Archive for the Original Research Category

The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK): A Zionist proxy?

Posted in Original Research on July 8, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

May 31, 2010 will no doubt be remembered as a day of infamy, when Israeli commandoes slaughtered nine unarmed Turkish activists — bearing humanitarian aid to the besieged Gaza Strip — in international waters.

But those nine martyrs for Palestine weren’t the only ones to die that day: only hours before the massacre on the high seas, seven Turkish naval personnel were killed in Turkey’s Iskenderun seaport in an attack claimed by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), ending a years-long truce.

The uncanny timing has led to speculation about the links between Israel — well known for training, funding and arming terrorist outfits — and the PKK.

The following media reports suggest the possibility that the recent upsurge in PKK attacks on Turkish targets is in fact Israeli payback-by-proxy for Ankara’s vocal opposition to the longstanding Zionist blockade of the Gaza Strip.

USAK Director Laciner implies link between Israel and PKK
The Journal of the Turkish Weekly (Turkey)
31 May 2010

Sedat Laciner, head of the Ankara-based International Strategic Research Organization (USAK)
, has made comments on the rocket-attack on a military vehicle near a naval base in Iskenderun town of Hatay killing six soldiers and Israel’s strike against the aid convoy heading to Gaza.
Comparing these two attacks, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Laciner indicated that there can be a relationship between some of the Israeli groups and the terrorist organization, PKK. The PKK terrorist organization attacked a Turkish naval base when the Israeli forces attacked the international civilian aid flotilla including Turkish aid workers.

Laciner said, “Some Israelis support the PKK. Even though the Israeli state does not support it as a state, the people who left Mossad or retired from the army advocate the PKK. All these were reported by the US and Israeli media in recent past.”

Highlighting the obvious relationship between Israel and the terrorist organization, Laciner stated that it was a known fact that the PKK militants who planned to make bomb attacks in some cities were trained by Israel.

Laciner iterated that the recent attack in Iskenderun, a Mediterranean Turkish coast town, was far from being a typical PKK attack. Furthermore, by making an emphasis on the timing of the two attacks, Laciner said, “There is something weird. This was not a conventional PKK or terrorist attack.”

Laciner stated, “Israel is a small country and its power is hidden in dark places rather than conventional sources. Such a country traditionalized use of such measures can do many things to Turkey that is a country with many deficiencies. Turkey has several weaknesses and its political and cultural structure is open to any kind of interventions.”

Laciner indicated that Turkey had openly challenged Israel in “one minute” and Iran issues; thus the attitude of Israel was not something unexpected. He counted two main issues which could be used by Israel against Turkey: PKK and Ergenekon.

[Wikipedia: Ergenekon is the name given to an alleged clandestine, Kemalist ultra-nationalist organization in Turkey with ties to members of the country’s military and security forces. The group, named after Ergenekon, a mythical place located in the inaccessible valleys of the Altay Mountains, is accused of terrorism in Turkey.

[Its agenda has variously been described as Eurasianist, and isolationist. The defendants portray themselves as defenders of secularism and national sovereignty. According to the indictment, the group’s claim to legitimacy is that it allegedly protects national interests, which the defendants believe are incompatible with the rule of the democratically elected government of Justice and Development Party and are harmed by Turkey’s alleged concessions to the West.

[In Turkey, the extensions of the state — the establishment — that are considered responsible for this are referred to as the “deep state.” The existence of the “deep state” was affirmed in Turkish opinion after the Susurluk scandal in 1996. Alleged members have been indicted on charges of plotting to foment unrest, among other things by assassinating intellectuals, politicians, judges, military staff, and religious leaders, with the ultimate goal of toppling the incumbent government in a coup that was planned to take place in 2009.

[This follows allegations published in Nokta that several abortive coups with the same intent were planned a few years ago. The proximate motive behind these false flag activities is said to be to discredit the incumbent Justice and Development Party and derail Turkey’s accession process to the European Union.]

Stating that the PKK has become a subcontractor organization and been trying to get profit from speculative developments, Laciner said, “It is normal that the PKK is trying to ally with Turkey’s enemies at this level. However, the main problem here is that Turkish intelligence units and state units are not able to act together.”

“The attack against the Gaza aid convoy is tried to be made an issue of Turkey-Israel. Israel also wants to show the ruling party of Turkey as something equal to Hamas. Israel wants to create such a bias in minds.”

He also said that the bloody attack on the convoy was a conscious attack which was made in order to give a lesson to the rest of the world and Turkey.

Laciner defined the action as a breach of both international and national law and a crime. By stating that there is no way to justify the action, Laciner said that the crisis has not finished yet.

Reminding Murat Karayilan (one of the prominent figure of the PKK)’s statements calling for the US to use them rather than abolishing the terrorist organization, Laciner said, “While Turkey is challenging both Israel and the West in issues like Iran, the statements of Karayilan may come true in response to Turkey’s actions. Therefore, the international conjuncture in favor of Turkey may change and a disadvantageous atmosphere may emerge. PKK can be used against Turkey and we may see the signs of it in the near future.”

Israel has supported the PKK against Iran. Israeli advisers also encouraged the Kurdish groups to rise up against Baghdad to establish a separate Kurdish state in the Northern Iraq.

Dr. Nilgun Gulcan also underlined the link between the PKK and Israel. Dr. Gulcan said, “Many Israelis are active in Northern Iraq. They legitimate their existence with the help to the local Kurds yet everybody knows that they have hidden agenda and secret relations with the armed groups in the region.”

The above article can be found at:
Turks suspect ‘Israeli link with PKK’
June 16, 2010

TEL AVIV — As relations between Israel and its erstwhile ally Turkey deteriorate following the Israeli navy’s May 31 killing of nine Turks, authorities in Ankara are investigating whether Israel had links to a deadly attack by Kurdish separatists on the same day.

Shortly after midnight May 31, fighters of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, attacked a military vehicle at the naval base at the port of Iskenderun, in Hatay province near the border with Syria, and killed seven naval personnel.

Iskenderun has never been a target for the PKK, which has been fighting the Turkish state since 1984 for an autonomous Kurdish enclave, although it has carried out attacks across Turkey.

A few hours later, Israeli naval commandos stormed the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara, flagship of a convoy carrying humanitarian aid to Israeli-blockaded Gaza, in international waters. They killed nine Turks they claimed attacked them and wounded dozens of pro-Palestinian activists aboard the vessel.

Relations between Israel and Turkey, under strain since Turkey’s Islamist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, furiously denounced Israel’s December 2008 invasion of the Gaza Strip, nosedived into bitter acrimony.

Many Turks saw the two murderous incidents as two sides of the same coin.

This was reflected within the political elite. Huseyin Celik, deputy chairman of Erdogan’s Justice and development Party, or AKP, noted, “We do not think it’s a coincidence that these two attacks took place at the same time.”

Turks were furious at the Israeli action in the eastern Mediterranean and turned out at the funerals of their slain countrymen in huge numbers, led by senior government officials.

So far as is known, Turkey’s intelligence service hasn’t been able to provide any proof of possible Israeli involvement in the Iskenderun killings. Erdogan’s interior minister, Besir Atalay has even sought to calm tempers.

“I don’t want to say these (incidents) are related,” he said. “Such investigations require close attention and we want to refrain from careless statements lacking tangibility…

“These subjects are delicate, especially when they have international dimensions.”

Still, the Turks point to Israel’s involvement with Kurdish guerrillas in Iraq since the 1960s. Israel aided them off and on, depending on the geopolitical environment, because they fought against the Baathist regime which was virulently anti-Israel.

The Israelis returned to Iraqi Kurdistan prior to the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 to train the peshmerga — “those who face death” — who were key US allies.

Israelis have also been reported to be operating with Kurdish rebels in Iran along with US and British agents, or Special Forces, in what Tehran claims is a systematic campaign to destabilize the Islamic Republic.

The Israelis have no history of supporting Turkey’s Kurdish separatists. But if the crisis reaches the point where Israel, along with the United States, decides an Islamist government in Turkey is a liability, all things are possible.

Israel kept clear of the PKK because the Jewish state had maintained a discreet intelligence link with Ankara since the 1950s. That eventually produced a 1996 military cooperation pact.

Turkey, one of the first countries to recognize Israel in 1948, was strategically important to Israel because it was the only Muslim state with which it had relations. For all intents and purposes that is no longer the case.

The relationship began to change when the Islamist AKP took power in 2002 and Erdogan sought to restore Turkey’s traditional role as a regional power.

For a time, Ankara put out feelers to the PKK in hopes of ending 26 years of bloodshed in which 40,000 people have perished. But in recent months, the separatists have resumed attacks.

PKK activity usually picks up in the spring when the mountain snows melt. But Ankara has been bracing for a surge in violence, particularly in urban areas, which could harm AKP prospects in upcoming elections.

If Israel and Turkey are hurtling toward a final split, with Erdogan’s government more oriented toward Iran and Syria than the Jewish state, the gloves may indeed come off.

Ankara is reported to be seeking to assemble another aid flotilla to challenge Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

Meantime, Erdogan has placed his loyalists in charge of Turkey’s intelligence service and other security agencies, effectively closing links with Israeli intelligence and long-used back channels that Israel’s leadership valued greatly.

The above article can be found at:
Squaring Israel’s defeats in the Middle East
PressTV (Iran)
June 20, 2010

Recently, US lawmakers warned Turkey that unless it abandons its policy of befriending Iran and shunning Israel, it would pay a hefty price.
“With regard to Congress of the United States, there will be a cost if Turkey stays on its current path of growing close to Iran and more antagonistic to Israel,” US Republican Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana told Turkey’s envoy to Washington last Thursday.

Democratic Representative Eliot Engel joined the criticism, adding that as a NATO ally, Turkey’s actions were “even more disgraceful.” He rapped Ankara for no longer “looking at the West and NATO.”

In a letter addressed to US President Barack Obama, 126 members of the US House of Representatives asked the White House to protect Israel from international condemnations following the deadly attack on a Gaza-bound aid convoy three weeks ago.

At first glace, the anticipated US punishment would be recognizing as genocide the mass killing of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during and after World War I. The issue has been previously brought up in the US Congress.

However, the current incidents involving the Turkish military seem to hint that the “cost” could be referring to other US policies.

Just as the Turkish flagship of the Freedom Flotilla, MV Marmara was attacked and its supplies confiscated, clashes broke out between Turkish armed force and members of the banned Kurdish Workers Party (PKK). Since then, the death toll from either side has risen almost daily.

Despite the organization’s Marxist ideology, it has strong ties with capitalist governments, among which Israel boasts longtime influence.

The public meeting between the PJAK — the Iranian offshoot of the PKK — and US officials in Washington, and other documents prove that the terror cell has close links to the US.

The Turkish National Intelligence Organization has evidence suggesting that Israel’s spy agency Mossad has been organizing similar PKK sting attacks on Turkish soil from its base in northern Iraq.

Analysts say that Israeli and US intelligence experts believe reigniting Turkey’s internal conflicts could effectively undermine Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s presidency and his Justice and Development Party.

They are seeking to question Erdogan’s decisions by diverting the spotlight to Ankara’s relations with its minority Kurdish community.

Israel is at the peak of US policies in the Middle East, and any threats to its precedence are penalized.

Turkey enjoyed US support for as long as it mediated the Israel-Syria talks, but Tel Aviv is now seeking to hamper growing Ankara Damascus ties.

An attack by the Syrian offshoot of the PKK on a Turkish army base in the port city of Iskenderun was designed to goad Turkey into believing Damascus organized the assault or did nothing to prevent it.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad traveled to Turkey shortly afterwards.

A high-ranking Turkish intelligence official says that there is some proof suggesting the PKK is now working directly under Mossad chief Meir Dagan. Now with James Clapper elected as the US intelligence director, it can be assumed that the group’s activities will expand.

Turkish media, citing intelligence sources, say advanced Israeli weapons and telecommunications equipment have been confiscated from PKK rebels.

US officials have meanwhile adopted a contradictory stance toward Turkey. President Obama sought to grow closer to the Muslim world by visiting Turkey and not Israel. But US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates blamed the European Union’s delays in accepting Turkey’s ascension as the source of Ankara’s sinful hostility toward Israel. Yet another group within the administration heaps all the blame on Turkey.

Is it possible to imagine that as soon as Turkey becomes a member of the European bloc, the nation would change its sentiments towards Gaza and the Palestinian suffering overnight?

It is also clear that Turkish security agencies are not ruling out assassination or coup attempts, but newspaper headlines and statements by political party leaders uniformly attest to the country’s support of Ankara’s stance on the May 31 attack on MV Marmara.

It seems that the West must pay more attention to the psychological factor of Turkish sentiment.

Assassination of a Hamas leader, discussion over Israel’s atomic arsenal in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the attack on Gaza-bound aid convoys, and the international push for the lifting of the Gaza blockade are the three corners of Israel’s recent defeats which can be squared off with revelations that would trace recent unrest in Turkey to Israel.

The above article can be found at:

‘Israel supports PKK, PJAK’
PressTV (Iran)
June 24, 2010

Israel supports Kurdish militants in their attacks against Turkey in order to put pressure on Ankara, a Turkish political analyst says.

Yavuz Selim, in an interview with Press TV, said that the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its offshoot Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK) are “definitely supported by Zionists.”

He noted that the main reason behind the Israeli support for the Kurdish militants is the fact that Turkey poses a threat to the “illegal existence” of Israel in the Middle East region.

Earlier in June, Sedat Laciner, the head of the International Strategic Research Organization — a Turkish think tank — said Mossad agents and Israeli military retirees had been sighted providing training to PKK militants in Iraqi Kurdistan.

Laciner said Tel Aviv does not have a positive perception of Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party, which is led by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The PKK, listed as a terrorist group by Turkey and much of the international community, took up arms in 1984, sparking a conflict that has claimed some 45,000 lives.

Over 40 Turkish soldiers have been killed in PKK attacks over the past few months.

The above article can be found at:

How the Far East views the Jews

Posted in Original Research on April 24, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

In the ‘Enlightened’ West, even to suggest the existence of an ‘undue Jewish influence’ can be a dangerous business.  Not so in the Far East, though, where the Jews’ overwhelming political, economic and cultural influence on world events is common knowledge — even the subject of bestselling books.

“…the North Koreans firmly stick to the myth of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” wrote late researcher and historian Israel Shahak. “From this myth, they draw a conclusion that via Israel they can easily win some access to America…”

The following items, including two mainstream news reports and selections from Shahak’s 1997 masterpiece ‘Open Secrets,’ are only a few cases in point.


S. Korean comic book called anti-Semitic

UPI; February 25, 2007

A South Korean educational comic book that depicts Jews as conspiring at world domination has arrived in the United States in English translation, a report said.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center plans to travel to Seoul to lobby the publisher to remove what he considers anti-Semitic images, the Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.

The book is part of a series, Distant Countries and Neighboring Countries, by Lee Won-bok, a university professor.

One image shows a man climbing a hill, only to run into a brick wall with a stop sign and a Star of David, Cooper said.

The final obstacle is always a fortress called Jews, Cooper added.

The rabbi said that the book echoes classic Nazi canards. He has received support from Korean-American leaders.

“I don’t have words to describe the outrage I feel,” said Yohngsohk Choe, of the [obviously co-opted] Korean-American Patriotic Action Movement in the USA.

The above article can be found at:


Anti-Semitism makes it to China?; February 22, 2009

BEIJING — Who’s to blame for the current global financial crisis? According to a bestselling book in China, which is leading the sales charts in the country, the answer is clear: The Jews.

In the eyes of most Chinese, Jewish people are considered “smart,” “rich” and “good at making money.” Bookstores in China offer a variety of self-help books titled, “How to make money like Jews,” and “The secret of Jews’ global success.”

Until recently, the notion that Jews and money were inseparable carried no anti-Semitic undertone in the country, but a relatively new book called “Currency Wars” threatens to change all that.

The book’s author, Song Hongbing, claims that behind world-changing events like the battle of Waterloo, Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, President Kennedy’s assassination, and the deep recession in Asia during the 1990s stood an intricate conspiracy aimed at increasing Jews’ wealth and influence.

Song, a Chinese computer engineer and history buff who resides in the United States, writes that almost every defining historical moment has been instigated by Jewish bankers, and mainly the Rothschild family, which Song says dominates the global banking system, including the US Federal Reserve System.

Song’s book was published in China about a year and-a-half ago, and initially sold an insignificant number of copies. But in recent months the global crisis has turned the book into a hit. Estimates put sales of “Currency War” well over a million, not including hundreds of thousands of illegal copies that can also be downloaded off the net.

Responses among readers vary; online discussions about the book reveal that many are convinced this is the most important publication ever written, as it “exposes the truth behind global economy.” However, others claim that this is “nonsense” and say that Song, who has never studied economics, simply pieced together a theory made up of several delusional conspiracy theories published on the internet.

Song’s publishers, a subsidiary of a state-owned publishing house, boast the fact that the book has been read by all leading financial executives in the country, as well as state leaders.

Song himself has become a local celebrity in China, and is often invited to lecture at financial conventions and is interviewed on TV as a famous financial analyst.

The above article can be found at:


And on page 65 of Israel Shahak’s ‘Open Secrets: Israeli Nuclear and Foreign Policies’ (1997), we find the following on the subject of the North Korean-Israeli relationship:

“The case of North Korea may not be the most important, but it is typical. It was described by Nahum Barnea in [Israeli newspaper] Yediot Ahronot on 20 August, that is before the signing of the accord with the PLO.”

“Barnea informs us that in its ‘talks with North Korea conducted by the deputy director of the foreign ministry, Eitan Bentzur, Israel asked for stopping the sales of the North Korean scuds to Iran and Syria. Like so many backward regimes, the North Koreans firmly stick to the myth of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. From this myth, they draw a conclusion that via Israel they can easily win some access to America, and that this access may perhaps rescue their regime in an hour of dire emergency.'”


And on the subject of Chinese-Israeli relations, we find the following on page 68 of  ‘Open Secrets’:

“As is well known, economic exchanges between Israel and China have been flourishing. But Israeli relations with China have also there strategic and intelligence aspects to which the Hebrew press has paid a deal of attention.”

“Those aspects were best summed up by Moshe Zak in Ha’olam Ha’ze (20 October).  Zak views ‘the mystery of Israel’s power over the Chinese leadership’ in the same terms as Barnea interprets the North Koreans: ‘the leaders of China firmly believe that the US and Israel coordinate their policies and that Israel has a great influence in Washington. This is why the Chinese Prime Minister, Li Peng, asked [Israeli PM Yitzak] Rabin during their conversation to act as a go-between to soothe the tension between Beijing and Washington which appeared after the Chinese underground nuclear test. Through Rabin, the Chinese prime minister conveyed a message to the US, offering to open negotiations to discuss this issue’…”

“He also says that ‘when the entire Chinese leadership spoke with Rabin about the scope of Chinese relations with Israel, they did not neglect to emphasize frequently that those relations are with the Jewish people anywhere, whose power and influence surpasses beyond any comparison that of the four-and-a-half million Jews residing in Israel.'”

Israeli drones said to operate over Iraq, Afghanistan

Posted in Original Research with tags , , , on March 20, 2009 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

skylark_lHa’aretz (Israel)
March 19, 2009

Israeli-manufactured unmanned aerial vehicles have been operating in the skies of Iraq and Afghanistan in the service of the United States-led coalition for the last three years.

According to reports in foreign media, the unpiloted aircrafts are products of the Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).

Over Iraq, the U.S. Army has been operating Hunter model UAVs that were manufactured in IAI’s Mississippi-based subsidiary Stark Aerospace. The top contractor for the project is the American defense company Northrop Grumman.

Reports say the aircraft have been deployed in various missions with considerable success.

Within the last year, the Canadian air force has also operated Israeli-made Heron UAVs over Afghanistan to assist Canada’s ground forces in combat against the Taliban.

It is not known whether any Israeli UAVs in Iraq and Afghanistan were shot down, yet no reports of such incidents have been received.

Though the UAVs were manufactured in Israel, there are no identifying marks on the aircraft to indicate the country of origin.

The above article can be found at:

Israeli drones said to operate over Iraq, Afghanistan

Israeli AIPAC spies set to walk

Posted in Original Research with tags , on March 5, 2009 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

aipac_spy_caseProsecutors lose key rulings in AIPAC case
The Jewish Daily Forward

February 25, 2009

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors in the national security case against two former pro-Israel lobbyists suffered legal blows this week that could affect their chances of winning or even lead the government to reconsider going forward with the case.

A February 24 ruling by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. turned down a government appeal aiming to limit the use of classified evidence by the defendants in the case. It also upheld the decision of a lower court requiring the prosecution prove the defendants acted in bad faith.

Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, two former staffers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, are accused of illegally communicating classified information to an Israeli diplomat, a journalist and to their AIPAC superiors. They were arrested after an FBI sting operation, in which they received information from Larry Franklin, a former mid-level Pentagon analyst. Rosen and Weissman were later fired from AIPAC.

The appeals court’s ruling comes after a February 18 decision by Judge T.S. Ellis of the U.S. district court in Virginia to allow the defense to call to the stand William Leonard, the former head of government Information Security Oversight Office, known as the “classification czar.” This decision gave a boost to the defendants who believe that Leonard’s testimony is crucial in countering prosecutors’ claims that the information Rosen and Weissman heard from Franklin and passed on, was, in fact, classified.

Attorney Abbe Lowell, who represents Steve Rosen, said the appeals court ruling will help the defendants prove the information they conveyed “was not classified, was not national defense information and its disclosure did not violate the law.”

“I see no winning strategy for the prosecution,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, who has been following the case closely. “They are in an all but impossible situation.”

Aftergood noted the high bar set by the court, demanding that the prosecution proves Rosen and Weissman disclosed the information intending to damage U.S. interests.

The rulings might be a turning point for the case that began over four years ago. Observers and defense sources speculated the new circumstances created by the pre-trial decisions could lead the Attorney General to reconsider the entire prosecution, in light of what is seen as a growing difficulty to prove guilt.

“This is the defense’s dream scenario, but it’s not an unrealistic one,” Aftergood said.

A tentative April 21 date was set by the court for the trial, but it may be pushed back to accommodate the scheduling needs of both sides.

The above article can be found at:

Israeli AIPAC spies set to walk

White House access (for Jews)? Step right in!

Posted in Original Research with tags , on March 5, 2009 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

aipac-phones-customThe Jewish Daily Forward
February 25, 2009

One month into the Obama presidency, Jewish communal leaders seeking high-level access appear to have come crashing through an open door.

Within four days in mid-February, community leaders were invited to two high-level conference calls — one with senior foreign policy officials to discuss the upcoming United Nations-sponsored Durban II conference on racism, and the other with Middle East special envoy George Mitchell. Attorney General Eric Holder is scheduled to speak in March at the annual plenum of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, an umbrella organization of public policy groups.

“It’s clear that Obama himself believes in outreach with a capital O,” said Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations public policy director, Nathan Diament, who participated in the calls.

This access may be deployed in part to ease community concerns about policy shifts that Jewish groups might find unwelcome. Many advocates fear that the Durban II conference, set to take place in Geneva in April, for example, will replicate the first Durban conference’s strident focus on purported Israeli and Zionist racism. Some Jewish groups urge Washington simply to boycott. The administration has indicated that it plans to address Jewish concerns during pre-conference agenda negotiations with other countries.

“It is clear they have things to say to the Jewish community, and it’s good they are saying them,” said one pro-Israel activist, speaking on condition of anonymity. Communal leaders say the administration’s efforts to connect with them appear to be a down payment on campaign promises of full transparency and outreach to all communities.

Initial administration outreach has departed somewhat from previous presidents’ approaches. In assembling invitation lists, the White House does not limit itself to working through the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the Jewish establishment’s formal foreign-policy voice to the executive branch. Ideologically diverse groups outside that orbit, such as the New Israel Fund and The Israel Project, have become regular participants in administration meetings.

The White House has also broken with tradition in not yet naming one individual as designated Jewish community liaison. Nonetheless, the job is still done, as in the past, by the Office of Public Liaison, now headed by Tina Tchen, who coordinated and moderated the recent conference calls.

Two White House staffers conduct daily outreach: Susan Sher, associate counsel to the president, and vice presidential staffer Danielle Borrin. Both are considered to have strong Jewish community ties. Sher was involved with the community in Chicago, and Borrin interned in the Washington office of United Jewish Communities before joining the staff of then-senator Joe Biden.

“Instead of having one point person, one e-mail address, one phone number to call, we have three,” said William Daroff, head of the UJC Washington office.

It is still not clear if and when the White House will name a full-time Jewish community liaison. Tchen has cited budgetary constraints as the reason the position remains unfilled. But a former Bush administration official scoffed at this, arguing, “There will always be resources to meet the president’s political needs.”

Dealing with the organized Jewish community’s myriad political connections has challenged every administration in designing its communications strategy. Previous administrations have had to juggle Jewish advocates’ expectations of having their own White House point person with the often contradictory desire for direct access to higher levels.

In this administration, as in others, certain senior officials have become de facto channels for lobbying, information and dialogue. Dan Shapiro, Middle East affairs director at the National Security Council, is seen as an address for Jewish groups on foreign policy issues. A former aide to Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson, Shapiro worked at the National Security Council during the Clinton administration and was a liaison on Middle East issues in Obama’s presidential campaign.

Another White House address is chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who has longstanding ties with Jewish leaders both in Chicago and nationally, though his top position makes him less accessible than others.

In Mitchell’s hour-long February 19 conference call with Jewish leaders, the envoy made clear that he wanted to hear community activists’ views. He also spoke directly to some of their concerns, said one participant who took notes. Aware of criticism of his 2001 report on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Mitchell noted, “On the plane back from the region, I read my report from eight years ago and saw how the reality on the ground has changed.”

While the 2001 report does not mention the word “Iran,” he said, the issue was raised in the first sentence of every conversation in his latest talks.

The former Maine senator also tried to ease concerns regarding his views on settlements, saying they were only one issue among many that will have to be dealt with by the administration, not an exclusive focus.

The above article can be found at:

White House access (for Jews)? Step right in!

Elder of Zion Kissinger calls Obama “important element” in “new world order”

Posted in Original Research with tags , , , , on March 3, 2009 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

obamahitlersinisterleo1The world must forge a new order or retreat to chaos
By Henry Kissinger

The Independent (UK)
January 20, 2009

As the new U.S. administration prepares to take office amid grave financial and international crises, it may seem counterintuitive to argue that the very unsettled nature of the international system generates a unique opportunity for creative diplomacy.

That opportunity involves a seeming contradiction. On one level, the financial collapse represents a major blow to the standing of the United States. While American political judgments have often proved controversial, the American prescription for a world financial order has generally been unchallenged. Now disillusionment with the United States’ management of it is widespread.
At the same time, the magnitude of the debacle makes it impossible for the rest of the world to shelter any longer behind American predominance or American failings. Every country will have to reassess its own contribution to the prevailing crisis. Each will seek to make itself independent, to the greatest possible degree, of the conditions that produced the collapse; at the same time, each will be obliged to face the reality that its dilemmas can be mastered only by common action.

Even the most affluent countries will confront shrinking resources. Each will have to redefine its national priorities. An international order will emerge if a system of compatible priorities comes into being. It will fragment disastrously if the various priorities cannot be reconciled.

The nadir of the international financial system coincides with simultaneous political crises around the globe. Never have so many transformations occurred at the same time in so many different parts of the world and been made accessible via instantaneous communication. The alternative to a new international order is chaos.

The financial and political crises are, in fact, closely related partly because, during the period of economic exuberance, a gap had opened up between the economic and the political organization of the world. The economic world has been globalized. Its institutions have a global reach and have operated by maxims that assumed a self-regulating global market. The financial collapse exposed the mirage. It made evident the absence of global institutions to cushion the shock and to reverse the trend. Inevitably, when the affected publics turned to their political institutions, these were driven principally by domestic politics, not considerations of world order. Every major country has attempted to solve its immediate problems essentially on its own and to defer common action to a later, less crisis-driven point.

So-called rescue packages have emerged on a piecemeal national basis, generally by substituting seemingly unlimited governmental credit for the domestic credit that produced the debacle in the first place, so far without achieving more than stemming incipient panic. International order will not come about either in the political or economic field until there emerge general rules toward which countries can orient themselves.

In the end, the political and economic systems can be harmonized in only one of two ways: by creating an international political regulatory system with the same reach as that of the economic world; or by shrinking the economic units to a size manageable by existing political structures, which is likely to lead to a new mercantilism, perhaps of regional units. A new Bretton Woods kind of global agreement is by far the preferable outcome.

America’s role in this enterprise will be decisive. Paradoxically, American influence will be great in proportion to the modesty in our conduct; we need to modify the righteousness that has characterized too many American attitudes, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union. That event and the subsequent period of nearly uninterrupted global growth induced too many to equate world order with the acceptance of American designs, including our domestic preferences. The result was a certain inherent unilateralism — the standard complaint of European critics — or else an insistent kind of consultation by which nations were invited to prove their fitness to enter the international system by conforming to American prescriptions.

Not since the inauguration of president John F Kennedy half a century ago has a new administration come into office with such a reservoir of expectations. It is unprecedented that all the principal actors on the world stage are avowing their desire to undertake the transformations imposed on them by the world crisis in collaboration with the United States.

The extraordinary impact of the President-elect on the imagination of humanity is an important element in shaping a new world order. But it defines an opportunity, not a policy. The ultimate challenge is to shape the common concern of most countries and all major ones regarding the economic crisis, together with a common fear of jihadist terrorism, into a strategy reinforced by the realization that the new issues like proliferation, energy and climate change permit no national or regional solution.

The new administration could make no worse mistake than to rest on its initial popularity. The role of China in a new world order is crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system. China made possible the American consumption splurge by buying American debt; America helped the modernization of the Chinese economy by opening its markets to Chinese goods.

Each side of the Pacific needs the cooperation of the other in addressing the consequences of the financial crisis. Now that the global financial collapse has devastated Chinese export markets, China is emphasizing infrastructure development and domestic consumption. It will not be easy to shift gears rapidly, and the Chinese growth rate may fall temporarily below the 7.5 per cent that Chinese experts define as the line that challenges political stability.

What kind of global economic order arises will depend importantly on how China and America deal with each other over the next few years. A frustrated China may take another look at an exclusive regional Asian structure, for which the nucleus already exists in the ASEAN-plus-three concept. At the same time, if protectionism grows in America or if China comes to be seen as a long-term adversary, a self-fulfilling prophecy may blight the prospects of global order. Such a return to mercantilism and 19th-century diplomacy would divide the world into competing regional units with dangerous long-term consequences.

The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations in the postwar period — except that the challenges now are more political and economic than military.

The complexity of the emerging world requires from America a more historical approach than the insistence that every problem has a final solution expressible in programs with specific time limits not infrequently geared to our political process. We must learn to operate within the attainable and be prepared to pursue ultimate ends by the accumulation of nuance. An international order can be permanent only if its participants have a share not only in building but also in securing it. In this manner, America and its potential partners have a unique opportunity to transform a moment of crisis into a vision of hope.

The author was U.S. National Security Adviser, 1969-75, and U.S. Secretary of State, 1973-77.

The above article can be found at: Henry Kissinger: The world must forge a new order or retreat to chaos

Elder of Zion Kissinger calls Obama “important element” in “new world order”

GAZA’S BLOOD IS ON OUR HANDS (for ignoring the truth of 9/11)

Posted in Original Research with tags , , on January 20, 2009 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

20090120221515652_1As the dust settles in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian casualties, mostly women and children, are being counted in the hundreds. What just happened was a real holocaust — not a fictional Hollywood production like the “Holocaust” of European Jewry — and the blood of the more than 1300 slain Palestinians is on our hands.

If we had collectively faced up to the reality of Israel’s central role in the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001, none of these subsequent Israeli atrocities — including the Zionist-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — would ever have been allowed to happen.

In the wake of 9/11, overwhelming evidence emerged, available to anyone who was interested, implicating Israel in the attacks. Much of this evidence — more than enough to stand up in any legitimate court of law — even came out in the Jewish-owned “mainstream” media. (For a concise collection of this evidence, see Victor Thorn’s “9/11 Evil: Israel’s Central Role in the September 11, 2001 Attacks”.)

Now, imagine if, in the months and first few years after the tragedy, we had all had the courage to face the obvious: that the so-called Jewish state — along with its rats’ nest of agents in the US government and intelligence agencies — had conceived, planned, and executed the attacks in order to produce an imaginary “Clash of Civilizations” and drive the US into a global war against the enemies of Israel.

All of the proof was available to us. If we had all shown a little strength of character, and faced up to the truth staring us in the face, the subsequent march to war by the Jewish-controlled Bush Jr. Administration would have been stopped in its tracks.

Imagine: States of the union — pressured by their outraged constituencies — would have demanded legitimate, independent investigations, threatening the federal government with secession if need be.

Enormous demonstrations, involving millions of Americans, would have converged on Washington DC. At risk to life and limb, angry protestors would have dragged known culprits from the White House and other federal institutions to face trial or, depending on the circumstances, vigilante justice.

Jewish-owned mass-media institutions, which played such a vital role in the 9/11 conspiracy and subsequent cover-up, would have been quickly dismantled. Their Zionist propagandists would have been detained pending investigation, trial and — most likely — execution.

Good people in the armed services — still loyal to the US Constitution — would have found and exposed those within their ranks working in the service of a foreign power. Zionist conspirators within the military would have been court-martialed and, having been found guilty of high treason, subject to the maximum penalty.

Meanwhile, the Israeli embassy in the US, along with ADL and AIPAC offices countrywide, would have been besieged by angry Americans seeking redress for the murder of 3000 of their innocent compatriots. Zionist agents would have been tried — by emergency courts, convened by independent states of the union, if need be — and, given the overwhelming proof against them, sentenced to death.

Conspirators who escaped conviction in court would have become fugitives, to be hunted down by righteously-minded local posses spearheaded, perhaps, by the outraged kinsmen of those slain on 9/11.

Most importantly, America’s support for the criminal state of Israel would have vanished overnight, to be replaced by bitter acrimony. An alliance of sovereign nations including the US — whose peoples had purged their respective governments of Zionist rot — would have brought their full weight to bear against the pariah state, arresting its criminal leaders and forcing its military to disarm.

Universally despised and economically unsustainable without US funding, the Israeli experiment would have been brought to a close, forcibly if necessary. Its people would have been dispersed — to refugee camps, if need be — and replaced by the original, rightful inhabitants of Palestine.

But no. We chose instead to give Israel and its henchmen a pass on 9/11.

In an indication of how low we’ve sunk, we let them get away with it. And our apathy only emboldened them to pursue a litany of subsequent crimes — in Iraq (where millions have been killed), Afghanistan, Southern Lebanon, and now Gaza.

Those dead and dying in the Gaza Strip have already paid the price for our spinelessness. And if the global resistance doesn’t soon take this fight to the enemy, it’s only a matter of time before the next consignment of innocent children is offered up to Jewish gods on the altar of our cowardice.

How long before we seek — demand — righteous vengeance?

GAZA’S BLOOD IS ON OUR HANDS (for ignoring the truth of 9/11)