Arbour's criticism of Israel didn’t quote ALL of her remarks - which included some very critical statements about Hezbollah as well.

But I never said it wasn't. Just like 'belief' is involved in a whole lot of things, including unproved conspiracy, need I observe. Anyway, let's leave it at that.

To tell you the truth, right at this moment I'm more concerned about what's happening in Mexico and Venezuela and what our American friends may have planned for down there in the next little while. Have you been following?

Like this:

It seems we cross posted. The last paragraph I refer to starts with, But, all that being said"

A doesn't seem to want a "2 state solution", but I gather wants the Palestinians to have the right to return.
This is not different from Israel Shamir's position:

http://www.israelshamir.net/

If it were an ideal world I'd say the one state, one man/woman/vote with equal citizenship no matter what your religion happens to be (in other words a secular state) would be the right way to go. On the other hand, I always supported a united Ireland too.

Sometimes you have to take the good rather than the perfect. Therefore, if the Palestinians can get a decent chance to have a 'real' nation with something like the same support from the US that Israel's gotten since the 1967 war then I think that may be the best we can hope for in the short to medium term. At least, under that kind of solution the killing might (as it has in Ireland) stop.

On the other hand, if Olmert gets ousted and is replaced by Netanyahu, all bets are off.

G. West,
Unfortunately,I have to agree with the above.

I didn't know about the US move on Mexico's oild fields...scary.

I've been following the aftermath of the Mexican elections on http://www.narconews.com/

Since 9/11 was the start of all this.....

Necessary Voices Society Fifth Anniversary Fundraising Events:
Help NVS by purchasing a signed copy of each book (cash or cheque) at the events!

Barrie Zwicker - Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11

Wednesday, August 30th, 2006; 7:30 to 9:30 pm - St. Andrew's Wesley United Church, Nelson at Burrard, Vancouver, BC. $5-20 Sliding Scale.

Barrie Zwicker was the first journalist in the world to deeply question the official story of 9/11 on national television. A write, TV producer and host, and political and environmental activist, he was Director of the International Citizens’ Inquiry into 9/11, Phase 2, at the University of Toronto in May 2004.

A dozen carefully-researched books have exposed the official story of 9/11 to be a terror fraud. Yet the mainstream media have monolithically failed to ask elementary questions about anomalies in this story. So-called alternative media have been little better. Towers of Deception explains why and prescribes actions to break out the truth.

I think the whole story's told in the fact that the United States Air Force basically stood down during the entire 2 hour emergency.

Regarding two equal states...absolutely impossible to prevent major war, including nukes. One state for all is the only possible answer. Chomsky's smart, but he's wrong on this. The reason is that after this Lebanon "measured response," the amount of hatred that's now built up against Israel will some day explode in a way that major players will have to line up for or against Israel.

So, an egalitarian, non-racist state in all of Palestine, is the only thing that has any chance of diffusing this ticking time bomb.

Otherwise Magog, hello, there.

Dunno Truman, have you read Nasralla's latest statement? Sounded conciliatory to me. 20 years ago no one thought the Irish would ever stop killing each other. 30 years ago we were in the middle of the cold war and the US had just scuttled out of Vietnam with its tail between its legs and the USSR seemed at the top of its pre-Afghanistan game.

Things change. There's no way it’s going to go from today's Israel to a secular state in one easy step. At the same time, no reason for your thoroughgoing pessimism - Gog and Magog sounds too much like Tim LaHay, Truman.

No rapturist, revelations crap, G. Just seems like a perfect place to have a war and a perfect bunch of ridiculous circumstances lining up to produce it. Far better than Serbian Prince Ferdinand being bumped off.

But I'm not a one hundred percent positive that my prophesy isn't just a projection of my outrage that the Jews didn't learn anything after what they went through in Europe--and they didn't envision an egalitarian state in which all Palestinians--Arabs and Jews--would be equally welcome, instead of just a special homeland for themselves.

Since I was 12 years and first read about the death camps in Europe I've hoped for a little bit more insight into the pathology of tribalism from them--especially them.

Why not a homeland for human beings?

Maybe not such a surprise that I feel much the same Truman. Still, there are plenty of Jews who don't agree with the hard-line stance and, as I wrote earlier to nana, I think there may just be a chance that cooler heads will prevail if the next 12 months don't go too badly. It'll take time and patience. On hopes the Americans will be so distracted by how badly things are going in Iraq that they’ll back off a bit.

I wish Canada would get on the right side of this issue and stop playing parrot to the Americans and the Blairites though. Not much chance of that with the guy who's living in 24 Sussex though!

I think there a quite a number of Jewish intellectuals and writers who haven't drunk the Kool-Aid by the way.

Do you remember those Encylopedia Britannica film strips they used to show us in school? That's where I first learned about the Holocaust.