US investigators say American companies paid money to the suspects behind the Israeli-masterminded assassination of a senior Hamas official.
American cyberspace companies have been named among the firms that transferred money to the alleged hitmen behind the targeted killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh -- the co-founder of the Hamas resistance movement's armed wing, known as the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades - on January 20 The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday.
CCTV camera footage, caught in a Dubai hotel, where the operation took place, has led the emirate's police to put the names of more than two dozen suspects on the international wanted list.
The Dubai police have identified 13 US-issued debit-card accounts used by the suspects into which money was deposited.
Police say evidence confirms the involvement of the Israeli spy agency, Mossad, in the operation.
Earlier in the year, The Sunday Times reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "gave his authorization" for the assassination.
The discovery that the death squad used British, Irish, French, German and Australian passports caused a political predicament for Tel Aviv which ended in the expulsion of its diplomats by Dublin and Canberra.
Poland recently denied Israel's request to extradite an Israeli man, named Uri Brodsky, who has been accused of providing the assassins with the only German passport used in the murder.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=136922§ionid=351020202
Saturday 31 July 2010
Mossad assassins paid by US firms
International Big Jewry — Humanity’s Real Enemy
“I fear the Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America. And use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos that the earth should become their inheritance.” — Bismarck (attributed)
HAVEN’T YOU EVER asked yourself this when watching TV: ”Has this country gone totally insane?” At some point you have to wonder if there really is a “Secret Cabal” of people pulling our strings. You know, all that “Protocols of Zion” stuff. And sure, you heard that the “Protocols” was nothing but a hoax or forgery, or whatever the Jews now try to tell you. For a long time they called it a “forgery” — but what of?
Have you read the Protocols? It’s incredible the degree of explanation and revelation for current and past events. And hell, I don’t care who you are, everybody knows something is going down, Jack. Common sense dictates that, at least. As a country, we’re obviously being marshalled along towards a future that certainly doesn’t bode well for Whites. Look around, read between the lines a little and you’ll see evidence all the time.
But let’s put away all the conspiracy business for the moment and look at a few indisputable facts. The biggest thing is how our money comes into existence; everyone knows “it doesn’t grow on trees,” right? People tell that to their kids all the time so they don’t become spendthrifts at the mall — meaning they need to learn that all us everyday chumps have to make money through hard work, education, etc., etc.
So, where does money really come from then?
Imagine for one minute if your own family was part of a small group of people having the monopoly rights on the printing of paper money everyone used? You would be fabulously wealthy (you can go over to the left and read from some of the links under “Follow the Money” topics). Factually, the “Federal Reserve” is NOT Federal, nor is it a “Reserve.” It’s owned by private banks, which in turn are owned by private parties and charge interest back to the government (supposedly us).
Technically, every single American with a social security number is on the hook for an immense bill. And that bill has now passed 13 trillion dollars. That’s something like $120,000 dollars for every taxpayer out there – so far!
All this is well known (but usually unmentioned by the media, or couched in abstract language). Make clear note that in one hundred years of existence, the Federal Reserve has never been audited and pays nothing in taxes on the billions of dollars they take in from us. Doesn’t this make you angry?
So why does the mainstream media never report on the Federal Reserve to any extent? It would seem that the so-called History Channel would do a piece on the subject, say a “Modern Marvels” show on the origins of the Federal Reserve. It’s simple, really: They know not to dwelve too deeply into the subject without having to answer to higher management. Much higher management.
The real owners of the Federal Reserve have been called the “Money Trust.” It is without a doubt the world’s largest criminal organization. Look into the huge scams they foist on nations and you’ll see (why rob a bank when you can own them and rip off millions?). It’s a matter of scale. They pretty much own our asses and most people don’t have a clue (or more likely, don’t want to). It all doesn’t have to be this way.
International Big Jewry — the world’s real backroom evil. More
Friday 30 July 2010
Racist Anti-Semitc ADL ‘joins bigots’ in opposing Ground Zero mosque
The Anti-Defamation League describes itself as "fighting anti-Semitism, bigotry and extremism," but critics of the Jewish group's latest move say it has joined the ranks of some of the US's most bigoted organizations in its call to oppose the "Ground Zero mosque," a Muslim community center being built several blocks from the site of the World Trade Center.
In a statement released earlier this week, the ADL said:
The controversy which has emerged regarding the building of an Islamic Center at this location is counterproductive to the healing process. Therefore, under these unique circumstances, we believe the City of New York would be better served if an alternative location could be found.
Proponents of the Islamic Center may have every right to build at this site, and may even have chosen the site to send a positive message about Islam. The bigotry some have expressed in attacking them is unfair, and wrong. But ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right. In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain – unnecessarily – and that is not right.
M.J. Rosenberg at TalkingPointsMemo points out that the ADL has now sided with such groups as the white supremacist Storm Front in opposing the mosque. "The ADL has joined some of the worst bigots in America" in opposing the mosque, Rosenberg writes.
The Washington Post's Greg Sargent describes the ADL's move as "just amazing. This is basically a concession that some of the opposition to the mosque is grounded in bigotry, and that those arguing that the mosque builders harbor ill intent are misguided. Yet ADL is opposing the construction of the mosque anyway, on the grounds that it will cause 9/11 victims unnecessary 'pain.'"
Sargent concludes: "On this one, you're either with the bigots or you're against them. And ADL has in effect sided with them."
Writing at AlterNet, Joshua Holland argues that the ADL's seemingly mixed message is a sign the group is on a "journey to irrelevance."
Founded in 1913 by the B'nai Brith, the ADL was created in response to the conviction of Jewish businessman Leo Frank, who was found guilty in the murder of a 13-year-old girl in a case many said was a racially-motivated miscarriage of justice. Frank was kidnapped from prison and lynched by a mob in 1915.
The group today describes itself as "the nation's premier civil rights/human relations agency." The group "fights anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry, defends democratic ideals and protects civil rights for all."
In the wake of the controversy surrounding the Muslim center in lower Manhattan, there has been a growing tide of opposition among some groups to the construction of mosques across the United States. In one case, residents of Mufreesboro, Tennessee, came together to oppose the construction of a mosque there.
In another incident, an anonymous protest organizer urged followers to bring dogs to a protest outside a mosque in Riverside County, California, during Friday prayers because Muslims "hate dogs."
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0730/adl-joins-bigots-opposing-gmosque/
| Islamophobia growing in America
Even as plans to build a mosque and Ground Zero in New York City move forward, fear of Islam and misunderstand of its major tenets is growing in America. "Osama bin Laden became a poster boy for all Muslims. There are billions of Muslims in the world, this one guy symbolizes all Muslims for most Americans because Americans are so politically uneducated. Our TV doesn’t report it, our schools don’t teach about it,” said filmmaker Danny Schechter. A recent estimate from the Council of American-Islamic Relations says there are seven million Muslims currently living in the US. There are no exact numbers available, however, since the US Census Bureau does not collect data on religious identification, and in some ways, the lack of accurate information is contributing to the spread of Islamophobia. “Racism is alive, well and kicking, with its main focus now on Muslims. 9/11 was largely about demonizing Muslims, and the recurring images that we get every couple of months are of a new car bomber, or underwear bomber, or shoe bomber. The impression is that Muslims are crazy,” said journalist Jerry Mazza. More than half of American Muslims reportedly believe that the US government’s anti-terrorism policies have been singling them out. “When you go to work, look for a job, they check your name, your name is Mohammed, they would rather skip you and hire the next person. In an airport and all that, you get double checked because of the name and all that,” said Mohammed Nekrouf, 25. A wave of protests has taken place in New York because the Muslim community wants two of their religious holidays to be days off in public schools. “It’s only two days. If Christmas holidays get a 10 day break, why can we not have two days,” asked teacher Batina Abdul-Mumia “I want the school system, Michael Bloomberg, to close the schools on Eid Al-Fahr and Eid Al-Fatr. They have the abilities, they have the power, they can do it, if they wish to. The Muslim kids are as much a part of this community as everyone else,” said Bahr Mustafa of the Muslim Holiday Coalition. http://rt.com/Top_News/2010-07-28/islamophobia-growing-america.html# |
pissrael says Iran sanctions not enough
Repeating its accusations against Tehran's nuclear program, Israel says sanctions cannot stop a determined Iran from pursuing its nuclear goals.
"They're determined to get nuclear military capability. We see it," Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program on Friday, AFP reported. "I don't believe that sanctions will work," he told the US-based cable news channel.
Barak said Israel agreed in essence with the sanctions and that Tel Aviv still believed it was time for sanctions to see whether they worked, but said the measure was not enough. "We have to realize, we cannot wink in front of tough realities, however tough they might be."
The UN Security Council approved a fourth set of sanctions on Iran in June -- a slap in the face of the Islamic republic's confidence building efforts and a tripartite nuclear swap declaration it signed with Brazil and Turkey in May.
Israel played an active role in helping the United States to persuade the Security Council's veto-holding members to endorse the US-drafted sanction resolution against Iran.
Barak renewed Tel Aviv's call for a military action against Tehran.
"We say all the way there should be extremely effective sanctions. If they don't work, we recommended our friends always not to remove any option from the table. We do the same for ourselves," Barak stressed.
Remarks by Israeli leaders against Iran's nuclear program come while Tel Aviv is known to possess the Middle East's sole nuclear arsenal -- estimated to include 300-400 nuclear warheads.
Tel Aviv has maintained a policy of ambiguity on its nuclear stockpile with the assistance of the US.
Iran has repeatedly assured it is committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which it is a signatory, arguing that as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency it has the right to civilian nuclear technology.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=136807§ionid=351020104
House Republicans Giving Green Light for Israeli Strike on Iran
Nearly one third of the Republican congressmen in the U.S. House of Representatives have introduced a resolution that would support Israel's right to use “all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran”, including military force.
The resolution was introduced by Rep. Louie Gohmert [R-Texas] and 46 co-sponsors.
House Resolution 1553 “condemns the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its threats of ‘annihilating’ the United States and the State of Israel, for its continued support of international terrorism, and for its incitement of genocide of the Israeli people.”
It “supports using all means of persuading the Government of Iran to stop building and acquiring nuclear weapons” and pledges that the U.S. will ensure that Israel “continues to receive critical economic and military assistance, including missile defense capabilities, needed to address the threat of Iran.”
In addition, it “expresses support for Israel’s right to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by Iran, defend Israeli sovereignty, and protect the lives and safety of the Israeli people, including the use of military force if no other peaceful solution can be found within a reasonable time.”
Iran lobby alarmed
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC), a pro-Iranian lobby group, is up in arms over the proposed resolution.
“Obviously we are reaching silly season in Washington with the elections in November,” NIAC's founder-president Trita Parsi told RN, a news venue that focuses on Russian issues. He added that “there have already been some signs that Israel is going to be a major element that some Republicans will use to get both voters as well as finance, donations to campaigns, away from the Democrats.”
However, Parsi said, “even silly season has real repercussions on the real world.” The resolution would send “a dangerous signal” to Israel, that some in congress would welcome military action by it against Iran, while the White House and U.S. military oppose such a strike, he argued.
NIAC's website warned that the “game plan” behind HR 1553 was spelled out earlier this month by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton in the Wall Street Journal, when he wrote: “Having visible congressional support in place at the outset [of an attack] will reassure the Israeli government, which is legitimately concerned about Mr. Obama's likely negative reaction to such an attack.”
“The Obama Administration quietly resisted Congressional efforts to pass unilateral economic sanctions for over a year, before ultimately giving in to Congressional pressure,” NIAC wrote. “Now that 'crippling' sanctions have been put in place, the far-right wing and Iran-hawks have begun openly advocating for what has always been their ultimate objective: war with Iran.”
NIAC warned that an attack on Iran would ignite a regional war that would put the lives of “innocent Americans, Iranians, and Israelis” in harm's way, as well as risking the pro-democracy movement in Iran, U.S. national security and the stability of Iraq and Afghanistan and the global economy, which relies on oil from the Persian Gulf.
NIAC denies allegations that it is used as a tool by the Iranian regime, citing its condemnations of human rights abuses in Iran.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/138835
Thursday 29 July 2010
Occupied America
"If we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day. If we don't kill we will cease to exist." -Israeli Prof. Arnon Sofer of Haifa University, Jerusalem Post
Part II - MISGEROT!
In part one of this "Occupied America" series, we discussed the network of Sayanim; - tens of thousands of Jews throughout the world who assist Israel's Mossad in gathering intelligence. We saw how most gentiles view this activity as a sign of "dual loyalty", in that Jews will have a loyalty to their native countries and to Israel, and that the loyalty to Israel is what prompts them to serve as Sayanim.
However, if you think about it, "dual loyalties" would create considerable risk for Mossad. It would be impossible for them to know in advance the strength of the "non-Israel" loyalty, and whether it might be strong enough to cause Jews they approach to turn agents in. (All of this activity is a serious felony in virtually all countries in which it takes place). However, Victor Ostrovsky, author of "By Way of Deception" quite candidly states that the existence of millions of Jews outside the borders of Israel gives Mossad a "non-risk recruitment tool:"
"One thing you know for sure is that even if a Jewish person knows it is the Mossad, he might not agree to work with you - but he won't turn you in. You have at your disposal a non-risk recruitment system that actually gives you a pool of millions of Jewish people to tap from outside your own borders."
Now for this system to be "non-risk" these millions of Jews around the world must have only a single loyalty - loyalty to Jews and their interests. In the words of Ostrovsky:
"There was one simple question asked when anything happened: "Is it good for the Jews or not?" Forget about policies, or anything else. That was the only thing that counted ... "
As an example of how this unitary or "single loyalty" works, we then examined the case of Robert Oppenheimer, director of the Manhattan Project, and father of the American atomic bomb, who passed atomic secrets to Russia. Finally, the prior post listed all of those eligible to be Sayanim in cabinet level positions in our government, and at the very top of all of our major mass media, thus setting forth a prima facie case that America is, in fact, occupied by an alien power.
The means, motive and opportunity clearly exist, as does the corpus delicti of a decaying and rudderless America..
In this installment, we are going to examine the heavily armed Jewish groups established and run by retired Mossad officers throughout the world, as a means of examining the question whether this is "Occupied America."
From "By Way of Deception" (St. Martins, 1990) Page 291:
"Arbel's department was responsible for setting up Jewish defense groups, called "frames," or misgerot, all over the world, now including some parts of the United States, where 'anti-semitism' is regarded as a threat.
Often people with particular skills, such as doctors, are on reserve and called in for short periods to help with these frames.
Normally, heads of the stations for the frames in the various countries are retired Mossad workers. The job is widely regarded as a sort of bonus for faithful service, a tshupar, the idea being that they've got all this expertise, why not use it?
"The main job is to help the leaders of Jewish communities outside Israel plan for their own security. Part of this is done through the hets w-keshet, or "bow and arrow," Israel's paramilitary youth brigades. While all Israeli youths, boys and girls, belong to this "eduday noar ivry", or "battalion of Hebrew youth," often youths from other countries are brought over to spend the summer learning about security, picking up such skills as completing obstacle courses, pitching tents, and learning how to use a sniper rifle and Uzi assault rifle. Still others learn upgraded security skills, such as how to build a slick, for hiding weapons or documents, when and how to do security checks, as well as the fundamentals of investigation and intelligence gathering. "
"Any use of the frames other than for self-protection has never been approved by any government official, although Mossad officials all know of such use. Thus, Yitzhak Shamir knew, but Peres, never a Mossad man, would not have known, even though he was prime minister. Israel does not sell the weapons directly to these foreign frames, but it does provide arms indirectly in a roundabout arrangement with known arms dealers."
"The Mossad does not see these frames as information gatherers, although the station heads know from experience that the shortest route to getting praise is by supplying useful information. Many of the youths trained at the summer camps in Israel later become Sayanim, and it certainly provides a strong group of willing helpers, well trained, undaunted by the lingo, who have already shown the ability to take chances...."
Page 140:
"We were now also learning about Tsafririm and the "frames" set up as a defense mechanism by Jews around the world. In this area we had a problem, or at least some of us did. I just couldn't agree with this concept of having guard groups everywhere. I thought frames in England, for example, where kids learn how to build slicks for their weapons to protect their synagogues, were more dangerous than beneficial to the Jewish community. I brought up the argument that even if a group of people had been oppressed, with attempts made to exterminate them - as with the Jews - they had no right to act obstructively in democratic countries. I could understand this happening in Chile or Argentina, or any other country where people disappear off the streets, but not in England or France or Belgium."
"The fact that there are antisemitic groups, whether real or imaginary, is definitely not an excuse, because if you look into Israel's own backyard, you'll see anti-Palestinian groups. Did this mean we thought the Palestinians therefore had the right to store weapons and organize vigilante groups? Or would we call them terrorists?"
Let's summarize:
- Israel maintains armed groups within our borders.
- These groups are run by agents of a foreign power. (retired Mossad officers).
- Jewish youths from all over the world are flown to Israel to learn how to use machine guns and sniper rifles.
- Once in Israel, these youths receive this training as part of the "battalions of Hebrew youth," Israel's version of the Hitler Yungend.
- Israel smuggles full-automatic weapons to these groups through arms dealers.
- Retired Mossad agents supervise this activity and keep them out of trouble.
Three conditions must obtain before we can conclude that a country is "occupied" by a foreign
power. These three conditions or symptoms of occupation must be clear.
- First, the occupier must hold commanding positions in the government and in the media.
- Second, the occupied police forces follow the agenda of the occupiers and ignore the illegal acts of
- occupation.
- Third, the occupier must control the electoral process and exact tribute from the occupied.
Maintaining armed cells throughout the Western world under the direction of foreign agents is
profoundly illegal. Our FBI certainly knows about these Misgerot or "frames" but they do nothing about them.
No informants, no infiltrators, no arrests, no armed confrontations - nothing!
Nothing, that is, except deafening silence.
It is obviously not an enforcement priority.
Only the spy Pollard was apprehended and then only because Pollard was completely out of control. His copying of classified documents was so prodigious as to become an embarrassment to his Israeli handlers. His discovery, as well as the revelations of Ostrovsky, had absolutely zero effect on our FBI.
The only reasonable inferences to be drawn from these facts are:
- That the FBI already knew who it works for;
- That only a small number of people who read books would find out about these disclosures; and
- That the people the FBI work for would remain in power, and that no change in enforcement policy is necessary.
|
FBI knew Israeli Mossad were involved in 911
"Investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying ... is considered career suicide." 911: Israeli Mossad Agents Used Stolen Arab Identities  The FBI acknowledged the terrorists involved in the 911 attacks were using false identities. |
It is ironic. The Soviet Union used the Communist party to spy in America back in the 1940's and 1950's. But they never dared flout U.S. law by arming the communist cells they controlled.
Israel's activity is so absolutely and shockingly brazen that it leaves one breathless. The lack of response from our own law enforcement agencies is stunning silent testimony to the reason why Israel and its U.S. loyalists can openly ignore our laws.
Indeed, it is similar in many ways to the scene at Florence and Normandy during the Los Angeles riots. As Reginald Denny was having his brains beat out, a dozen armed police in three cars slowly and quietly backed away from the intersection. It was all captured on camera. The message was clear. You white citizens are on your own! Do not expect us to protect you, even when we have the clear and overwhelming power to do so.
Message understood, boys! What we get instead is Feinstein in the Senate and Schumer in the House ranting about how "uncomfortable" they feel living in a country in which people have guns, and trying to convince the middle class to be uncomfortable also. Their discomfort with people owning guns is clearly selective. No mention of the Misgerot, with their full-automatic (and clearly illegal) Uzi's. Jews owning guns is comforting - gentiles owning guns is not!
Our FBI follows the Schumer - Feinstein agenda by assigning thousands of agents to monitor anti government types. They send out hundreds of informants and provocateurs hoping to talk unsophisticated whites into selling guns or exploding bombs on their own property. Not surprisingly, they are occasionally successful. They have enough success that the press is supplied with lurid stories about militias and bombs so that middle class Euro-America will think that the anti-government opposition is physically dangerous and threatening to them.
 'It is rather strange that the US media seems to be ignoring what may well be the most explosive story since the 11 September attacks — the alleged break-up of a major Israeli espionage operation in the USA.The FBI was quick to dismiss a 4 March report by Intelligence Online . . . but has agreed that an undisclosed number of Israeli students have been expelled for “immigration violations”. If the reports from Paris are correct, it would be the largest known Israeli espionage operation in the USA, Israel’s closest ally and one on which it depends for its survival. Jane's Polls show Americans well-informed on those responsible for 9/11
|
It is a happy marriage of law-enforcement with news management. They are new at this game, so occasionally they will make public relations mistakes, as with the Waco assault and the killing of Vickie Weaver. But supervisors are reprimanded and reassigned until more media savvy types can be found to replace them.
The fact that our FBI has never busted a Sayan or a Misgerot gives you a pretty clear idea of who they work for. It is a necessary pre-condition of "occupied" status.
But apparently their masters are not happy with mere obedience and loyal service. They demand degradation and humiliation as well.
Several years ago, our FBI was assigned the task of monitoring and analyzing "hate crimes." In an article published by USA Today on Feb. 4, 1996 the FBI announced its statistics.
There were 7947 hate crimes.
- 41% of the hate crimes were "intimidation".
- Another 23% were vandalism or spray painting.
Intimidation? Our FBI has been assigned the task of monitoring name-calling. Shouting an epithet at someone from across the street has become a "hate crime" in these United States of the Offended. And of course the graffiti that graces much of our urban landscape in these United States of the Offended has also become a "hate crime" if it contains politically incorrect thoughts or lands on a synagogue.
Our FBI has been reduced to Kindergarten hall monitors ever on the alert for politically incorrect insults. There are 5 million assaults (unlawful beatings) committed each year in the United States. Blacks commit 7.2 times more interracial assaults than whites. When you correct for the fact that blacks comprise 12% of the population, it is 50 times more likely that a black will assault a white than it is for a white to assault a black. So apparently, assigning the FBI the job of monitoring and gathering statistics on name calling and politically incorrect midnight artistry provides the media with the basic feedstock required to convince the soccer moms that it is the poor whites with anti-government views who are the dangerous criminals. At the same time, of course, the Bureau of Justice Statistics has decided to stop gathering data on the race of crime perpetrators and victims. Too much grist for the Internet!An occupying power will seek to degrade those who obey its command. Like mandatory "sensitivity training," making the FBI cross dress as Ms. Manners is an important psychological tool and an important emblem of power. It is a way of letting every agent know unmistakably who is in charge. And so, perhaps, the FBI must accept its Ms. Manners - hall monitor role at the same time it serves up press conferences about statistically rare violations by rural militias.
Never a nod to policing Israel's spying Sayanim or busting its illegally armed Misgerot. And of course, stopping the vast wave of real crime that engulfs our cities and makes them unsafe for the Soccer Moms to enter at night simply is not part of the agenda at all. No matter how humbly the boys in the FBI shuffle, it will never be enough. Having fun in Occupied America?
Benjamin Netanyahu in the CIA in charge of 'War on Terror' Planning
Sayanim — Israeli Operatives in the U.S
A refresher: Occupied USA
Americans know that something fundamental is amiss. They sense—rightly—that they are being misled no matter which political party does the leading.
A long misinformed public lacks the tools to grasp how they are being deceived. Without those tools, Americans will continue to be frustrated at being played for the fool.
When the “con” is clearly seen, “the mark” (that’s us) will see that all roads lead to the same duplicitous source: Israel and its operatives. The secret to Israel’s force-multiplier in the U.S. is its use of agents, assets and sayanim (Hebrew for volunteers).
When Israeli-American Jonathan Pollard was arrested for spying in 1986, Tel Aviv assured us that he was not an Israeli agent but part of a “rogue” operation. That was a lie.
Only 12 years later did Tel Aviv concede that he was an Israeli spy the entire time he was stealing U.S. military secrets. That espionage—by a purported ally—damaged our national security more than any operation in U.S. history.
In short, Israel played us for the fool.
From 1981-1985, this U.S. Navy intelligence analyst provided Israel with 360 cubic feet of classified military documents on Soviet arms shipments, Pakistani nuclear weapons, Libyan air defense systems and other intelligence sought by Tel Aviv to advance its geopolitical agenda.
Agents differ from assets and sayanim. Agents possess the requisite mental state to be convicted of treason, a capital crime. Under U.S. law, that internal state is what distinguishes premeditated murder from a lesser crime such as involuntary manslaughter. Though there’s a death in either case, the legal liabilities are different—for a reason.
Intent is the factor that determines personal culpability. That distinction traces its roots to a widely shared belief in free will as a key component that distinguishes humans from animals.
Agents operate with premeditation and “extreme malice” or what the law describes as an “evil mind.” Though that describes the mental state of Jonathan Pollard, Israeli leaders assured us otherwise—another example of an evil mind as the U.S. was played for the fool.
Played for the Fool, Again
Pollard took from his office more than one million documents for copying by his Israeli handler. When those classified materials were transferred to the Soviets, reportedly in exchange for the emigration of Russian Jews, this spy operation shifted the entire dynamics of the Cold War.
To put a price tag on this espionage, imagine $20 trillion in U.S. Cold War defense outlays from 1948-1989 (in 2010 dollars). The bulk of that investment in national security was negated by a spy working for a nation that pretended throughout to be a U.S. ally.
Pollard was sentenced to life in prison. Israel suffered no consequences. None. Zero. Nada. Not then. Not now. Then as now, we were played for the fool.
At trial, Pollard claimed he wasn’t stealing from the U.S.; he was stealing secrets for Israel—with whom the U.S. has long had a “special relationship.” He thought we should have shared our military secrets with them. That’s chutzpah. That also confirms we were played for the fool.
Looking back, it’s easy to see how seamlessly we segued from a global Cold War to a global War on Terrorism. In retrospect, the false intelligence used to induce our invasion of Iraq was traceable to Israelis, pro-Israelis or Israeli assets such as John McCain (see below).
Even while in prison, Pollard’s iconic status among Israelis played a strategic role. Was it just coincidence that Tel Aviv announced a $1 million grant to their master spy less than two weeks before 911? Is that how Israel signaled its operatives in the U.S.?
Did that grant have any relationship to the “dancing Israelis” who were found filming and celebrating that mass murder as both jets smashed into the World Trade Center?
Absent that provocation, would we now find ourselves at war in the Middle East? Surely no one still believes that America’s interests are being advanced in a quagmire that has now become the longest war in U.S. history.
“I know what America is,” Benjamin Netanyahu told a group of Israelis in 2001, apparently not knowing his words were being recorded. “America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction.”
Let’s face it: the U.S. was again played for the fool.
With oversight by Israeli case officers (katsas), Israeli operations proceed in the U.S. by using agents, assets and volunteers (sayanim). Let’s take a closer look at each.
The Sayanim System
Sayanim (singular sayan) are shielded from conventional legal culpability by being told only enough to perform their narrow role. Though their help may be essential to the success of an Israeli operation, these volunteers (sayanim also means helpers) could pass a polygraph test because their recruiters ensure they remain ignorant of the overall goals of an operation.
In other words, a sayan can operate as an accomplice but still not be legally liable due to a lack of the requisite intent regarding the broader goals—of which they are purposely kept ignorant. Does that intentional “ignorance” absolve them of liability under U.S. law? So far, yes.
Much like military reservists, sayanim are activated when needed to support an operation. By agreeing to be available to help Israel, they provide an on-call undercover corps and force-multiplier that can be deployed on short notice.
How are sayanim called to action? To date, there’s been no attempt by U.S. officials to clarify that key point. This may explain why Pollard was again in the news on July 13th with a high-profile Israeli commemoration of his 9000th day of incarceration.
To show solidarity with this Israeli-American traitor, the lights encircling Jerusalem were darkened while an appeal was projected onto the walls of the Old City urging that President Obama order Pollard’s release from federal prison.
Pollard has long been a rallying point for Jewish nationalists, Zionist extremists and ultra-orthodox ideologues. In short, just the sort of people who would be likely recruits as sayanim. The news coverage given this Day of Adoration may help explain how Israel signals its helpers that an operation is underway and in need of their help.
Are pro-Israelis once again playing Americans for the fool?
When not aiding an ongoing operation, sayanim gather and report intelligence useful to Israel. This volunteer corps is deeply imbedded in legislative bodies, particularly in the U.S.
Thus far, this Israeli operation has advanced with legal impunity as the Israel lobby—though acting as a foreign agent—continues even now to pose as a “domestic” operation.
Morris Amitay, former executive director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, explains how this invisible cadre aids the Israel lobby in advancing its geopolitical agenda:
“There are a lot of guys at the working level up here [on Capitol Hill]…who happen to be Jewish, who are willing…to look at certain issues in terms of their Jewishness…These are all guys who are in a position to make the decision in these areas for those senators…You can get an awful lot done just at the staff level.”
What sayanim are not told by their katsas is that an Israeli operation may endanger not only Israel but also the broader Jewish community when these operations are linked to extremism, terrorism, organized crime, espionage and treason. Though sayanim “must be 100 percent Jewish,” Ostrovsky reports in By Way of Deception (1990):
“…the Mossad does not seem to care how devastating it could be to the status of the Jewish people in the Diaspora if it was known. The answer you get if you ask is: “So what’s the worst that could happen to those Jews? They’d all come to Israel. Great!” [Mossad is the intelligence and foreign operations directorate for Israel.]
Assets, Agents and Sayanim
Assets are people profiled in sufficient depth that they can be relied upon to perform consistent with their profile. Such people typically lack the state of mind required for criminal culpability because they lack the requisite intent to commit a crime.
Nevertheless, assets are critical to the success of Israeli operations in the U.S. They help simply by pursuing their profiled personal needs—typically for recognition, influence, money, sex, drugs or the greatest drug of all: ideology.
Thus the mission-critical task fulfilled by political assets that the Israel lobby “produces” for long-term service in the Congress—while appearing to represent their U.S. constituents.
Put a profiled asset in a pre-staged time, place and circumstance—over which the Israel lobby can exert considerable influence—and Israeli psy-ops specialists can be confident that, within an acceptable range of probabilities, an asset will act consistent with his or her profile.
Democrat or Republican is irrelevant; the strategic point remains the same: to ensure that lawmakers perform consistent with Israel’s interests. With the help of McCain-Feingold campaign finance “reform,” the Israel lobby attained virtual control over the U.S. Congress.
The performance of assets in the political sphere can be anticipated with sufficient confidence that outcomes become foreseeable—within an acceptable range of probabilities. How difficult was it to predict the outcome when Bill Clinton, a classic asset, encountered White House intern Monica Lewinsky?
Senator John McCain has long been a predictable asset. His political career traces its origins to organized crime from the 1920s. It was organized crime that first drew him to Arizona to run for Congress four years before the 1986 retirement of Senator Barry Goldwater.
By marketing his “brand” as a Vietnam-era prisoner of war, he became a reliable spokesman for Tel Aviv while being portrayed as a “war hero.” No media outlet dares mention that Colonel Ted Guy, McCain’s commanding officer while a POW, sought his indictment for treason for his many broadcasts for the North Vietnamese that assured the death of many U.S. airmen.
As a typical asset, it came as no surprise to see McCain and Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, a self-professed Zionist, used to market the phony intelligence that took us to war in Iraq. McCain’s ongoing alliance with transnational organized crime spans three decades.
His 1980’s advocacy for S&L crook Charles Keating of “The Keating 5” finds a counterpart in his recent meetings with Russian-Israeli mobster Oleg Deripaska who at age 40 held $40 billion in wealth defrauded from his fellow Russians.
McCain conceded earlier this month in a town hall meeting in Tempe, Arizona that he met in a small dinner in Switzerland with mega-thief Deripaska and Lord Rothschild V.
For assets such as McCain to be indicted for treason, the American public must grasp the critical role that such pliable personalities play in political manipulations. McCain is a “poster boy” for how assets are deployed to shape decisions such as those that took our military to war. In the Information Age, if that’s not treason, what is?
The predictability of a politician’s conduct confirms his or her qualifications as an asset. They are routinely developed and “produced” over lengthy periods of time and then—as with John McCain—maintained in key positions to influence decision-making at key junctures.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was candid in his assessment four weeks after 911. He may have been thinking about John McCain when he made this revealing comment:
“I want to tell you something very clear, don’t worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it.” [October 3, 2001]
Indictments for Treason
Are assets culpable? Do they have the requisite intent to indict them for treason? Does John McCain possess an evil mind? Did he betray this nation of his own free will or is he typical of those assets with personalities so weak and malleable that they can easily be manipulated?
As federal grand juries are impaneled to identify and indict participants in this trans-generational operation, how many sayanim should the Federal Bureau of Investigation expect to uncover in the U.S.? No one knows because this subtle form of treason is not yet well understood.
Victor Ostrovksy, a former Mossad katsa (case officer) wrote in 1990 that the Mossad had 7,000 sayanim in London alone. In London’s 1990 population of 6.8 million, Israel’s all-volunteer corps represented one-tenth of one percent of the residents of that capital city.
If Washington, DC is ten times more critical to Israel’s geopolitical goals (an understatement), does that mean the FBI should expect to find ten times more sayanim per capita in Washington?
What about sayanim in Manhattan, Miami, Beverly Hills, Atlanta, Boston, Charleston, Charlotte, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Kansas City, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland, Sacramento, San Diego, Seattle, St. Louis, Tampa, Toledo?
No one knows. And Tel Aviv is unlikely to volunteer the information. This we know for certain: America has been played for the fool. And so has our military.
This duplicity dates back well before British Foreign Secretary Alfred Balfour wrote to an earlier Lord Rothschild in 1917 citing UK approval for a “Jewish homeland.” In practical effect, that “homeland” now ensures non-extradition for senior operatives in transnational organized crime.
To date, America has blinded itself even to the possibility of such a trans-generational operation inside our bordersand imbedded inside our government. Instead the toxic charge of “anti-Semitism” is routinely hurled at those chronicling the “how” component of this systemic treason.
Making this treason transparent is essential to restore U.S. national security. That transparency may initially appear unfair to the many moderate and secular Jews who join others appalled at this systemic corruption of the U.S. political system.
Yet they are also concerned that somehow they may be portrayed as guilty by association due to a shared faith tradition. That would be not only unjust to them but also ineffective in identifying and indicting those complicit.
This much is certain: a Democrat as president offers no real alternative to a Republican on those issues affecting U.S. policy in the Middle East.
Today’s corruption predates the duplicity in 1948 that induced Harry Truman to extend recognition to this extremist enclave as a legitimate nation state. Our troubles date from then.
That fateful decision must be revisited in light of what can now be proven about the “how” of this ongoing duplicity—unless Americans want to continue to be played for the fool.
http://criminalstate.com/2010/07/sayanim-%E2%80%94-israeli-operatives-in-the-u-s/
ADL: 80 MILLION AMERICANS "ANTI-SEMITIC"
Parasites everywhere never happy with the hosts...
By Rev. Ted Pike
ADL director Abe Foxman says that 45 years ago one third of Americans were “seriously infected” with anti-Semitism. Now, he says, 12 to 14 percent are in that category. This, he contends, amounts to 40 million Americans.
However, there are another 40 million who are “mildly” infected. They believe, he says, that Jews are “too powerful in finance,” “control the government,” and “control Hollywood.” Such “mild” anti-Semitism, Foxman claims, includes the belief that “the Jews killed Christ.”
(Watch the video of racist , anti-Semitic parasite Foxman from ADL.org)
Who most conspicuously asserts that Jews killed Christ? Answer: at least 150 million Bible-believing Catholic, Orthodox, and evangelical Christians.
Who most conspicuously asserts that Jews control Hollywood and the US government? Answer: for the moment, veteran Hollywood insider and movie producer Oliver Stone. When asked by Britain's Sunday Times why so much emphasis has been placed on the Holocaust, Stone replied, “The Jewish domination of the media. There’s a major lobby in the United States. They are hard workers. They stay on top of every comment, the most powerful lobby in Washington. Israel has f****d up United States foreign policy for years.”
Here we see ADL making tens of millions of Americans anti-Semitic for simply accepting what Jews tell us about themselves. Many Jewish film historians and reference sources now document how Jews founded the Hollywood movie and Big Three TV industries. Neal Gabler in his classic An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood exhaustively chronicles such control. So does the prestigious Encyclopedia Judaica: “Thus, all the large Hollywood companies, with the exception of United Artists, were founded and controlled by Jews.” ("Motion Pictures," p. 449) The Judaica has separate articles detailing how David Sarnoff, William S. Paley, and Leonard Goldenson founded and controlled NBC, CBS, and ABC.
ADL’s main quarrel is not with anti-Semitism. It’s with reality. It’s with the fact that many people believe what the Jews say and repeat it on the internet, especially the Jewish accomplishment of attaining staggering control in media, government and finance. Such repetition of what Jews have told us, especially if spoken in a critical way, now becomes for ADL “virulent anti-Semitism.”
In ADL’s perfect world, Jews should be able to boast of their incredible emergence from persecution to dominance of the most influential sectors of society, and receive Gentile praise for that, without enduring suspicion or criticism.
To the delight of ADL, such utopia is now realized from tens of millions of evangelicals. Yet ADL, in its Department of Global Anti-Semitism in the US State Department, accuses evangelicals of “classic anti-Semitism” for believing the New Testament account that Jews had Christ killed. (See, Bible is Hate, Says U.S. Government). Nevertheless, "Israel-first" believers abhor any suspicion that ADL is conspiring against them. Believing that any criticism of a Jew will incur divine wrath, most evangelicals and their leaders are theologically sworn to silence against even mentioning the name “ADL” in public.
ADL Masks Its True Intention
Foxman says that ADL’s role in helping pass Georgia’s anti-masking law in the 1950s seriously crippled the KKK because they could no longer promote hatred and bigotry anonymously. But the internet today, Foxman believes, is like the hoods of KKK bigots, allowing hate to flourish anonymously. His implication? Something like the masking law should be effected to end internet freedom to hate.
The problem, however, is that, like KKK masks, which had a hateful, possibly murderous intention behind them, ADL's "noose" of the charge of anti-Semitism placed around 80 million Americans, also has malevolent intent.
ADL is architect of the federal hate crimes law. It has a sordid record of inciting persecution of Christians who criticize abortion and homosexuality in countries like Canada.
ADL’s nooses are made to be tightened.
http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/adl80millionamericansantisemitic.htm
The Last Bastion of American Morality Is Under Assault
The World's Troublemakers
ANTI-DEFAMATION OR ANTI-AMERICAN?
What's in a name
Spent the day working on a story about an Arab man, married with two children, who told a Jewish woman his name was Dudu. They ended up having consensual sex an hour later in a nearby building.
Afterwards she found out he'd lied to her. His real name was Kashur and he was an Israeli Arab, not an Israeli Jew as she'd assumed from the name Dudu. He's now been charged with rape by deception and sentenced to 18 months in prison. This, after two years of house arrest.
It's an interesting story. On the one side there are those who say it's racism and that the real issue at play is that he's a Muslim who pretended to be a Jew - the message is don't touch "our women."
But the courts and rape centers in Israel say what's more important is that he presented himself as a single man, unmarried and without children - and that this was misleading.
Some of the questions it raises: If a man says he's French and it later turns out he's Italian, can he be sued? If a man says he loves a woman and she later finds out he doesn't, can she take him to court? When exactly is the line crossed? Kashur has been under house arrest for two years. He's now been sentenced to prison for 18 months, a sentence he plans to appeal.
http://rt.com/About_Us/Blogs/newshound-s-diaries.html
Wednesday 28 July 2010
Tuesday 27 July 2010
Gaza is a prison camp, says David Cameron
Carrot and stick diplomacy
David Cameron has described Gaza as a ''prison camp'' and appealed to the Israeli Government to allow the free flow of humanitarian goods and people in and out of the Palestinian territory.
Mr Cameron's comments came during a visit to Turkey, where relations with Israel have been strained since Israeli troops stormed a flotilla of ships carrying supplies to Gaza in May, killing eight Turks and one Turkish-American.
Speaking in Ankara, the Prime Minister denounced the attack on the flotilla as ''completely unacceptable'' and restated his call for Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu to deliver a ''swift, transparent and rigorous'' inquiry.
But he also urged Turkey not to allow the incident to wreck its relationship with Israel.
Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip, which has severely limited the movement of people and goods since 2007, has sparked outrage in Turkey, which provided the organisers and the bulk of the participants for the flotilla.
Today Mr Cameron said: ''The situation in Gaza has to change. Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions.
''Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.''
And he added: ''The Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla was completely unacceptable.
''And I have told PM Netanyahu we will expect the Israeli inquiry to be swift, transparent and rigorous.''
The Prime Minister said he hoped that direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians would take place within the coming weeks and urged Turkey to press the parties to come together by ''making the case for peace''.
He said: ''Turkey's relationships in the region, both with Israel and with the Arab world, are of incalculable value.
''No other country has the same potential to build understanding between Israel and the Arab world.
''I know that Gaza has led to real strains in Turkey's relationship with Israel.
''But Turkey is a friend of Israel.
''And I urge Turkey, and Israel, not to give up on that friendship.''
At a press conference alongside Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Mr Cameron stood by his comments on Gaza, which he said were "warranted" by the situation there.
Mr Cameron added: "I speak as someone who is a friend of Israel, who desperately wants a secure and safe and stable Israel after the two-state solution has come about.
"It is very important that people remember that Israel will only agree to the final status issues if it feels that at the end of that process it will have the security that it craves.
"That is why on the issue of Gaza, while pushing for humanitarian access and the end of the blockade, we always have to remember that there have been rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel."
Mr Erdogan said Gaza resembled "a sort of open-air prison" and described the Israeli army assault on the aid flotilla as "piracy".
"The fact that this blockade has not been lifted is a tragedy," said the Turkish PM.
Addressing the raid on the flotilla, he said: "This attack in international waters can only be termed piracy. There is no other word to describe it.
"I hope we can remedy this situation and Israel turns back from this mistake. They must apologise to Turkey and compensation has to be paid and the blockade must be lifted so we can all contribute to regional peace."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/7912095/Gaza-is-a-prison-camp-says-David-Cameron.html
Israel: Global NATO’s 29th Member
Rick Rozoff
———-
Extending Article 5 protection, hitherto limited to full member states, to Israel was being advocated with the inescapable implication that a coalition of most of the world’s most powerful military nations, led by the self-designated world’s sole military superpower, would retaliate against Iran if it responded to an Israeli first strike attack. As the U.S. stations hundreds of nuclear warheads at NATO bases in Europe, including in Iran’s neighbor Turkey, invoking NATO’s war clause could provoke a nuclear conflagration.
“Washington has no plans to restrict the expansion only by admitting Israel. The alliance desires to attract India, Japan, Australia and Singapore….The continuation of NATO expansion is undoubtedly an alarming and dangerous idea that could split the world into groups of countries that oppose each other….According to the NATO Charter, an attack on a member state is considered as an aggression against all the members of the alliance [and] any conflict of Israel with its neighbours could become a source of a large-scale regional conflict that could turn into a global war.”
———-
As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is pressuring its 28 member states and dozens of partnership affiliates on five continents to contribute more troops for the war in Afghanistan, the Jerusalem Post reported on January 13 that “Israel is launching a diplomatic initiative in an effort to influence the outcome of NATO’s new Strategic Concept which is currently under review by a team of experts led by former United States Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.” [1]
NATO is crafting its updated Strategic Concept to replace that last formulated in 1999, the year of the military bloc’s expansion into Eastern Europe and its first full-fledged war, the 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.
Madeleine Albright, arguably the individual most publicly identified with orchestrating both NATO’s absorption of three former Warsaw Pact members, including her native Czech Republic, and in launching Operation Allied Force, co-chairs NATO’s Group of Experts with Jeroen van der Veer, CEO of Royal Dutch Shell until June of 2009.
In addition, “To ensure close coordination between the Group of Experts and NATO Headquarters, the Secretary General has designated a small NATO team lead by Dr. Jamie Shea, head of Policy Planning Unit, to function as a secretariat and staff support.” [2] Shea was NATO spokesman in 1999 and is now Director of Policy Planning in the Private Office of the Secretary General at NATO Headquarters.
Last October 1 NATO and Lloyd’s of London (“the world’s leading insurance market” in its own words) co-organized a conference in London to unveil and promote the new Strategic Concept. Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen of NATO and Lloyd’s chairman Lord Peter Levene delivered the major addresses.
Host Levene conjured up “a myriad of determined and deadly threats” that required NATO intervention worldwide and Rasmussen itemized no fewer than eighteen of those – none remotely resembling a military attack on or challenge to a single member state. [3]
Recently Madeleine Albright has been traveling to several European capitals to preside over a series of seminars on the updated Strategic Concept and the latest of those, in Oslo, Norway on January 13, was attended by officials from the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
In preparation for the above meeting “Several weeks ago, a former senior Israeli diplomat met privately with Albright to discuss Israeli interests in the concept that is under review.” [4]
The same source added the following background information:
“Israeli-NATO ties have increased dramatically in recent years. Chairman of the Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola visited Israel in November, and the Israeli Navy has announced plans to deploy a missile ship with Active Endeavour, a NATO mission to patrol the Mediterranean Sea….
“Israel is also seeking to receive an upgraded status following the conclusion of the Strategic Concept review that will enable Israeli officials to participate in top NATO forums….Israel is a member of the Mediterranean Dialogue, which was created in 1994 to foster ties with Middle Eastern countries like Israel, Jordan, Egypt and Morocco.” [5]
By 2000 NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue had expanded to include seven nations in the Middle East and Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia.
1994 was the same year that the North Atlantic bloc launched the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program. Both partnerships were inaugurated only three years after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the breakup of the Soviet Union left not only Eastern Europe but the Middle East, Africa and Asia open to Western military penetration and expansion.
The Partnership for Peace has included all fifteen former Soviet and all six former Yugoslav federal republics as well as all non-Soviet Warsaw Pact members. Twelve of those – Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia – became full NATO members in the decade ending last year after passing through the PfP.
In addition, the program takes in all former neutral, non-aligned states in Europe except for Cyprus: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Malta, Sweden and Switzerland. Malta withdrew from the PfP in 1996 but was reabsorbed in 2008. Pro-U.S. parties in the Cypriot parliament are waging an all-out campaign to drag their nation into the program.
Except for Malta, only recently reentering the PfP, the six nations listed above have sent troop contingents of varying sizes to Afghanistan to serve under NATO command. The only countries in all of Europe (excluding the microstates of Andorra, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino, and Vatican City), including the Caucasus, that have not offered troops for the Afghan war front to date are Russia, Belarus, Serbia, Malta, Moldova and Cyprus.
At its 2004 summit in Istanbul, Turkey the largest single expansion of NATO in its history occurred as seven states were brought in as full members, all in Eastern Europe and including the first former Soviet and former Yugoslav republics recruited as full members of the Alliance.
The Istanbul summit also lent itself to another, similarly ambitious, project: The Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI). [6] The ICI purposed to elevate the seven Mediterranean Dialogue partners to a status analogous to that of the Partnership for Peace and to consolidate military ties with the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Since Algeria joined the Mediterranean Dialogue in 2000, Montenegro became an independent state in 2006 and joined the Partnership for Peace the same year, and Malta rejoined the latter two years later, every Mediterranean littoral and island nation except – for the moment – Cyprus, Lebanon, Libya and Syria is either a NATO member or partner. The Mediterranean Dialogue also allows NATO to stretch down the Atlantic Coast of Africa to Morocco and Mauritania.
If the accession of new members and the Partnership for Peace provided NATO with outposts on Russia’s borders (Azerbaijan, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine) and on China’s (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan), the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative has allowed for the further encirclement of Iran by moving Alliance influence and military presence into the Persian Gulf.
Of the thirteen Middle Eastern and African nations targeted by it, Israel is the one that most immediately and substantively seized on the opportunity the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative offered.
The enhanced status of the Mediterranean Dialogue led within months of the Istanbul NATO summit to Israel engaging in Alliance activities for the first time.
On February 24, 2005 Jaap de Hoop Scheffer became the first NATO secretary general to visit Israel and the next month “Israel and NATO conducted their first ever joint naval exercise in the Red Sea, signalling a strengthening of relations.” An Alliance naval group visited the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat for a week-long visit, “which included a joint exercise with the Israel Navy.” [7]
As Britain’s Jane’s Defence Weekly reported, “The novelty in the exercise was the fact it was conducted with NATO ships, which operate regularly in the Mediterranean, but rarely visit the Red Sea.” [8]
In May of the same year it was announced that “Israel plans to stage three military exercises with NATO during 2005.
“Israeli officials said the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has submitted a plan to NATO that would include the staging of three exercises with Israel’s military over the next 10 months. They said the exercises would take place at NATO headquarters in Brussels….”
An Israeli official was cited as saying, “We have no doubt that Israel will gain immensely from closer ties with NATO, and we also believe that Israel has much to offer NATO in return.” [9]
In the same month a planning conference for “NATO-led military exercises in the framework of the Partnership for Peace” program was held in Macedonia and was “attended by representatives of over 20 countries, including, for the first time, two countries from the so-called Mediterranean Dialogue – Israel and Jordan.” [10]
Jane’s again: “Whereas Israel’s geopolitical location could offer an ‘external base’ for the defence of the West, NATO’s military and economic status could provide added security and economic benefits for the host state.
“In a rapidly changing strategic environment, Israeli policy makers are recognising definite advantages, especially in security affairs, in developing closer ties with NATO. The present Israeli government’s enthusiasm for this project can be seen in an ambitious set of proposals submitted to the Alliance,” which included “joint military training [and] future joint development of weapons systems.” [11]
In June “The Israeli navy participated for the first time in a NATO submarine exercise in the Gulf of Taranto off the Italian coast,” Sorbet Royal 2005. “Israel was seeking to extend its strategic alliance with NATO beyond what is offered to its Mediterranean cooperation group, even up to full membership of NATO.” [12]
According to an Israeli account before the war games began, “14 nations and about 2,000 forces are to spend the next three weeks hunting for four submarines resting on the ocean floor….” [13]
In July of 2005 Israeli ground troops participated in a NATO military exercise for the first time, a 22-nation training mission in Ukraine that lasted for two and a half weeks. “The drill dealt mainly with antiterrorism combat and low-intensity conflict, but it also symbolized an increasing participation of Israeli forces in NATO.”
Israeli Colonel Alon Friedman said on the occasion that “There have been senior commanders who have gone to NATO events as well as consultants, but never combatants like this.” The Jerusalem Post reported that “Friedman said he was not privy to the diplomatic moves to get the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] more involved in NATO, but he understood the initiative came from NATO.” [14]
By the following year the level of collaboration between the world’s sole military bloc and Israel had increased further. A column appeared at an Israeli news site on February 1 called “Is Israel headed for NATO?” authored by Uzi Arad. Arad established the Atlantic Forum of Israel in 2004 and still chairs the organization. The Atlantic Forum is the main vehicle for promoting NATO-Israel integration on the Israeli side. It’s website, currently under construction, features a Star of David side-by-side with the NATO symbol. [15]
Uzi Arad has an interesting biography, both before and after the founding of the Atlantic Forum. He was the Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from 1997-1999 “on secondment from the Mossad, in which he served for more than two decades, culminating in his tenure as Director of Research (Intelligence).” [16] He has also been Advisor to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.
Complications developed last year when was “designated to become chairman of the National Security Council under Netanyahu,” but “The press in Washington…reported that Arad had been refused permission to enter the country” [17] because of “his alleged contacts with Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin, who has been convicted of passing information to Israel.” [18] By the end of last March the Obama administration nevertheless approved his visa application for discussions in Washington on Iran.
An Israeli newspaper described his major project: “Working closely with NATO, the Atlantic Forum of Israel seeks to promote and enhance Israel’s relations and standing with the Atlantic Alliance and has played an important role in advancing this relationship.” [19]
In the aforementioned article of Arad’s in February of 2006 he wrote “For the past two years, cooperation between Israel and NATO has become closer, to a certain degree – both on a multilateral level, within the Mediterranean Dialogue, and on a bilateral level, directly with NATO.”
He added that “Last year, Israeli Ambassador [to the European Union in Brussels and envoy to NATO] Oded Eran submitted an official proposal for increasing cooperation, and since the visit of NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer to Israel last June, NATO and Israel have been negotiating over completing the multilateral cooperation plan.
“Israel consented, and announced its willingness to participate in Operation Active Endeavor, which is being conducted in the Mediterranean Sea as part of the alliance’s counter-terrorism effort. It also took part in three military exercises and hosted a conference of air force commanders from NATO and its partners.” [20]
A feature in the Wall Street Journal a few days after Arad’s article appeared, “NATO, Israel Draw Closer,” quoted Arad as asserting: “The only thing worse than Israel being a member of NATO may be Israel not being a member of NATO.” It also mentioned another prime mover in fostering the Israel-NATO nexus, one on the U.S. (and European) end. “Ronald Asmus, a senior State Department official during the Clinton administration who is credited by Mr. Arad with being an ‘intellectual godfather’ of closer NATO-Israel links, says arguments against membership remind him of the initial opposition to NATO enlargement to former Soviet bloc states or the alliance assuming its first missions beyond Europe.” [21]
The German Marshall Fund of the United States website provides this background information on Asmus:
“Dr. Asmus is currently Executive Director of the Brussels-based Transatlantic Center and responsible for Strategic Planning at the German Marshall Fund of the US.
“[He was] Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs from 1997-2000 and has been a senior analyst and fellow at Radio Free Europe, RAND and the Council on Foreign Relations. He has been a pioneering voice in the debate over post-Cold War European security and NATO’s transformation. He has published widely and is the author of Opening Nato’s Door.
“For his ideas and diplomatic accomplishments, he has been decorated by the U.S. Department of State as well as the governments of Estonia, Georgia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden.” [22]
The Washington Post published his article “Contain Iran: Admit Israel to NATO” on February 21, 2006 which contained these recommendations:
“The best way to provide Israel with that additional security is to upgrade its relationship with the collective defense arm of the West: NATO. Whether that upgraded relationship culminates in membership for Israel or simply a much closer strategic and operational defense relationship can be debated.”
“Several leading Europeans have called for NATO to embrace Israel, but this debate will not get serious until the United States, Israel’s main ally, puts its weight behind the idea. The time has come to do so.” [23]
Earlier in the month he co-authored a lengthy piece called “Does Israel Belong In the EU and NATO?” with Bruce P. Jackson. Jackson was the founder and head of the U.S. Committee on NATO/Expand NATO and the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq set up four months before the invasion of the nation and is on the Board of Directors of the Project for the New American Century. Asmus and Jackson wrote that “what some Israeli strategic thinkers are starting to discuss – and what we are addressing here – is…an upgraded strategic relationship between Israel and EuroAtlantic institutions like NATO and the EU that would lead to increasingly closer ties and could include eventual membership.” [24]
The third leg of the Israel-NATO integration stool is Ivo Daalder, until recently Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and now the new U.S. administration’s ambassador to NATO where he has a free hand to implement his projects.
In the September/October issue of Foreign Affairs, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, he and co-author James Goldgeier, Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote an article called “Global NATO” which included this excerpt:
“With little fanfare – and even less notice – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has gone global.”
What Daalder had in mind had been adumbrated two years earlier when he wrote “We need an Alliance of Democratic States. This organization would unite nations with entrenched democratic traditions, such as the United States and Canada; the European Union countries; Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia; India and Israel; Botswana and Costa Rica.” [25]
NATO will be the framework for a new U.S.-led global order with the United Nations reduced to a mere handmaiden and cleanup service.
In March of 2006 James Jones, then military chief of the Pentagon’s European Command and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe and now U.S. National Security Adviser, commented on another advance in NATO-Israeli military integration, the first deployment of NATO AWACS to Israel for a military exercise “apparently as a signal to Iran”:
“We’ve had NATO AWACS deployed to do some demonstrations in Israel, and we do have an active dialogue with the Israeli defense force in terms of interoperability, and particularly as it regards the security of the Mediterranean basin at sea.” [26]
In May eight NATO warships docked in the Israeli port city of Haifa “which the military said was an indication of strengthening ties between Israel and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation” preparatory to the Israeli Navy “tak[ing] part for the first time in a NATO naval exercise in the Black Sea in June….” [27] That month the Israeli navy missile ship Achi Eilat left Haifa with its NATO counterparts to join in Operation Mako, “a ten-country joint training exercise in the Black Sea led by NATO-Mediterranean Dialogue countries.” The war games also included ships from “Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, France, Albania, Algeria, Georgia, the United Arab Emirates and others.” The event marked “the first time that an operational unit of the IDF will fully participate with NATO in a military-like operation.” [28] (By way of follow-up, on January 11, 2010 Focus News Agency in Bulgaria revealed that the Israeli Air Force plans to use bases in that country for training exercises.)
NATO reported on the exercises, especially in reference to the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, that “over 2000 personnel and some 25 ships from NATO and Partner countries are rehearsing joint operations at sea in and around Constanta, Romania” where the U.S. and NATO have subsequently acquired a strategic military base.
“Nine NATO countries are taking part (Bulgaria, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Romania, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom), four Partner countries (Albania, Azerbaijan, Croatia and Georgia) as well as two Mediterranean Dialogue countries (Algeria and Israel).
“In addition, for the first time, the exercise is being observed by a country from NATO’s Istanbul Cooperation Initiative – the United Arab Emirates.” [29]
“The purpose of the exercise [is] to create better interoperability between the Israeli Navy and NATO naval forces. Israel was invited to participate in the exercise as a member of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue.” [30]
In the same month the Israeli Defense Ministry acknowledged that “In a move intended to further bolster ties between Israel and NATO, the IDF is putting search-and-rescue forces on standby so they can be immediately dispatched to participate in NATO global operations.”
In addition, it was announced that “Israel might also be willing to send field hospitals to NATO peacekeeping forces stationed around the world” and “The IDF has also decided to dispatch a high-ranking navy officer to Naples in the coming months, where he will participate in NATO’s…Operation Active Endeavor.” [31]
Toward the end of June a U.S. Congressional committee “unanimously approved a resolution that calls for enhancing Israel’s relationship with NATO.”
“The resolution recommends upgrading Israel’s affiliation to a ‘leading member of NATO’s Individual Cooperation Program,’ a promotion the bill says ultimately will lead to Israel’s full membership in the alliance.” [32]
The Individual Cooperation Program was a provision made available to Mediterranean Dialogue members within the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. On October 16, 2006 NATO and Israel concluded an Individual Cooperation Program agreement.
“Israel and NATO have approved a long-term plan for cooperation in 27 different areas” and “Israel is the first non-European country, and the first in the Middle East to cooperate with NATO and reach a bilateral agreement with the organization.” [33]
Indeed, it is the only country (excepting Iceland) outside of Europe that is included in the U.S. European Command’s area of responsibility. (As neighboring Egypt is the only African nation not in Africa Command.) The rest of the Middle East, like Egypt, is covered by Central Command. For NATO’s purposes Israel – like the South Caucasus states of Armenia and Georgia if not Azerbaijan – is for all intents a European nation.
As the country’s minister of foreign affairs Tzipi Livni said at the NATO’s Transformation, the Mediterranean Dialogue, and NATO-Israel Relations seminar in Herzliya on October 24, 2006, “The alliance between NATO and Israel is only natural….Israel and NATO share a common strategic vision….[T]hreats, aimed at Israel and the western-valued moderate community, position Israel more than ever before on the Euro-Atlantic side. In many ways, Israel is the front line defending our common way of life.” [34]
The two-day conference was organized by the Atlantic Forum of Israel and the NATO Public Diplomacy Division and occurred only two months after the end of Israel’s second Lebanon war, which displaced 900,000 Lebanese, a quarter of the nation’s population.
Delivering her address at the meeting, Livni acknowledged “it is…no secret that Israel preferred the involvement of the forces of NATO in Lebanon….In meeting these strategic threats, NATO is most essential.” She also said “Israel will be glad to cooperate and participate in positive NATO regional and local initiatives, among them: the Mediterranean Dialogue; the like minded global partnership; and the inclusion of Israel in the PFP (Partnership For Peace) NATO program.” [35]
NATO was represented by Deputy Secretary General Alessandro Minuto Rizzo, whose keynote address included:
“We have recently agreed [upon] an individual cooperation programme – or ICP. This programme is the first of its kind in the Mediterranean Dialogue….Just a few weeks ago, an exchange of letters between NATO and Israel set the stage for an Israeli contribution to Active Endeavour….This will be the first contribution from a Mediterranean Dialogue nation and represents another truly significant step forward for both NATO and Israel.
“The posting of an Israeli Liaison Officer to the NATO Command in Naples is a further indication of the vitality of our cooperation, as was the demonstration of a NATO AWACS plane in Israel. And, last but not least, over the course of this year, Israel has participated in two major NATO/PfP military exercises in Romania and Ukraine.” [36]
A retired Israeli intelligence officer told an American news agency that the Individual Cooperation Program with NATO “allows for 2,000 joint activities – thrice the volume open to the countries involved in the Mediterranean Dialogue.” [37]
The previously mentioned Oded Eran, Israel’s representative at NATO headquarters, alluding to the Alliance’s military assistance clause, was quoted by the same source as saying that what had been achieved was “a multilateral umbrella….We don’t necessarily need article 5. The very fact we’re members of such an organization gives…a sort of guarantee.” [38]
By the end of 2006 Israel-NATO military integration had proceeded to the stage that:
The Jewish state was granted a partnership agreement with the Western military bloc more advanced than any accorded any other nation outside of Europe.
The nation’s foreign minister publicly called for her country’s inclusion in NATO’s Partnership for Peace program, which has recently successfully groomed twelve other states for full membership in the bloc.
Calls were being made in the West and Israel alike for the latter’s full membership in NATO.
Extending Article 5 protection, hitherto limited to full member states, to Israel was being advocated with the inescapable implication that a coalition of most of the world’s most powerful military nations, led by the self-designated world’s sole military superpower, would retaliate against Iran if it responded to an Israeli first strike attack. As the U.S. stations hundreds of nuclear warheads at NATO bases in Europe, including in Iran’s neighbor Turkey, invoking NATO’s war clause could provoke a nuclear conflagration.
The nation was being promoted as the linchpin of a new Global NATO as now U.S. ambassador to the Alliance Ivo Daalder openly proclaimed it.
In 2007 a Russian analyst warned of the consequences of the above developments:
“By admitting Israel Washington plans to use the alliance as an instrument for exerting pressure on Arab states and strengthening its position in the Middle East….Washington has no plans to restrict the expansion only by admitting Israel. The alliance desires to attract India, Japan, Australia and Singapore….The continuation of NATO expansion is undoubtedly an alarming and dangerous idea that could split the world into groups of countries that oppose each other….According to the NATO Charter, an attack on a member state is considered as an aggression against all the members of the alliance [and] any conflict of Israel with its neighbours could become a source of a large-scale regional conflict that could turn into a global war.” [39]
Undeterred by such grave considerations, even the threat of world war, Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv continued their joint military collaboration.
In April of 2007 six NATO warships – from Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain and Turkey – docked in the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat “for joint drills with the navy’s Red Sea Task Force.” [40] NATO had in effect extended its comprehensive Mediterranean Sea naval surveillance and interdiction operation, Active Endeavor, to the Red Sea and would later establish a permanent presence in the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea.
“Six NATO frigates commanded by a Turkish admiral arrived…in Haifa for a joint drill with Israeli Navy missile boats.
“Israel has been shoring up ties recently with NATO as part of preparations for any future showdown with Iran.” [41]
Following the signing of the Individual Cooperation Program (ICP) the preceding November, in June NATO’s Assistant Secretary General for Defence Policy and Planning John Colston visited Israel and invited the nation to provide troops for international Alliance missions. “We welcome very strongly the interest of a whole range of partner nations in participating in NATO-led operations around the world. There are currently seven to eight thousand troops from non-NATO nations participating in missions and further such contributions are always welcome.” In Colson’s words, troop and other contributions – presumably to Afghanistan in the first case – would “fill the ICP framework with practical cooperation.”
The NATO official confirmed his organization’s plans to “add Israel to NATO’s ‘operational capabilities concept’ with the goal of creating better cooperation between the militaries…that would lay the groundwork for potential Israeli participation in NATO-led missions.”
What such missions would entail was indicated by Colson’s announcement that “We agreed to share lessons from Afghanistan with Israel to gain and benefit from one another.” [42]
NATO Deputy Secretary-General Claudio Bisogniero visited Israel in October for two days of meetings arranged by the Atlantic Forum of Israel. “Bisogniero and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are set to address the second annual NATO Israel Symposium at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya on Monday night, to be followed the next day by a seminar on NATO’s role in the Middle East,” a follow-up to the 2006 two-day affair also addressed by Livni and by Bisogniero’s predecessor, Alessandro Minuto Rizzo. Bisogniero arrived only three weeks after taking up his post and his trip marked the first anniversary of Israel’s Individual Cooperation Program with NATO.
The Atlantic Forum’s Uzi Arad said of the event “There is an evolving process of Israel and NATO drawing together. NATO is constantly transforming itself. As it looks at its role outside of Europe and in the Middle East, it looks into the prospect of closer Israel-NATO relations.” [43]
The most significant comment at the symposium came from a (once and future) Israeli head of state: “Addressing the Atlantic Forum’s symposium in Hertzliyah…former prime minister Netanyahu urged NATO to accept Israel as a ‘full partner’ by the year 2010.” [44]
The next month the chiefs of general staff of Israel and Egypt (which followed Israel in entering into an Individual Cooperation Program) participated in a meeting of all 26 of their counterparts from NATO member states. In fact, “Chiefs of Defence of more than 60 Countries together with NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander for Operations and NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander for Transformation attended, at various levels, the NATO Military Committee Meetings.” [45]
In December an Indian news source revealed more about NATO’s increased cooperation with Israel within the context of building an Asia-Pacific and beyond that a Global NATO. “India will join North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) countries, as well as Israel, Japan, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand at the Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada in the United States in June-July 2008 for the Red Flag wargames for the first time.” [46]
Israeli warplanes also participated in the 2009 Red Flag exercises.
This came against the backdrop of Israeli Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman (current Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister), then past and future U.S. presidential candidates John Edwards and Rudolph Giuliani, former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar and other major Western figures demanding full NATO membership for Israel.
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who wrote two articles as far back as 2001 urging NATO to take over the Palestinian Gaza Strip and West Bank, in 2003 advocated that not only Israel but Egypt and (post-invasion) Iraq be welcomed as NATO member states. Incidentally, Friedman’s call for NATO to subjugate Palestine was echoed in differing degrees by James Jones when he was U.S. Special Envoy for Middle East Security and by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft in 2008. The Jerusalem Post wrote early in that year about Jones, previously supreme commander of NATO and now the Obama administration’s National Security Adviser, that “The United States is reviewing the feasibility of deploying a NATO force in the West Bank as a way to ease IDF security concerns….The plan, which is being spearheaded by US Special Envoy to the region Gen. James Jones, is being floated among European countries, which could be asked to contribute troops to a West Bank
multinational force. [47]
Another news source described the plan in franker terms: “James Jones, a former Marine Corps general and NATO military commander from 2003-2005, has been assigned the task of preparing a plan to take over the military occupation of the Occupied Territories of Palestine on behalf of Israel’s security interests.
“The plan for the West Bank will try to draw from the experience made by the deployment of the UNIFIL-forces, led by NATO-countries, but engaging African and Asian troops as well in southern Lebanon.” [48]
NATO plans reach far beyond contingencies for patrolling Israel’s borders with Gaza and the West Bank and even occupying and subjugating Palestinian territories.
A former George H.W. Bush administration State Department official (in the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs), Bennett Ramberg, wrote an article for a major U.S. newspaper almost two years ago bearing the title “An Israeli-NATO pact.” It presented a scenario for military confrontation with Iran and overcoming Russian air defenses in that nation. The writer’s suggestions included:
“As NATO expanded its international reach beyond the European theater in recent years, Israel´s association has become a matter of discussion in Brussels….Israel´s integration into NATO, possibly with a separate American security guarantee, would provide Israel with the defense in depth it has yearned for….[S]hould the United States consent to provide F-22 stealth fighter-bombers, Israel´s capacity will increase. Equally impressive are the American-supplied bunker-buster bombs the aircraft may carry.” [49]
In November of 2008 Israeli Chief of the General Staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi attended a NATO meeting in Brussels in which he “set out the strategic threats to Israel and appeal[ed] for increased cooperation….”
Ashkenazi addressed the military chiefs of staff of all twenty-six NATO states at the time and “presented the various threats to the State of Israel, the strategic challenges in the Middle East and the rise of global terrorism, as well as the need for increased cooperation between Israel and NATO members in order to confront the shared threats.” [50]
The following month, December, with Israel’s Operation Cast Lead assault on Gaza only weeks away, NATO expanded and enhanced its Individual Cooperation Program with Israel. “The agreement allows for an exchange of intelligence information and security expertise on different subjects, an increase in the number of joint Israel-NATO military exercises and further cooperation in the fight against nuclear proliferation.
“It also paves the way for an improvement of collaboration in the fields of rearmament and logistics and Israel’s electronic link to the NATO system.”
Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Livni was present for the signing of the pact and said, “Israel’s security capabilities are a household name and we see the strengthening of cooperation between Israel and the international security body as a strategic objective that reinforces Israel.
“Israel is a power within the international index when it comes to the army and its capabilities in the fight against terror; the whole world recognizes this and the expansion of cooperation between Israel and NATO as it was expressed this morning is important proof of this.” [51]
On December 8 NATO hosted a delegation from the Atlantic Forum of Israel at its headquarters in Brussels.
On December 27 Tel Aviv began its relentless attacks in Gaza, replete with reports of the use of white phosphorous bombs and depleted uranium weaponry.
The president of the United Nations General Assembly at the time, Nicaragua’s Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, criticized the offensive as a breach of international law and said, “Gaza is ablaze. It has been turned into a burning hell.” [52]
A week and a half into the attacks a Russian news source wrote that “American planners want to carry 3,000 tonnes of ammunition from the Greek port of Astakos to the Israeli port of Ashdod” and “An even larger shipment of arms, which included laser-guided bombs, arrived in December.” [53]
In the middle of the assaults and carnage NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer arrived in Tel Aviv to deliver a speech to the Atlantic Forum highlighted by his contention that “This is a new NATO.” In a feature with that title, Israel’s Haaretz newspaper printed remarks by Scheffer which included:
“NATO has transformed to address the challenges of today and tomorrow. We have built partnerships around the globe from Japan to Australia to Pakistan and, of course, with the important countries of the Mediterranean and the Gulf.”
“[The] Alliance is projecting stability in Afghanistan, in Kosovo, in the Mediterranean (with Israeli support), and elsewhere – including fighting pirates off the Somali coast – without in any way diluting our core task to defend NATO member states and populations. Finally, we are looking at playing new roles, as well, in energy security and cyber defence….”
“In 2005 and in 2006 Israel participated in two NATO military exercises. In addition, the NATO-Israel Agreement on the Security of Information allows us to share intelligence….In 2006 Israel decided to contribute to NATO’s…Operation Active Endeavour in the Mediterranean….”
“Israel has been the first country to finalize with NATO, in October 2006, a very detailed individual cooperation program, which had been revised and upgraded last November.” [54]
Scheffer met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Affairs Minister Tzipi Livni, and Livni and Scheffer “discussed means of cooperation between Israel and NATO with regard to the war on terror and methods of preventing smuggling into the Gaza Strip” even as the fighting continued.” [55]
Olmert assured Scheffer that “Israel stands behind NATO and fully supports its struggle against terrorism, just as we expect that you will understand us in our struggle against terrorism….” He also “discussed with him the situation in southern Israel and the Gaza Strip since the beginning of Operation Cast Lead.” [56]
The NATO website reported that Scheffer also met with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and now prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In his Atlantic Forum address he said, “Israel has been a most enthusiastic Mediterranean Dialogue partner and that tells me that this country knows full well about the Dialogue and about the benefits that it brings”. [57]
In March Livni returned the favor by flying to Brussels to meet with Scheffer.
The next month the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung office in Jerusalem released the results of a study it commissioned on Israeli attitudes towards NATO intervention in the Gaza Strip and full membership in the military bloc. Dr. Lars Hansel, the head of the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung in Israel, was quoted by the Jerusalem Post:
“[T]he German marines deployed on the Lebanese coast…are seen (by Israelis) as a welcome development. We are clearly sensing a shift in discourse in Israel about this.” [58]
A poll conducted by an Israeli research group demonstrated how successful the efforts of Uzi Arad’s Atlantic Forum and its allies have been.
“[A] majority of respondents (54%) supported outright Israeli membership in NATO (33% did not). Support rose to 60% when only Jewish responses were counted. Almost two-thirds of Israeli Jews support sending NATO troops to the West Bank in a peacekeeping capacity….Israeli Jews supported the presence of NATO peacekeepers in Palestinian areas by 62 percent to 34%, the study found. But that support was not shared among Israeli Arabs, who opposed the idea by 44% to 24%.” [59]
As an indication that words may soon be translated into action, Haaretz wrote last April that “The possibility of an Israeli attack against a nuclear Iran…will be a test of the willingness of NATO’s member states to implement Article 5 of the treaty’s convention….” [60]
An analysis published by China’s Xinhua News Agency last July, “Israel pushes for major upgrade in relations with NATO,” stated “Reports in the Israeli media this week suggest that Israel is looking forward to participation in several key exercises and operations with NATO and individual NATO members during the remainder of 2009.
“However, this seems to be only part of plans for a much broader gradual integration into NATO by Israel.”
It added “Some reports suggest Israel’s desire to cooperate with NATO and to up its operational exercises is Israel’s further preparation for any attack on Iran.” [61]
The same news agency also reported in July that “the IAF [Israeli Air Force] will take part later this year in a joint aerial exercise with a NATO-member state, which is yet to be identified,” quoting “Israeli defense officials as saying that the overseas exercises would be used to drill long-range maneuvers.” The source also mentioned that “In 2007, Israeli warplanes bombed a suspected nuclear site inside Syria.
“Last summer, over 100 IAF jets flew over Greece in an exercise widely seen as a test-run for a potential air raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities.” [62]
Late last autumn as the U.S. and NATO prepared to increase troop strength in Afghanistan to over 150,000, the full reciprocity and the geographical range of Israeli-NATO military cooperation were revealed.
The Chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, paid a two-day visit to Tel Aviv to meet with leaders of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and “to study the tactics and methods of the IDF” and “was studying the IDF in order to gain a better understanding of how to deal with the ongoing war in Afghanistan.” [63]
A senior Israeli defense official spoke of a meeting between the head of NATO’s Military Committee and Israeli Chief of the General Staff Lieutenant-General Gabi Ashkenazi: “The one thing on NATO’s mind today is how to win in Afghanistan. [Di Paola] was very impressed by the IDF, which is a major source of information due to our operational experience.”
Di Paola “noted that NATO and the IDF were facing similar threats – NATO in Afghanistan and Israel in its war against Hamas and Hizbullah.” [64]
Israel has trained Czech helicopter crews in a desert base for deployment to Afghanistan and has supplied and offered its Heron drones to Canada, Germany and other NATO states for the war in that nation.
As another portent of what Brussels and Tel Aviv are jointly anticipating – if not planning – NATO sponsored a three-day course in Haifa in November that provided “emergency management professionals with training on staff teaching and preparation methods in the face of mass casualty situations.
“These situations include all emergencies causing a large number of casualties that require special organisation and response by local, regional and national medical and other services.” [65]
Earlier in the month NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander and U.S. European Command chief Admiral James Stavridis arrived in the Israeli capital to meet with “Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, the Deputy Chief of the General Staff, Maj. Gen. Benjamin Gantz and several other commanders. The Admiral [was] accompanied by other EUCOM commanders.” [66]
The occasion was the last day of the two-week Operation Juniper Cobra 10, the most recent and by far the largest of biennial joint U.S.-Israeli military exercises. Last year’s was on an unparalleled scale, in fact the biggest-ever joint war games between the two nations. 1,400 American troops and seventeen warships participated in what is probably the most ambitious layered, integrated missile defense exercises ever staged anywhere. [67] “An unprecedented number of American generals, along with 1,400 U.S. army soldiers, are participating with top IDF brass in the high-level Juniper Cobra military exercise that one U.S. Navy commander said is aimed at ’specific threats.’” [68]
The unprecedented drills came shortly after the current U.S. administration announced plans to cancel the ground-based midcourse missile project of President George W. Bush in Eastern Europe in favor of what President Barack Obama on September 17 affirmed were “stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and America’s allies.” Reports had surfaced earlier that the U.S. and NATO were to abandon the project of basing ground-based interceptor missiles in Poland and a complementary radar installation in the Czech Republic and instead deploy far more mobile, often non-detectable missile interceptor components to Israel, the Balkans, Turkey and the South Caucasus. [69]
Last year’s Juniper Cobra exercises were the opening salvo for the new plan, clearly prepared for long in advance.
The official purpose was to protect Israel from possible Iranian missile attacks, but the truth is far different. More than a year before, the Pentagon’s European Command, whose top military commander is also NATO’s supreme commander, installed a missile shield radar base in Israel’s Negev Desert, near the host country’s nuclear program at Dimona. The American Forward Based X-Band Transportable Radar has a range of 2,900 miles [4,300 kilometers], far more than what would be required for Iran but sufficient to cover all of western and much of southern Russia.
120 U.S. military personnel were assigned to the base, the first foreign troops to ever be stationed in Israel. Juniper Cobra was the testing phase for U.S. global interceptor missile deployments in the Middle East and beyond. The new American plans have been described by the White House and the Pentagon to be fully integrated with NATO to encompass all of Europe, and Israel’s role in those designs is pivotal. Last autumn’s U.S.-Israeli missile exercises helped “the United States craft its European missile shield…Featuring in the…maneuvers is Aegis, a U.S. Navy anti-missile system that the administration of President Barack Obama plans to deploy in the eastern Mediterranean as the first part of a missile shield for Europe announced last month.” [70]
As a U.S. Army officer present for Juniper Cobra stated at the time, “On a wider perspective, what the Americans learn from these complex exercises will help shape a NATO defense shield for Europe.” [71]
Earlier this month Israel announced that it has successfully tested what it calls its Iron Dome short- and medium-range anti-missile system, which consists of the newly developed Arrow 2 and David’s Sling interceptor missiles. The first Arrow “was deployed in 2000, and Israel and the United States have since conducted a joint, biennial missile defense exercise, called Juniper Cobra, to work on integrating the weapons, radars and other systems of the two countries.” [72]
Last May in the “first meeting of senior Israeli defense officials with the Obama administration’s new staff at the Pentagon,” the Director General of Israeli Ministry of Defense, General Pinchas Buhris, and American counterparts in Washington, DC it was announced that the U.S. will fully fund a $100 million advanced Arrow 3 missile defense system.
“Israel and the United States are also developing David’s Sling – a missile defense system for medium-range missile with a range between 70 and 250 kilometers. The Arrow 3 will be a longer-range version of the Arrow defense system currently in IDF operation. It will be capable of intercepting incoming enemy missiles at higher altitudes and farther away from Israel.” [73]
In July the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency worked with Israel to test the Arrow system at a U.S. range in the Pacific Ocean.
The head of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Army Lieutenant General Patrick O’Reilly, said regarding the Pacific drills that “the test will allow Israel to measure its advanced Arrow system against a target with a range of more than 620 miles (1,000 km), too long for previous Arrow test sites in the eastern Mediterranean.
An unnamed U.S. Defense Department official was quoted by Reuters as saying “The upcoming test…provides us the opportunity to have the Patriot system, the THAAD [Terminal High Altitude Area Defense] system and the Aegis system all interacting with the Arrow system so that we’re demonstrating full interoperability as we execute this test.” The same four interceptor missile systems were used jointly in the Juniper Cobra exercises in October and November. [74]
Other NATO states are also assisting the missile and general military buildup for a potential catastrophe in the Middle East, most notably Germany, which will double the amount of Dolphin submarines it has provided Israel. Dolphins are considered capable of carrying Israeli nuclear cruise missiles for any future conflict with Iran. “A bigger Dolphin fleet could allow Israel the option of basing some in its Red Sea port of Eilat, providing a short-cut to the Gulf. An Israeli submarine crossed the Suez Canal for an exercise off Eilat last July, the first such deployment.” [75]
On January 11 Haaretz wrote that “The U.S. Army will double the value of emergency military equipment it stockpiles on Israeli soil, and Israel will be allowed to use the U.S. ordnance in the event of a military emergency….” Citing the U.S.-based Defense News, the Israeli newspaper added, “an agreement reached between Washington and Jerusalem last month will bring the value of the military gear to $800 million.
“This is the final phase of a process that began over a year ago to determine the type and amount of U.S. weapons and ammunition to be stored in Israel, part of an overarching American effort to stockpile weapons in areas in which its army may need to operate while allowing American allies to make use of the ordnance in emergencies.”
It also revealed that “The deal allows Israel access to a wider spectrum of military ordnance, and the U.S. [is] considering which forms of military supplies would be added to stores in Israel. Missiles, armored vehicles, aerial ammunition and artillery ordnance are already stockpiled in the country.” [76]
The U.S., Israel and NATO are preparing for momentous events in the Middle East. They will not be peaceful ones.
1) Jerusalem Post, January 13, 2010
2) NATO’s New Strategic Concept
http://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/roadmap-strategic-concept.html
3) Thousand Deadly Threats: Third Millennium NATO, Western Businesses
Collude On New Global Doctrine
Stop NATO, October 2, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/10/02/thousand-deadly-threats-third-millennium-nato-western-businesses-collude-on-new-global-doctrine
4) Jerusalem Post, January 13, 2010
5) Ibid
6) NATO In Persian Gulf: From Third World War To Istanbul
Stop NATO, February 6, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/nato-in-persian-gulf-from-third-world-war-to-istanbul
7) Jane’s Defence Weekly, May 10, 2005
8) Ibid
9) Middle East Newsline, May 21, 2005
10) Makfax, April 21, 2005
11) Jane’s Defence Weekly, May 12, 2005
12) Jane’s Defense Weekly/Islamic Republic News Agency, June 28, 2005
13) Jerusalem Post, June 19, 2005
14) Jerusalem Post, July 22, 2005
15) http://www.atlantic-israel.org
16) Haaretz, March 20, 2009
17) Haaretz, March 31, 2009
18) Haaretz, March 20, 2009
19) Ibid
20) Ynetnews, February 1, 2006
21) Wall Street Journal, February 14, 2006
22) http://www.gmfus.org/publications/author.cfm?id=11
23) Washington Post, February 21, 2006
24) http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200502/ai_n11826505
25) Washington Post, May 23, 2004
26) Jewish Telegraphic Agency, March 7, 2006
27) Agence France-Press, May 30, 2006
28) Israel National News, June 14, 2006
29) NATO, June 22, 2006
30) Jerusalem Post, June 26, 2006
31) Jerusalem Post, June 23, 2006
32) Jewish Telegraphic Agency, June 27, 2006
33) Israel Today, October 17, 2006
34) NATO, October 24, 2006
35) Ibid
36) NATO, October 24, 2006
37) United Press International, October 26, 2006
38) Ibid
39) Eduard Sorokin, What Is Behind The US Plan For NATO Expansion?
Voice of Russia, September 25, 2007
40) Jerusalem Post, April 16, 2007
41) Jewish Telegraph Agency, April 1, 2008
42) Jerusalem Post, June 25, 2007
43) Jerusalem Post, October 22, 2007
44) Winnepeg Free Press, October 30, 2007
45) NATO, November 19, 2008
46) The Asian Age, December 20, 2007
47) Jerusalem Post, February 20, 2008
48) Arab Monitor, January 8, 2008
49) Washington Times, July 5, 2008
50) Agence France-Presse, November 18, 2008
51) Haaretz, December 2, 2008
52) Press TV, January 15, 2009
53) Russia Today, January 10, 2009
54) Haaretz, January 10, 2009
55) Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, January 11, 2009
56) Arutz Sheva, January 12, 2009
57) NATO, January 11, 2009
58) Jerusalem Post, April 22, 2009
59) Ibid
60) Haaretz, April 3, 2009
61) Xinhua News Agency, July 7, 2009
62) Xinhua News Agency, July 6, 2009
63) Israel Today, November 23, 2009
64) Jerusalem Post, November 20, 2009
65) NATO, November 16, 2009
66) Israeli Defense Forces, November 3, 2009
67) Israel: Forging NATO Missile Shield, Rehearsing War With Iran
Stop NATO, November 5, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/israel-forging-nato-missile-shield-rehearsing-war-with-iran
68) Arutz Sheva, November 3, 2009
69) U.S. Expands Global Missile Shield Into Middle East, Balkans
Stop NATO, September 11, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/u-s-expands-global-missile-shield-into-middle-east-balkans
Black Sea, Caucasus: U.S. Moves Missile Shield South And East
Stop NATO, September 19, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/09/19/283
70) Reuters, October 22, 2009
71) United Press International, October 30, 2009
72) Washington Post, September 19, 2009
73) Jerusalem Post, May 20, 2009
74) Reuters, July 14, 2009
75) Reuters, January 14, 2010
76) Haaretz, January 11, 2010
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/01/17/israel-global-natos-29th-member/
![[9_10_s22.jpg]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_s5yaZ0Ye2Mo/R3slhl7bTtI/AAAAAAAAG4o/pXTUHusKJIg/s1600/9_10_s22.jpg)
