Dual Citizenship -- Loyal to Whom?

by Dan Eden

Someone wrote and asked me, "Why are there Israeli- but not Mexican-American Dual Nationals?"

Well, here's my take on this. I'd also like your views and opinions.

Unless we are Native American Indians, all Americans have their origins in some other country. Both of my parents were from England. They were proud to be "British" but they were most proud of achieving their American citizenship. Sure, we had pictures of the Queen and nick-nacks with the Union Jack on them. My mother even celebrated the traditional 4 o'clock tea time and was good at making Yorkshire Pudding. In the late 60's my older brother served in the US Army and did his tour in Viet Nam. When it came down to "allegiance," we were all patriotic Americans. Period.

The word "allegiance" means that we promise loyalty. It also carries with it the expectation that this loyalty will be exclusive and unrestrained. In the case of a declared war or real threat or conflict, for example, our allegiance to America should preclude any other interest, be it another country or political ideology.

When they took their oath to become American citizens, my parents had to pledge their "allegiance" exclusively to America and renounce their allegiance to "any and all foreign governments." That included Great Britain, one of our strongest allies.

Before Viewzone asked me to research the meaning of "dual citizenship," I had never heard of the term. How could someone be a citizen of two countries at the same time? But I was just ignorant. Dual nationalities and citizenships are quite common.

From my internet research, I learned that in 1997, a French Canadian with a U.S. passport ran for mayor of Plattsburgh, N.Y. He argued that the incumbent spoke French too poorly to be running a city so close to Quebec. He lost. Also in 1997, a retired top American official for the U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) ran for president of Lithuania. He was inaugurated in February to a burst of fireworks!

In 1996, Dominicans from New York not only could vote in the Dominican Republic's presidential elections for the first time, they could vote for a fellow New Yorker. Multiple nationalities have become so commonplace that some analysts fear the trend is undermining the notion of nationhood, particularly in the place with the most diverse citizenry on Earth: the United States.

Debate over the issue intensified in the late 1990s, when Mexico joined the growing list of poor nations that say it's OK for their nationals to be citizens of the countries to which they have migrated. Under the law that took effect in 1998 Mexicans abroad -- most of them in the United States -- will be able to retain Mexican citizenship even if they seek U.S. citizenship. And naturalized Americans of Mexican descent will be able to reclaim their original citizenship. The Mexican government stopped short, for now, of giving expatriates the right to vote.

Security Issues

Since citizenship carries with it a responsibility to be exclusively loyal to one country, the whole concept of dual citizenship and nationality raises questions about which of the dual citizenships have priority. This is extremely important when the two countries have opposing interests. It can be a deadly problem when a dual citizen is in a high position within our American government.

Can one imagine a Japanese citizen serving in the Pentagon during WWII? Or how about a citizen of the Soviet Union holding a cabinet position in the White House during the Cold War?

Today's conflicts are centered in the Middle East. America needs to balance foreign policies towards oil producing Arab nations with our goal being peace and stability in the region. This places a burdon on our government to be even-handed in our dealings with the Arab world and Israel. While the Iraq War was waged on lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction and revenge for 911, the real reason has emerged as a well designed global plan to improve the power and leverage of Israel. Added to this policy is yet another potential blow to American interests and security -- the impending War with Iran. This war will be waged for the security of Israel and will be paid for by the blood of American soldiers and the hard-earned money of American citizens whose quality of life is inversely tied to the cost of petrolium.

Recently, in their much lauded paper, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Harvard professor, Stephen Walt, and University of Chicago professor, John Mearsheimer, focused attention on the strong Israeli lobby which has a powerful influence over American foreign policies (see BBC article). They detail the influence that this lobby has exerted, forming a series of international policies which can be viewed as in direct opposition to the interests and security of the American people. These acts and policies are more often than not carried out by US government appointees who hold powerful positions and who are dual American-Israeli citizens. Since the policies they support are often exclusively beneficial to Israel, often to the detriment of America, it has been argued that their loyalties are misdirected.

A few classic examples can be cited here.

Jonathan Jay Pollard was an American-Israeli citizen who worked for the US government. He is well known because he stole more secrets from the U.S. than has any other spy in American history. During his interrogation Pollard said he felt compelled to put the "interests of my state" ahead of his own. Although as a U.S. Navy counter-intelligence specialist he had a top-secret security clearance, by "my state" he meant the state of Israel.

Literally tens of thousands of Americans holding U.S. passports admit they feel a primary allegiance to the state of Israel. In many instances, these Americans vote in Israeli elections, wear Israeli uniforms and fight in Israeli wars. Many are actively engaged both in the confiscation of Palestinian lands and in the Israeli political system. Three examples come to mind:

One is Rabbi Meir Kahane, who founded the militant Jewish Defense League in the U.S. in the 1960s, then emigrated to Israel where, eventually, he was elected to the Knesset. Until he was shot and killed at one of his U.S. fund-raising rallies in 1990, the Brooklyn-born rabbi shuttled between Tel Aviv and New York, where he recruited militant American Jews for his activities in Israel against Palestinians. He claimed to be a "dual citizen" of America and Israel.

Another Jewish American, James Mahon from Alexandria, Virginia, reportedly was on a secret mission to kill PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat when he was shot in 1980 by an unknown assailant. When he was shot, Mahon held an American M-16 in his hand and a U.S. passport in his pocket.

Then there was Alan Harry Goodman, an American Jew who left his home in Baltimore, Maryland, flew to Israel and served in the Israeli army. Then, on April 11, 1982, armed with an Uzi submachine gun, he walked, alone, to Al-Aqsa, Jerusalem's most holy Islamic shrine, where he opened fire, killing two Palestinians and wounding others. Both the U.S. and Israeli governments played down the incident, as did the media.

Most recently, US Navy Petty Officer, Ariel J. Weinmann, while serving at or near Bahrain, Mexico, and Austria, "with intent or reason to believe it would be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation (Israel), [attempted] to communicate, deliver or transmit classified CONFIDENTIAL and SECRET information relating to the national defense, to a representative, officer, agent or employee of a foreign government." Weinmann was apprehended on March 26 after being listed as "a deserter by his command," according to the US Navy. The information he gathered was supplied to Israel.

The examples of Kahane, Mahonm, Goodman and Weinmann raise the question of when a U.S. citizen ceases to be, or should cease to be, a U.S. citizen. U.S. Law at one time clearly stated that an American citizen owed first allegiance to the United States. A U.S. citizen should not fight in a foreign army or hold high office in a foreign country without risking expatriation. What the heck happened?

The 1940 Nationality Act

Section 401 (e) of the 1940 Nationality Act provides that a U.S. citizen, whether by birth or naturalization, "shall lose his [U.S.] nationality by...voting in a political election in a foreign state."

This law was tested many times. In 1958, for instance, an American citizen named Perez voted in a Mexican election. The case went to the Supreme Court, where the majority opinion held that Perez must lose his American nationality. The court said Congress could provide for expatriation as a reasonable way of preventing embarrassment to the United States in its foreign relations.

But then something very odd happened.

In 1967 an American Jew, Beys Afroyim received an exemption that set a precedent exclusively for American Jews. Afroyim, born in Poland in 1895, emigrated to America in 1912, and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1926. In 1950, aged 55, he emigrated to Israel and became an Israeli citizen. In 1951 Afroyim voted in an Israeli Knesset election and in five political elections that followed. So, by all standards he lost his American citizenship -- right? Wrong.

After living in Israel for a decade, Afroyim wished to return to New York. In 1960, he asked the U.S. Consulate in Haifa for an American passport. The Department of State refused the application, invoking section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act -- the same ruling that had stripped the American citizen named Perez of his U.S. citizenship.

Attorneys acting for Afroyim took his case to a Washington, DC District Court, which upheld the law. Then his attorneys appealed to the Court of Appeals. This court also upheld the law. The attorneys for Afroyim then moved the case on to the Supreme Court. Here, with Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas, Lyndon Johnson's former attorney and one of the most powerful Jewish Americans, casting the swing vote, the court voted five to four in favor of Afroyim. The court held that the U.S. government had no right to "rob" Afroyim of his American citizenship!

The court, reversing its previous judgment as regards the Mexican American, ruled that Afroyim had not shown "intent" to lose citizenship by voting in Israeli elections. Huh?

While Washington claims it has a "good neighbor" policy with Mexico, the U.S. does not permit Mexicans to hold dual nationality. The US makes them become either U.S. or Mexican -- you can't be both. But the U.S., in its special relationship with Israel, has become very sympathetic to allowing Israeli-Americans to retain two nationalities and allowing U.S. citizens not only to hold public office in Israel, but to hold US government positions as well! No other country holds this special exception to our laws of citizenship.

So, you might ask, are there any other dual Israel-American citizens who hold US government positions that could compromise American security? Yes. Consider the following list that I obtained on the web:


Michael Mukasey
Recently appointed as US Attorney General. Mukasey also was the judge in the litigation between developer Larry Silverstein and several insurance companies arising from the destruction of the World Trade Center.

Michael Chertoff
Former Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, at the Justice Department; now head of Homeland Security.

Richard Perle
One of Bush's foreign policy advisors, he is the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle came from one the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktanks, the AEI. Perle is one of the leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the administration and now in the media.

Paul Wolfowitz
Former Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle's Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz came from the above mentioned Jewish thinktank, JINSA. Wolfowitz was the number two leader within the administration behind this Iraq war mongering. He later was appointed head of the World Bank but resigned under pressure from World Bank members over a scandal involving his misuse of power.


Douglas Feith
Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith also came from the Jewish thinktank JINSA. Feith, like Perle and Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.

Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
The former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst with expertise in Iranian policy issues who worked in the office of Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and reported directly to Feith's deputy, William Luti, was sentenced January 20, 2006, "to more than 12 years in prison for giving classified information to an Israeli diplomat" and members of the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Franklin will "remain free while the government continues with the wider case" and his "prison time could be sharply reduced in return for his help in prosecuting" former AIPAC members Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, [who] are scheduled to go on trial in April [2006]. Franklin admitted that he met periodically with Rosen and Weissman between 2002 and 2004 and discussed classified information, including information about potential attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq. Rosen and Weissman would later share what they learned with reporters and Israeli officials." (source: sourcewatch.com).

Edward Luttwak
Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq and Iran.

Henry Kissinger
One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed information about Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's book (Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House). Kissinger likely had a part in the Watergate crimes, Southeast Asia mass murders (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos), Installing Chilean mass murdering dictator Pinochet, Operation Condor's mass killings in South America, and more recently served as Serbia's Ex-Dictator Slobodan Milosevic's Advisor. He consistently advocated going to war against Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S. Unfortunately, President Bush nominated Kissinger as chairman of the September 11 investigating commission. It's like picking a bank robber to investigate a fraud scandal. He later declined this job under enormous protests.

Dov Zakheim
Dov Zakheim is an ordained rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended Jew's College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in 1973. He was adjunct professor at New York's Jewish Yeshiva University. Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby.

Dov Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and in 2000 a co-author of the Project for the New American Century's position paper, Rebuilding America's Defenses, advocating the necessity for a Pearl-Harbor-like incident to mobilize the country into war with its enemies, mostly Middle Eastern Muslim nations.

He was appointed by Bush as Pentagon Comptroller from May 4, 2001 to March 10, 2004. At that time he was unable to explain the disappearance of $1 trillion dollars. Actually, nearly three years earlier, Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10, 2001 that an audit discovered $2.3 trillion was also missing from the Pentagon books. That story, as mentioned, was buried under 9-11's rubble. The two sums disappeared on Zakheim's watch. We can only guess where that cash went.

Despite these suspicions, on May 6, 2004, Zakheim took a lucrative position at Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the most prestigious strategy consulting firms in the world. One of its clients then was Blessed Relief, a charity said to be a front for Osama bin Laden. Booz, Allen & Hamilton then also worked closely with DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is the research arm of the Department of Defense.

Judicial Inc's bio of Dov tells us Zakheim is a dual Israeli/American citizen and has been tracking the halls of US government for 25 years, casting defense policy and influence on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Judicial Inc points out that most of Israel's armaments were gotten thanks to him. Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value.


Kenneth Adelman
One of many Pentagon Advisors, Adelman also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle, and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supported going to war against Iraq. Adelman frequently is a guest on Fox News, and often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. Through his racism or ignorance, he actually called Arabs "anti-Semitic" on Fox News (11/28/2001), when he could have looked it up in the dictionary to find out that Arabs by definition are Semites.

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby
Vice President Dick Cheney's ex-Chief of Staff. As chief pro-Israel Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is so gun-ho to invade Iran. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Marc Rich, whom Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president. Libby was recently found guilty of lying to Federal investigators in the Valerie Plame affair, in which Plame, a covert CIA agent, was exposed for political revenge by the Bush administration following her husband's revelations about the lies leading to the Iraq War.

Robert Satloff
U.S. National Security Council Advisor, Satloff was the executive director of the Israeli lobby's "think tank," Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby's "experts" come from this front group, like Martin Indyk.

Elliott Abrams
National Security Council Advisor. He previously worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department.

Marc Grossman
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State. Grossman is one of many of the pro-Israel Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to higher posts.

Richard Haass
Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at large. He is also Director of National Security Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who sat on the National Security Council, and who consistently advocated going to war against Iraq. Haass is also a member of the Defense Department's National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.

Robert Zoellick
U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position. He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up a Vichy-style puppet government. He consistently advocates going to war against Iran.

Ari Fleischer
Ex- White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr) Administration. Prominent in the Jewish community, some reports state that he holds Israeli citizenship. Fleischer is closely connected to the extremist Jewish group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the Qabala, and hold very extremist and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer was the co-president of Chabad's Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the Young Leadership Award from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001.

James Schlesinger
One of many Pentagon Advisors, Schlesinger also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supported going to war against Iraq. Schlesinger is also a commissioner of the Defense Department's National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.

David Frum
White House speechwriter behind the "Axis of Evil" label. He lumped together all the lies and accusations against Iraq for Bush to justify the war.

Joshua Bolten
White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Bolten was previously a banker, former legislative aide, and prominent in the Jewish community.

John Bolton
Former UN Representative and Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Bolton is also a Senior Advisor to President Bush. Prior to this position, Bolton was Senior Vice President of the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktank, AEI. He recently (October 2002) accused Syria of having a nuclear program, so that they can attack Syria after Iraq. He must have forgotten that Israel has 400 nuclear warheads, some of which are thermonuclear weapons (according to a recent U.S. Air Force report).

David Wurmser
Special Assistant to John Bolton (above), the under-secretary for arms control and international security. Wurmser also worked at the AEI with Perle and Bolton. His wife, Meyrav Wurmser, along with Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence, co-founded the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri),a Washington-based Israeli outfit which distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light.

Eliot Cohen
Member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor. Like Adelman, he often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. More recently, he wrote an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal openly admitting his rascist hatred of Islam claiming that Islam should be the enemy, not terrorism.

Mel Sembler
President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries, specifically those with financial problems.

Steve Goldsmith
Senior Advisor to the President, and Bush's Jewish domestic policy advisor. He also served as liaison in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (White House OFBCI) within the Executive Office of the President. He was the former mayor of Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization initiatives.

Adam Goldman
White House's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.

Joseph Gildenhorn
Bush Campaign's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community. He was the DC finance chairman for the Bush campaign, as well as campaign coordinator, and former ambassador to Switzerland.

Christopher Gersten
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS. Gersten was the former Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Husband of Labor Secretary.

Mark Weinberger
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs.

Samuel Bodman
Deputy Secretary of Commerce. He was the Chairman and CEO of Cabot Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.

Bonnie Cohen
Under Secretary of State for Management.

Ruth Davis
Director of Foreign Service Institute, who reports to the Office of Under Secretary for Management. This Office is responsible for training all Department of State staff (including ambassadors).

Daniel Kurtzer
Ambassador to Israel.

Cliff Sobel
Ambassador to the Netherlands.

Stuart Bernstein
Ambassador to Denmark.

Nancy Brinker
Ambassador to Hungary

Frank Lavin
Ambassador to Singapore.

Ron Weiser
Ambassador to Slovakia.

Mel Sembler
Ambassador to Italy.

Martin Silverstein
Ambassador to Uruguay.

Lincoln Bloomfield
Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs.

Jay Lefkowitz
Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Ken Melman
White House Political Director.

Brad Blakeman
White House Director of Scheduling.

I don't know about you, but dual citizenship is fine with me for an ordinary citizen. But if you hold an official position that demands that you put American interests above all else -- if you should look transparent and fair to the rest of the world regarding your formation of Middle East foreign policies, then this is a dangerous trend. Even if there were no pro-Israeli agenda, the fact that decision makers have a bias or an allegiance to one of the parties involved in the current conflict should have raised red flags long before now.

If you think we're being unfair here, ask yourself: How you would react to the Head of Homeland Security if he or she were a dual national with citizenship in Iran, Lebanon or Saudi Arabia? Ask yourself why you don't feel the same about Israeli dual citizenship. Then you will understand how powerful the Israeli lobby has been in "adjusting" your acceptance of their special status.

Hey, I could be way off on this. Let's hear from you.

Why P5+1 Ignores the Israeli Nuclear Threat

Diverting Attention to Iran Gives Israel Free Nuke Pass

 … by  Jim W. Dean, VT Editor          … with  Press TV

- first published,  April 6th,  2013 -

Why is Israel not considered the threat that it is?

The nuclear water-boarding of Iran continues by the Western powers despite its veiled politeness. It reminds me of going through fraternity hazing at college. When being paddled we were required to say, “Thank you sir, may I have another?”

We all hope that the P5+1 meetings bare ripe fruit. But I am convinced now more than ever that the focus on Iran is nothing more than a well planned diversion to keep attention away from who the real threats have been in the region.

Iran has shown tremendous restraint during the past ten years. The Israelis, along with the criminal Bush regime, were doing all that they could to trigger a war on Iran, including framing them for a false flag attack.

There have been numerous provocations against Iran, the biggest being the 17,000 Iranians murdered by terrorists. You can divide that by three and see how many 9-11 body counts you come up with.

The US supported MKO killed 12,000 of them, but Americans know nothing of it. One Israeli died in the last Gaza ‘war’, but Americans do know that. Do you see something a little out of balance here?

Yes, some of this mass killing was done while Saddam was using the MKO, but when the US took over it kept the MKO bases in operation under its protection. Mind you, this was back when Iran was turning over the ‘deck of cards’ Ba’athists who had crossed into Iran as a show of good faith, one not appreciated.

The Bush regime war criminals were openly bragging about how when we finished with Iraq we were going to ‘do’ Syria, Libya and Iran. Only chicken hawks use that kind of terminology.

The MKO was used as the only available ‘boots on the ground’ tool for getting human Intel and destabilizing Iran. It was…an act of war, without a vote being taken back here at home. Welcome to that world.

The voices proclaiming war on the Muslim world (not under US control) were not only the draft dodging NeoCon blowhards. They included American Jews who considered serving in the American military not only foolish, but an act of treason against Israel for not serving there.

The NeoCon Allstars

The NeoCons saw their job as infiltrating American politics and institutions like the Pentagon so they could use cannon fodder Americans to die for Israel, and they did. America Jews on the combat front lines were about as common to find as tooth fairies and Santa’s elves.

These NeoCon Israeli assets were the ‘experts’ who testified before Congress that the costs of the Iraq war would be recouped through just a few years of their oil sales. These were the experts who sent recent college grads over there to turn Iraq into a model American puppet democracy that would be a shining light to all.

Those insiders who were critical of this geopolitical fantasy were purged. But looking back now on it we can clearly see that those pushing what has become the biggest disaster in American history, they are the ones who should have been purged.

Never have so many Americans owed so little to so many in the Bush regime. It has caused me to rethink the whole concept of government immunity. Personally I feel that anyone that provides knowingly false information to further any military aggression should be prosecuted for war crimes under the Nuremberg precedent of ‘waging and offensive war.’

“Birds of a feather – Flock together”

The concept of the military oath to the commander in chief requires some rethinking, also.

Why should they not take an oath to the American people and the Constitution, and have the legal power to take any part of our political or military brass into court for treason due to violation of their own oaths?

The mechanics would be simple. A percentage of the war budget would be dedicated to an independent ongoing review of the truthfulness of all actions taken to initiate a war, conducting it, and its aftermath.

The enlisted troops would have their own investigation division with full prosecutorial authority. They would also have access to all classified intelligence so the regime could not hide crimes of treason that way.

Sure, some would say, “This is crazy!” My response would be, “Crazy compared to what?” We know now that those planning and running the War on Terror were clueless about what they were doing. The terrorists who they claimed were a threat were really the left over Jihadists we had trained and supported for years to fight the Soviets and then dumped them afterward.

Osama bin Laden was a highly decorated CIA colonel, with the cover name of Tim Osman. We have interviewed his handler and confirmed he was flown here for a quiet decoration ceremony for all that he had done in the Soviet/Afghan war.

bin Laden (aka Tim Osman) with Brzezinski

The Mujahadin should have all be pensioned out in appreciation for their struggles and had disability care provided for their wounded veterans. Their attitude toward America might have been a lot different. But no, our MBA accountants decided it was cheaper to just forget about them.

We know that the Madrassa schools that indoctrinated children into fighting the infidel Soviets were funded by the CIA and Saudi Arabia.

We had no problem in supporting Muslim extremism when America was using them, and still is. The Wahhabis are chopping off heads in Syria today, compliments of the you know who.

We know successive administrations have continued the folly of ‘Israeli Nuclear Threat Denial’ which has supported the biggest nuclear threat in the Mid East for decades now. It has been the corner stone of our failed Middle East foreign policy and the looting of American taxpayers.

And for a smokescreen Iran is framed as the nuclear bogeyman when our own intelligence agencies have refuted the threat. The Zionists have been caught year after year claiming that Iran is close to having a bomb which they will probably use, so “we have to attack them now to save ourselves.”

Why? Who is threatening them that would even have them consider such a thing that would kill huge numbers of innocent Muslims?

If America and the West really wanted to be safe we should invade Israel, take control of all its weapons of mass destruction and begin the ten years of crimes against humanity trials it will take to prosecute them all.

The folly of our foreign policy is so obvious that Americans who support it should be held accountable under the Bush doctrine that made it legal. Those threatening America should be hunted down wherever they are. The big mistake we made was not cleaning them out here first, so it was they got to give us the West Bank treatment.

In reality, the American people should be close allies to the Iranian people and others in the region. If America went over to a real defense policy like Iran, maybe we could re-industrialize our country like they have. If you take a good look at it you will see that we have sanctioned ourselves through the stupidity of our failed corrupt leadership.

Iran is building this hydro electric facility in Tajikstan – Coming on line in 2013

Iran, who has never invaded anyone, is accomplishing a Manhattan Project domestic industrialization program while under Western sanctions. It is rebuilding its former historical position as the cross roads of the Silk Road.

But instead of spices and silk, energy and advanced technology will flow along the road via oil and gas pipelines, high voltage electrical wires, and co-development projects.

Last time I looked, soldiers do not swear an oath to protect banksters and multinational thugs. Our far Eastern new ‘pivot’ policy is nothing more than that. No one there is any real threat to America. We have been hoaxed by elite hustlers using the classic fear manipulation, a treasonous attack upon their own people.


Our own Thomas Jefferson warned us of this fate with his famous quote, “Merchants have no country.”

During our colonial French and Indian War, French ships actually re-provisioned themselves at American ports.

King George was still running the show then, but we already had the bad seed of Americans willing to make a buck anyway they could, even if it involved supplying the enemy during war time.

Later, during the War of 1812, our New England states supplied beef and other food for the British Army in Canada, and British ships were welcome to provision themselves in their ports. So America has a long history of super traitors in our midst.

They are still with us today folks, killing us for any reason they choose, and will never stop until we give them the appropriate treatment.

With zero indictments for 9-11, the mortgage and derivatives crashes, and the phony War on Terror…they would have you believe that Iran is your threat?

If you buy that then you deserve to live under the boot…but not the rest of us, please.

Source

US Aid to Israel Could Dodge Sequester Cuts

 

Sequester to Cut Education but Could Continue Massive Aid to Israel

American Public Unaware of the Screw Job!

The ambitious goal to be formally designated as the United States’ “major strategic ally” is apparently on the agenda at the annual American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee gathering that’s kicking off in Washington, known as AIPAC. If the plan becomes legislation, it could oblige the US to support Israel diplomatically and militarily if it strikes Iran.

Robert Naiman, policy director at Just Foreign Policy, says that it could also exempt Israel from any reduction in foreign aid that might result from budget cuts.

Source

Mahmoud Abbas and the Right of Return

by Sami Jamil Jadallah

The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and its leadership never had any legitimacy deriving from Palestinians under Occupation or in the Diaspora. The PLO and its leadership past and present incompetent to liberate, unfit to lead, failed to build and organize a modern nation state, always self serving, a political, financial mafia if not a criminal racketeering organization, a perpetual fraud and lie must disband now.

Mahmud Abbas, the head of the Palestine “liberation” Organization, head of Fatah and the president of the Palestinian Authority chose the 95th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration to renounce on Israeli public television the “Right of Return” of the more than 6 millions Palestinians living in exile.

Perhaps Mahmoud Abbas is desperate to save the political, financial if not criminal mafia that runs and operate the Jewish Occupation from Ramallah. Hostage to salaries of an army of functionaries and civil servants managing the Jewish Occupation not to mention providing security to the Israeli army and armed Jewish settlers to the tune of $1.4 Billions annually in expenses for the Palestinian Security Forces.

Since Oslo, ending the Jewish Occupation was never a priority and was never the objective of the PLO/Fatah and the Palestinian leadership. Perpetuating the Palestinian Authority and the personal and financial interests of the leadership was and remains the only objective for the leadership and the PLO.

By renouncing the “Right of Return” for the Palestinians Mahmoud Abbas gave full recognitions to the Right of Return for all “Jews” kosher and non-kosher, authentic and suspect Jews. Confirming the fraud and lies perpetuated by the PLO and its leadership and the Zionist movement.

For over 45 years the PLO and Fatah leadership past (Arafat) and present (Abbas) have made the Right of Return a fundamental and basic issue in any peace settlement with Israel. Well it seems that Mahmoud Abbas decided to expose the fraud and lies of the PLO and renounce any rights to represent Palestinians of the Diaspora.

If one is to look at the history of the PLO and the leadership of Arafat, Abbas, Qurai one will see nothing but fraud, lies, and looting, with mafia like behavior of many of the leadership within the PLO and Fatah. What we see now in Ramallah from abuse of power, nepotism, lootings, civil and human rights abuses has been going on since the group first established military presence in Jordan and subsequent move to Lebanon where it ran the “Fakahani Republic”. Oslo is nothing but an ingathering and collections of thugs, incompetent and failed cadre that return with Arafat to run the Jewish Occupation and loot the treasury.

Desperate to save his narcissist leadership, that of the PLO and Fatah, the late Yasser Arafat decided to enter into secretes negotiations with Israel undermining the post Madrid public negotiations lead by the late Dr. Haider Abdul-Shafi. Arafat and key members of the PLO/Fatah were afraid that Dr. Abdul-Shafi might emerge as the Palestinian leader that can potentially challenge Arafat leadership.

Having lost much of his credibility after siding with Saddam, having presided over the looting of tens of billions of people’s money, and having caused irreparable harm to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the Gulf and around the world, Arafat turn to Israel to recover all that he lost and he was able to do that when he negotiated and signed the Oslo Accord. Arafat and the PLO turn to Israel to regain legitimacy lost among all Palestinians.

Oslo was nothing more than legitimizing the continued Jewish Occupation by giving full and unconditional recognition to Israel an Israel without defined borders. In exchange Israel gave full recognition to the PLO as representative of the Palestinian people thus Arafat was able to secure a perpetual role for the PLO and its leadership and as long as there is an Israeli Occupation. Arafat and the Oslo team left out all key issues to an Israeli veto including Right of Return, Jerusalem, compensation and ending the Jewish Occupation. Under Oslo the Palestinian leadership gave Israel the right to “veto” any and all issues put forward. The Palestinian territories occupied in 67 were referred to as “disputed” not “occupied” territories subject to international law, thus the attempt to go to the UN.

As a consequence of these fatal if not criminal failures, Israel was able to build and expand Jewish Settlements on 58% of the “territories”, was able to build and continue to build the Apartheid Wall, continued to rob and steal water from aquifers located in the “territories”, continued to maintain and expand more than 550 “security” checkpoints that subjects millions of Palestinians to daily humiliations. In exchange for all this give away, Arafat and the Oslo team were granted a Palestinian Authority to manage and pay for the Jewish Occupation through money begged from donors and few thousand VIP passes.

More troublesome is the leadership failed solutions to a Palestinian economy that is hostage to Israel and its total control over the entire economy of the “territories”, suffering from Israel’s economic downturn while not benefiting from a robust Israeli economy. The Palestinian economy under the PLO became one of begging and looting, drowning ordinary Palestinians in debts, mortgage and consumers debts. While ordinary Palestinians become more and more poor, Palestinian leadership and Oligarchs tied to the leadership are racking billions.

The PLO and its leadership failed the Palestinians at every turn and at every level and everywhere from Kuwait and the Gulf to Lebanon and Syria, to Jordan and Egypt. It looted tens of billions that remained unaccounted for. Oslo was nothing but deliberate collaborations with the Jewish Occupation. It rendered the Palestinians people powerless reducing those under Occupation beggars and thieves and undermined any chance for the Palestinians in the Diaspora to have a so say in any final settlement. Diaspora Palestinians have no choice but organize and have their own organization that derives its legitimacy from the people not from Israel as the case with Abbas and the PLO.

Disbanding the Palestinian Authority should not be an Israel demand, but a Palestinian demand. Time to disband not only the Palestinian Authority and the PLO and bring an end to this long chapter of failures, fraud and lies.

 

Source

Palestine's Abu Mazen rescinds his right of return on Israeli TV

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (C) prays on the first day of Eid al-Adha in the Palestinian city of Ramallah October 26, 2012. Muslims around the world celebrate Eid al-Adha to mark the end of the Haj by slaughtering sheep, goats, cows and camels to commemorate Prophet Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son Ismail on God's command. (Photo: Reuters - Mohamad Torokman)

Updated 6:50pm: Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas rescinded his internationally sanctioned right to return to his hometown of Safad, annexed by Israel in 1948, on Israeli TV Thursday night.

Pressed by Israeli Channel 2 TV about whether the Palestinian Authority considered towns in the Galilee to be part of Palestine, Abbas struck a deeply personal note in the Authority's latest efforts to placate Israeli concerns about Palestinian refugees.

"I want to see Safad. It's my right to see it. But not to live there," said an impassioned Abbas.

He was born and raised in the northern town of Safad in 1935, fleeing to Syria with his family during Israel's violent campaign to dispossess and expel Palestinians in 1948.

"I am a refugee but I am living in Ramallah. I believe that the West Bank and Gaza is Palestine. And the other parts is Israel."

Hamas' prime minister Ismail Haniyeh reacted on Friday, saying Abbas' remarks were "extremely dangerous" and contradicted longtime Palestinian territorial demands.

Abbas' comments came a day before the 95th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, which officialized British support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.

The UN General Assembly passed a resolution on December 11, 1948 calling Israel to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and orders that the state compensate Palestinians for any damage done to their property. The resolution was not respected, instead hundreds have been killed trying to travel back to their villages.

The Palestinian Authority has for more than two decades pushed to strike a deal with Israel that would establish a Palestinian state on borders annexed by Israel after 1967, ceding its right to those taken in 1948. However, they have reassured skeptical Palestinians that such a deal, known as the two-state solution, would not contradict the right to return.

However, documents leaked to Al-Jazeera last year detailing 10 years of Israeli negotiations with the Palestinian Authority gave rise to fresh skepticism, with Israeli negotiators saying they would agree to a symbolic number of returnees--less than 10,000 of the 7 million currently scattered around the world and in refugee camps. Chief Palestinian Authority negotiator Saeb Erekat was found to have countered that offer with 150,000 refugees.

Abu Mazen also touted himself as the protector of Israeli security in the Channel 2 interview, announcing that Israel would not see a third Palestinian armed uprising against its occupation.

"As far as I am here in this office, there will be no third armed intifada. Never. We don't want to use terror. We don't want to use forces. We don't want to use weapons. We want to use diplomacy. We want to use politics. We want to use negotiations. We want to use peaceful resistance. That's it."

 Source

New Senate Push to Pledge Unconditional Support for Israeli "Preventive" War on Iran

By Jamal Abdi
 
"Information Clearing House" - -  Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is planning to press the Senate next month to pledge U.S. troops, money, and political support to Israel should Bibi Netanyahu launch a preventive war on Iran.

Graham claims his effort would merely make explicit that the U.S. has Israel's back. But when your friend is drunk, you don't hand them the keys. If Graham has his way, he will hand Bibi the keys and lend him our car, while the rest of us ride shotgun.

Graham's planned measure would outsource the decision about whether the U.S. goes to war to the Israeli prime minister, pledging that if Bibi decides to act -- regardless of the consequences and our own calculations -- the U.S. will provide money, troops, and political leverage (presumably at the UN and IAEA where there will be a push to shred the sanctions and the Non-Proliferation Treaty).

Those who support the measure will likely claim that a "credible threat" of war must be issued in order to prevent an actual war. But U.S. military leaders understand the difference between a credible threat, which is already very much on the table given the U.S. presence in the Persian Gulf, and outsourcing the decision of whether the U.S. goes to war to Bibi Netanyahu.

As chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey pointedly said just weeks ago about potential Israeli strikes on Iran, "I don't want to be complicit if they decide to do it." Graham's resolution is about as clear a signal of complicity as you can get.

Graham's mendacity on Iran policy should by now be notorious. His most recent victory was to convince Congress to endorse Netanayhu's redline for war with Iran instead of the redline laid out by the president. The trick was that, in pushing that measure, Graham disingenuously claimed that Obama's redline was nuclear weapons "capability." And Congress bought it. In reality, the president very clearly rejected that redline and said the U.S redline was to prevent Iran from actually getting the bomb, not getting an amorphous "capability."

But Graham (and Bibi) won the battle on the Hill. Both the House and the Senate voted to endorse Netanyahu's redline, not Obama's. To be fair, many in the House and Senate who supported the resolution still have no idea that there is a difference. They read the talking points circulated by Graham and AIPAC (the measure's chief advocates), and to this day think they were simply voting to endorse what Obama had already said. 

Now, Graham is herding his willfully ignorant colleagues to support another incremental step towards war with Iran, under the guise of being "pro-Israel" and supporting the president. His new resolution would twist Obama's words that the U.S. "has Israel's back" to mean the U.S. is on call to jump into war with Iran if and when Netanyahu decides it's go time. 

According to CQ, Graham said having Israel's back means, "if you get into a fight, I'm coming to help you." He continued:

"There are two different clocks here, the Washington clock and the Tel Aviv clock," he said. "The Israelis are not going to let the window close on their ability to slow down this program. They're going to act... They're going to control their own destiny."

Graham's resolution would make it clear that the United States would provide assistance to Israel "if they have to go because they've decided they are not going to turn their window over to us or anybody else."

Sorry, but there is a difference between not getting in Israel's way and actively supporting a disastrous decision with American servicemembers, money, and international political leverage. Graham is hoping that, yet again, no one notices the difference.

Having Israel's back does not mean supporting preventive war that the entire national security establishment says would be a disaster for everyone involved and could guarantee an Iranian nuclear weapon. Having Israel's back does not mean goading them into making stupid decisions and pledging to bail them out unconditionally.

The Senate should not be handing out promises to enable foreign leaders to decide whether and when the U.S. goes to war. This would not be a mutual defense pact -- it would be a suicide pact.

Jamal Abdi, Policy Director, National Iranian American Council.

Obama Surrenders again on Palestine but Will He Benefit?

Historic Al-Aqsa Mosque and The Dome of the Rock in occupied Palestine

Franklin Lamb

As a former law professor President Obama knows something about international law and US constitutional law which he taught at the University of Chicago. But besmirched his academic bona fides, violated Democratic Party rules and hurt his campaign on 12/5/12 by ordering the Democratic Party to summarily change earlier a twice debated and unanimously adopted plank of the Democratic Platform on the subject of the status of Jerusalem.

The reason this observer even took the time to read the 26,56l word, 37 page 2012 Democratic Party Platform which guides every Democratic candidate for both Houses of Congressand the party’s Presidential candidate,and to a lesser degree, thousands of Democratic Party candidates across the USA is, well, nostalgia.

And I read every word from my preferred relaxation spot which is on the top of my fine new14 story Waad apartment building in the Hezbollah security zone of Dahiyeh, South Beirut. The high-rise was rebuilt, (Israel bombed it and 251 other residential buildings during the July 2006 33-day aggression, reducing it to rubble and dust with two US gifted MK-83 1000 lb. bombs) and my perch has a wonderful view of the mountains to the east and the Mediterranean to the west.As I studied the platform, among my ducks and chickens that I raise on the roof, I couldn’t help thinking of my own experience, now more than a quarter century ago from my time representing Oregon as Democratic National Committeeman under Jimmy Carter and being a member of the 1980 DNC Platform Committee while working in Washington on Ted Kennedy’s issues staff as he tried to wrest our party’s nomination from our incumbent President. It was not easy for the Kennedy campaign to do and as history records our campaign petered out. But not before and not too unlike what occurred this week, a Middle East issue caused some sparks over whether to recognize the PLO and support calls for a State of Palestine in the 1980 Platform.

The decision made by the DNC Platform committee this year cut the 2004 and 2008 Platform sentence “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel" and was the result of several months of work by the platform committee analyzing written submissions, receiving oral presentations, and participating in discussions and debate sessions around the country. To the party’s credit, removing the earlier language reflected international law, both UN Resolution and international customary law based on the overwhelming consensus of more than 188 member countries of the United Nations with very few exceptions being Israel. All of which assert that the status of Jerusalem, whether it’s to be the capital of Palestine, Israel, both or internationalized, is to be left to final status negotiations between the native Palestinians and their colonial occupiers. Nordid the expunged language reflect Obama’s personal views.

Following reports that the Romney campaign was going to run ads asking where is God and support for Israel in the Democrats platform, Obama hastily and ill-advisedly, in this observers view, ordered the Platform Committee to restore the language of both. At the same time, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the nation's most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, which had urged including language about Jerusalem's status as the Israeli capital in written testimony to the platform drafting committee, made clear that they were troubled by the omission of their favor Jerusalem language.

As required by Democratic Party rules, the language change needs to be approved by a 2/3 floor vote called by Platform Committee Chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.He did put the vote at the beginning of the 9/5/12 Convention session. However since video/audio reports, including C-Span, make plain the delegates voted roughly 50/50, well shy of required 2/3’s , Villaraigosa called for a second and then a third vote which produced the same result. Each time there was a cacophony of “No’s’! from the assembled delegates which were ignored. Mayor Villaraigosa violated Party rules again when he rejected motions for a roll-call vote and repeated ‘points of order” from the floor. He then falsely announced that 2/3’s had agreed to the language change. He then abruptly walked off the podium thereby profoundly disrespecting the party stalwarts who support it with their hard work and organizational skills. The stunned stare on Villaraigosa’s face suggested how deep in denial the Democratic Party has been about the anti-Zionist and pro-Palestinian sentiment growing among the party rank and file. The widely claimed bipartisan support for the Zionist occupation of Palestine is receding.

The Party now faces the prospect of a full convention vote on the issue or a court challenge if delegates choose not to let Obama’s betrayal stand.

The reason the 2012 Platform Committee Members changed the former language is that the old position was ludicrous according to expert testimony presented at the Platform hearings, does not reflect US policy as reiterated on 9/6/12 by State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell, and because this year’s platform reflected, to a modest degree at least, the overdue and increasing political power of Arab and Muslim Americans who, often as small business people have largely heretofore considered themselves Republicans. But more are becoming active in the Democratic Party.These new party activists are informed about the issue of Palestine and take the status of Jerusalem seriously.

Obama once again betrays humanity and surrenders to the Zionist entity

Either way the Romney campaign was sure to claim, as they are doing right now that: “Mr. Obama has refused to state his position on Jerusalem and Israel.”

Andrea Saul, a Romney spokeswoman, is telling the media: "Now is the time for President Obama to state in unequivocal terms whether or not he believes Jerusalem is Israel's capital."

Obama erred politically and humiliated himself and his partly needlessly with his sell-out in Charlotte. He gained nothing in the way of Zionist support because the lobby has made clear form Tel Aviv to New York that it will never trust him on Israel as they increasing coalesce around the Romney-Ryan ticket.

The whole spectacle also damaged the Democratic Party which since the 1960’s has championed voter’s rights. Bill Clinton touted this important legacy in his speech. He also focused on the Republicans’ disrespect for voter’s rights: “If you want every American to vote and you think it’s wrong to change voting procedures just to reduce the turnout of younger, poorer, minority and disabled voters, you should support Barack Obama.”

One wonders what the delegates were thinking having just experience disrespect for voting rights within their own party.

Tom Hayden once described the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties as the difference between Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola. The same applies to both parties Platform language on Palestine. The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs illustrates the differences if the reader can find them:


DEMS: The U.S. and Israel "share common values"

GOP: “The security of Israel is in the vital national security interest of the United States”

DEMS: “A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States”

GOP: “Ensure that [Israel] maintains a qualitative edge in military technology”

DEMS: "Ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge”

GOP: “We envision two democratic states”

DEMS: "Seek peace between Israelis and Palestinians….producing two states for two peoples”

GOP: “Palestinian people must support leaders who reject terror, embrace the institutions and ethos of democracy, and respect the rule of law.”

DEMS: Palestinians must "recognize Israel's right to exist, reject violence, and adhere to existing agreements”

GOP: “We call on the new government in Egypt to fully uphold its peace treaty with Israel”

DEMS: "We will continue to support Israel's peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan"

GOP: “We call on Arab governments throughout the region to help advance [the] goal [of peace]”

DEMS: “President Obama will continue to press Arab states to reach out to Israel”

GOP: “We support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state with secure, defensible borders; and we envision two democratic states—Israel with Jerusalem as its capital and Palestine—living in peace and security”

Dems: “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel…The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths"

Obama bowing down to the powerful Zionist lobby

Neither the Republican nor the Democratic Platforms make any reference to Israeli settlements, increasing violence carried out by Israeli government and settlers or provides even a faint hint of any Israeli wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, AIPAC released a statement on 9/6/12: "We welcome reinstatement to the Democratic platform of the language reaffirming Jerusalem as Israel's capital. One imagines that Obama’s nemeses, Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu is chortling.

Franklin Lamb, former Assistant Counsel, US House Judiciary Committee and  Professor of International Law at Northwestern College of Law in Oregon, earned his Law Degree at Boston University and his LLM, M.Phil., and PhD degrees at the London School of Economics. Following three years at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Lamb was visiting fellow at the Harvard Law School’s East Asian Legal Studies Center. 

He is currently doing research in Lebanon and volunteers with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign and the Sabra-Shatila Foundation.  Lamb is the author of: Israel’s 1982 War in Lebanon:  Eyewitness Chronicles of the Invasion and Occupation, South End Press, First Printing, 1983, International Legal Responsibility for the Sabra-Shatila Massacre, Imp. TIPE: 42, Rue Lebour 93100 Montreuil, Paris, France 1984, The Price We Pay: A Quarter Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons in Lebanon (Lamont Press) 2007, His latest book, The Case for Palestinian Civil Rights in Lebanon, is due out shortly.

Source

Canada ‘isolates’ Iran; Really!

War Criminal Benjamin Netanyahu and his Lap Dog Stephen Harper

Last month Tehran hosted the largest international event. The leaders from 120 Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and 27 other nations including China and Russia assembled in Tehran and gave unanimous support to country’s nuclear program.

The support proved by any standard that the Islamic Republic is more popular among the 193 United Nations members than any other country. The Veterans News Now has called the summit Iran’s great diplomatic victory over the US and Israel which tried their level best to sabotage the summit.

To the great horor of the Zionist Occupied Nations (ZONs) – Iran will not only steer the NAM affairs for the next three year – but NAM will stay closer to Iran’s interests after Iran’s term expires in 2015. After Iran, the rotating NAM chairmanship will goes to Venezuela and Bolivia, both Iran’a allies.

Since the US and Israel don’t have diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic – they chose their poodle Harper regime in Ottawa to Isolate Iran. To realize how funny Israel-Firster Harper government’s decision to expel Iranian consulate staff from Canada and recall its diplomatic staff from Tehran – the two countries were never represented at ambassadorial level since the 1980s with the exception of a three-year stunt in 1990s. Furthermore, the trade between the two nations was less than $10 million.

Ottawa has claimed that it took the decision to “isolate” Iran from the international community due to Iran’s refusal to stop its nuclear program and being an ‘existential threat’ to Israel. Interestingly, Canadian foreign minister, Israel-Firster John Baird chose to make the announcement in Moscow and not in Ottawa. Maybe he intended it a message for Putin for later’s support for Tehran.

Since 1979 Islamic Revolution, Canada’s relation with Iran has been ‘shady’ on international level. In 1980, Tehran expelled Canadian ambassador in Tehran, Kenneth Taylor, for being the top CIA agent in Iran. On April 24, 1980, American Air Force, based on Ken’s intelligence briefing, planned and carried its incursion Operation Eagle Claw to rescue 52 American embassy staff members captured as ‘spies‘. The Operation involved eight RH-53D Sea Stallion helicopters. Before the ‘American braves’ reached their destination in Tehran – three of the eight helicopters were lost in the desert sand storm (a Divine intervention, perhaps). The surviving crew and the soldiers in panic returned to the base at Masirah without taking along 8 of the bodies of dead US soldiers.

Canadian delegate always staged walk-out during Ahmadinejad’s speeches at the UN General Assembly for criticizing the Zionist regime.

Canadian delegate walked out of Durban I (South Africa) and Durban II (Geneva) conferences on combating racism for majority of member states’ criticism of the Zionist regime for its apatheid policies.

In September 2011, Harper government boycotted Durban III conference in New York, because its keynote speaker was no other than Iran’s President Dr. Ahmadinejad.

In October 2010, Stephen Harper government’s blind support for the Zionist entity and its participation in US-NATO war in Afghanistan had cost Canada its bid to secure a non-permanent member seat at the UN Security Council for the first time in the last six decades.

In May 2011, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird issued a statement, saying, “Canada deplores the election of Iran to a seat on the United Nations Commission on Population and Development. Canada remains extremely troubled by the outrageous human rights abuses committed by Iran against its own citizens, and by Iran’s threats and actions to undermine the safety, security and stability of its neighbors (read Israel)”.

In May, Canadian embassy in Tehran stopped issuing visas to the relatives and friends of 400,000 Iranian diasporas living in Canada. Now in order to visit Canada they must go to Ankara in neighbouring Turkey to get a visa.

In February 2012 – Canadian pro-Israel groups slammed US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey for saying that Iranian regime is “a rational actor”.

Tehran has maintained a token diplomatic relation with Ottawa since 1980s.

“I was very surprised by the Canadian announcement,” James Devine, an Iran expert at Mount Allison University in Sackville, N.B., told CBC News, noting that it isn’t tied to a specific event or a reaction to “an acute crisis in the relationship.” Devine also emphasized that Canada’s move is likely to have little impact in Iran as Canada is not an international player.

In May 2012, Iran’s deputy foreign minister and Tehran’s representative at the EU, Ali Asghar Khaji, in an Interview with Paul Koring of Toronto daily The Globe and Mail, called Canada Israel’s lapdog.

 Source

America Planning for a Post-Israel Middle East?

By Franklin Lamb

August 28, 2012 "Information Clearing House" ---- 

Congresswoman Illena Ros-Lehtinen will have her hands full as she makes the political and social rounds at this month’s Republican National Convention. Illena, is the only female committee chair in the House of Representatives and arguably Israel’s most ardent agent. She is a constant thorn in the Obama administration's side, regularly castigating the president for playing "political games with U.S. foreign policy” and being “soft on Iran” and undermining the legitimacy of Israel. Ros-Lehtinen is a congressional cheer leader also for her Jewish voters in Florida -- a key battleground in the rapidly approaching US presidential election. Most recently, Ros-Lehtinen helped shepherd through Congress yet another bill tightening sanctions against Iran while calling for US military action against the Assad regime in Syria.

The Congresswomen’s focus will likely not be on pushing the republican’s talking points regarding her party’s nominee, Mitt Romney the former “moderate Massachusetts governor” who she is aware is unlikely to win the White House. Nor, according to a source at the Democratic National Committee, frantically putting together final touches on their own Convention, to be held the week of September 3 in Charlotte, North Carolina, will Ileana spend much time with or promoting Mitt’ running mate, Congressman Paul Ryan. Ryan, an Ayn Rand (author of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged as well as founder of the Objectivism movement) follower, regularly tells audiences that “Ayn Rand’s teachings have been one of the most profound philosophical influences of my life.” 

Well, except for religion and abortion and a few other matters, as Ayn, who passed away in 1982 was an avowed atheist and strongly pro-abortion, the opposite of what Ryan tells audiences he is.

Rather, Ros-Lehtinen will be meeting with local, national, and international Jewish leaders in this must win state where she has been assigned the task of reassuring them that the Republican Party is Israel’s best friend and that a recent US government draft report urging a US re-think of its relationship to Israel is the responsibility of none other than Barack Obama, and it reveals his true disdain for Israel.

Helping her smear the White House with the findings in the draft  analysis will be William Kristol, publisher of the neoconservative Weekly Standard and Director of the New American Century, an “Israel first” Washington-based lobby “promoting joint Israeli and American political and military leadership across the globe, while bringing democracy to the Middle East”.

So what is all the fuss about?

It’s a paper entitled: Preparing For A Post Israel Middle East, an 82 page analysis that concludes that the American national interest in fundamentally at odds with that of Zionist Israel. The authors concludes that Israel is currently the greatest threat to US national interests because its nature and actions prevent normal US relations with Arab and Muslim countries and, to a growing degree, the wider international community.

The study was commissioned by the US Intelligence Community comprising 16 American intelligence agencies with an annual budget in excess of $ 70 billion. The IC includes the Departments of the Navy, Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Defense Intelligence Agency, Departments of Energy, Homeland Security, State, Treasury, Drug Enforcement Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Agency, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency commissioned the study. 

Among the many findings that Ros-Lehtenin and Kristol and other unregistered agents of Israel will likely try to exploit politically between now and November 6, by using them to attack the Obama Administration. A sampling of the findings includes the following:

•   Israel, given its current brutal occupation and belligerence cannot be salvaged any more than apartheid south Africa could be when as late as 1987 Israel was the only “Western” nation that upheld diplomatic ties with South Africa and was the last country to join the international boycott campaign before the regime collapsed;

•   The Israel leadership, with its increasing support of the 700,000 illegal settlers on the occupied West Bank is increasing out of touch with the political, military and economic realities of the Middle East;
 

•   The post Labor government Likud coalition is deeply complicit with and influenced by the settlers’ political and financial power and will increasingly face domestic civil strife which the US government should not associate itself with or become involved with;

•   The Arab Spring and Islamic Awakening has, to a major degree, freed a large majority of the 1.2 billion Arab and Muslims to pursue what an overwhelming majority believe is the illegitimate, immoral and unsustainable European occupation of Palestine of the indigenous population;

•   Simultaneous with, but predating, rapidly expanding Arab and Muslim power in the region as evidenced by the Arab spring, Islamic Awakening and the ascendancy of Iran, as American power and influence recedes, the US commitment to belligerent oppressive Israel is becoming impossible to defend or execute consistent given paramount US national interests which include normalizing relations with the 57 Islamic countries;

•   Gross Israeli interference in the internal affairs of the United States through spying and illegal US arms transfers. This includes supporting more than 60 ‘front organizations’ and  approximately 7,500 US officials who do Israel’s bidding and seek to dominate and intimidate the media and agencies of  the US government which should no longer be condoned;

•   That the United States government no longer has the financial resources, or public support to continue funding Israel. The more than three trillion dollars in direct and indirect aid from US taxpayers to Israel since 1967 is not affordable and is increasingly being objected to by US taxpayers who oppose continuing American military involvement in the Middle East. US public opinion no longer supports funding and executing widely perceived illegal US wars on Israel’s behalf. This view is increasingly being shared by Europe, Asia and the International public;

•   Israel’s segregationist occupation infrastructure evidenced by legalized discrimination and increasingly separate and unequal justice systems must no longer be directly or indirectly funded by the US taxpayers or ignored by the US government;

•   Israel has failed as a claimed democratic state and continued American financial and political cover will not change its continuing devolution as international pariah state;

•   Increasingly, rampant and violent racism exhibited among Jewish settlers in the West Bank is being condoned by the Israeli government to a degree that the Israel government has become its protector and partner;

•   The expanding chasm  among American Jews objecting to Zionism and Israeli practices, including the killing and brutalizing of Palestinians under Israeli occupation,  are gross violations of American and International law and raise questions within the US Jewish community regarding the American responsibility to protect (R2P) innocent civilians under occupation;

•   The international opposition to the increasingly  apartheid regime can no longer be synchronized with American claimed  humanitarian values or US expectations in its bi-lateral relations with the 193 member United Nations;

The Draft ends with language about the need to avoid entangling alliances that alienate much of the World and condemn American citizens to endure the consequences.

Interestingly, it notes Iran as an example of a country and people that have much in common and whose citizens have a real interest in bilateral associations (here an apparent reference to Israel and its US lobby) not determined by the wishes of other countries and their agents. It also highlights the need for the US to undertake “the repairing relations with Arab and Muslim countries including the drastically curtained use of drone aircraft.

The coming days will clarity the success of Israel’s in making an issue of the finding in the soon to be published daft report and the degree to which the Republican Party will gain for its findings in the race for the White House.

Franklin Lamb, former Assistant Counsel, US House Judiciary Committee and  Professor of International Law at Northwestern College of Law in Oregon, earned his Law Degree at Boston University and his LLM, M.Phil., and PhD degrees at the London School of Economics. Following three years at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Lamb was visiting fellow at the Harvard Law School’s East Asian Legal Studies Center. 

He is currently doing research in Lebanon and volunteers with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign and the Sabra-Shatila Foundation.  Lamb is the author of: Israel’s 1982 War in Lebanon:  Eyewitness Chronicles of the Invasion and Occupation, South End Press, First Printing, 1983, International Legal Responsibility for the Sabra-Shatila Massacre, Imp. TIPE: 42, Rue Lebour 93100 Montreuil, Paris, France 1984, The Price We Pay: A Quarter Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons in Lebanon (Lamont Press) 2007, His latest book, The Case for Palestinian Civil Rights in Lebanon, is due out shortly.

Jerusalem Post Reports Netanyahu Interference in US Elections

Israeli Paper Cites Netanyahu for “Putting His Hand In American Ballot Boxes”

By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor

The article by Gil Hoffman of the conservative Jerusalem Post was a surprising one.  Mofaz, a non-Jew member of the Knesset pointed out the obvious, Netanyahu believes he is “King of Israel” and can appoint American presidents. 

One can extrapolate from that the concept that a Romney presidency would subjugate the US to acting as a mere surrogate, both military and economically for Israel. Dozens of studies of AIPAC, the ADL, SPLC and Washington think tanks, citing their direct control by Tel Aviv, adds “meat” to this accusation.

The key issue here is that The Post, rather than Haaretz has carried the issue, although edited and highly truncated, as with news prettymuch everywhere:

Kadima chairman Shaul Mofaz on Thursday accused Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of conspiring to bring down US President Barack Obama, in a feisty speech at a special Knesset session called to approve the appointment of Avi Dichter as home front defense minister.

Mofaz said that after Netanyahu had tired of interfering in internal Kadima politics, he had shifted to meddling in the US presidential election between Obama and presumptive Republican candidate Mitt Romney.

“Mr. Prime Minister, you are trying to grossly and dangerously interfere in the US election in an unprecedented manner,” Mofaz said. “Whom do you serve and why? Why are you putting your hands deep in the American ballot boxes? You are playing a dangerous game that will endanger our children’s future.”

“The prime minister is using Dichter’s good name for a corrupt and cynical maneuver,” Mofaz said. “A home front defense minister should not be a rubber stamp in the hands of those planning a hasty attack [on Iran’s nuclear facilities] that has not been coordinated with the United States. Mr. Prime Minister, you are trying to scare the public, and the truth is we are scared because you are implementing such dangerous and irresponsible policies.”

MK Yoel Hasson (Kadima) said Netanyahu was “acting as if the Time magazine headline ‘King Bibi’ had gone to his head, but he will be replaced, and so will “Prince Barak.”

A critical issue to Americans has been Romney’s recent visit to Israel where he met behind closed doors with diamond merchants tied to 70% of the world’s illegal “blood diamond” trade and is said to have accepted millions in illegal campaign donations.  Romney met secretly with cash bearing delegations from Russia, London’s banking community and other groups, some American citizens but most not, all violations of American law.

Even contributions given by Americans that traveled with Romney included funds collected from foreign citizens, another violation of US law.

Source