Saturday, 25 February 2012
+ According to proponents of the Grand Conspiracy, the Order of the Illuminati controls the world already. Abū Qatāda is living proof it doesn't. The latest news about this enigmatic character concerns the anonymity afforded his landlord, who appears to have been kept in the dark about his new tenant. But what do we know about him, and why has he been so much in the news of late? More to the point, why isn't he long gone, by fair means or foul? According to that font of all knowledge Wikipedia, Abū Qatāda al-Filisṭīnī was born at Bethlehem, although apparently not in a stable - this is a real life soap opera, not Coronation Street. Although he has committed no criminal offence in this country, for the past ten years he has been giving the British Government one almighty headache. In October 2002, he was ordered by then Home Secretary David Blunkett to be detained without trial indefinitely under Britain's already Draconian anti-terrorist legislation. Although there has been reams of this drafted in Britain, the United States and elsewhere since the 9/11 atrocities, detention without trial is not a new phenomenon in these islands. Leaving aside the historical context, enemy aliens were interned during the First World War and British nationals during the Second World War, the latter under Regulation 18b, something that was described as “in the highest degree odious”. During the so-called Troubles in Northern Ireland, both internment without trial and Diplock Courts were introduced. Named after Lord Diplock, these legal proceedings involved the suspension of trial by jury and adjudication by a solitary judge, a dangerous procedure indeed for civil liberties, but due to the nature of both Republican and Loyalist terrorism, there was little choice. Returning to Abū Qatāda, he is routinely described as one of the most dangerous men if not the most dangerous man in Britain, which begs the question, why has he just been released, albeit under the most Draconian house arrest provisions ever seen in this country? Because, apparently, rather than being dangerous in the same way as serial killer Levi Bellfield or the recently convicted Carl Whant, Qatāda is in reality only potentially dangerous. Broadly speaking, there are three accusations levelled against him: 1) That he has delivered unpleasant sermons and similar homilies, which might be described as hate speech, including praising the late and unlamented Osama Bin Laden. 2) That he has incited murders and terrorist acts. 3) That he has taken an active part in terrorism. Praising Osama Bin Laden and other terrorists and murderers may be bad taste, but in the United States anyway it has never been and hopefully never will be illegal. In any case, black humour including jokes about 9/11 can be found all over the Internet. While it may have been considered extremely poor taste to relate them at Ground Zero on the 10th anniversary, even the sickest of jokes have their place. As well as the usual enemies of devout men with long beards - the Great Satan, International Zionism and Pink Paper subscribers - Qatāda is said at one point to have called upon Moslems to kill the wives and children of Egyptian police and army officers. If this is true, then like the Westboro Baptist Church he is not bigoted, he simply hates everybody, which begs two questions: 1) Why does anyone support him? 2) Why is he still alive? The second question requires some qualification. According to the proponents of the Grand Conspiracy, any enemy of the New World Order up to and including the President of the United States, can be rubbed out at the drop of a hat. Don't forget, they killed JFK; they killed Dr David Kelly; they were behind 9/11; according to David Icke, they can even control the weather. Oh, and the only reason they haven't killed Alex Jones is because to do so would make him a martyr. Right? So why is such a dangerous and obviously undesirable human being as Abū Qatāda still breathing? It can't be they are afraid of turning him into a martyr, not after killing Osama Bin Laden twice! Qatāda is currently being monitored by some sixty police officers who could be better employed policing London's streets or even following John Terry in case he utters a racial expletive. Think of the expense if nothing else, yet at this very moment, the British Government, which includes George (Bilderberger) Osborne is engaged in high powered negotiations with the Jordanian Government to return him to the country where he has already been convicted albeit in absentia of real crimes and sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labour. Couldn't they at least have arranged for him to confess to some crime in Britain as Kent Police did for Michael Stone? Or framed him for conspiracy to murder as the FBI did Edgar Steele? Obviously not. Then why not? Just as obviously because this all-pervasive conspiracy does not really exist. They did not kill JFK; Lee Harvey Oswald did. They did not orchestrate 9/11; that was done by a group of self-styled martyrs who are at this moment wondering where are their 72 black-eyed virgins as they burn in Everlasting Hell. So is there no conspiracy at all? Yes and no. Although there are many types of conspiracies, broadly speaking there are two kinds. The first are small, grubby affairs usually at a low or a very low level, consisting of men and women who carry out some illegal and often clandestine act. When the police or other agencies are involved, such conspiracies can operate only on a small scale because they cannot be sanctioned by the government due to their illegality, although some are quasi-legal. A good example of this can be found in the the revelations of Mark Kennedy, the undercover police officer who had a change of heart. Although Kennedy's activities involved low level law breaking, there can be no doubt whatsoever that similar operations have involved not so low level law breaking, but murder? A government that can murder people with impunity is not a conspiracy, it is a tyranny, although an exception appears to have been made for the Israeli Government, as in the Flotilla massacre, and the untypically inept January 2010 murder of Mahmoud al Mabhouh in Dubai by Mossad agents. The other type of conspiracy can involve hundreds, thousands or even millions of people, but only as passive participants. Rather than a conspiracy, this is best described as an ideology or even a delusion; the war on drugs is one such delusion on a grand scale. Examples of passive conspiracies are those that involve slavery, enforced prostitution or child labour. They operate openly or more or less openly, and while the people who could do something about them look the other way. Such conspiracies if they be so called have operated throughout history. Whatever its continuity with the original Order of the Illuminati of 1776, the New World Order is one such perverted ideology. Call it a conspiracy if you will, but its major players have neither the ability nor the stomach to murder the likes of Abū Qatāda, JFK or anyone else. They do though have both the ability and the mindset to start wars - as they did in Iraq - on totally specious pretexts, and in so doing kill hundreds of thousands or even millions of innocent people, including the finest flower of their own youth. The reason they have the ability to do this is because the people who could stop them don't. Those people are us. This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/320102#ixzz1nOjoZUwn
Nation Revisited # 89, March 2012. email@example.com Following the Mob Representative government would be a fine thing but parliamentary democracy based on the party system has very little to do with “the will of the people.” Public opinion is orchestrated by the mass media and exploited by unscrupulous politicians. Instead of trying to lead and educate the mob they pander to its basest instincts. The Labour Party encourages class war and the Tories promote xenophobia. We have had an equal share of Labour and Tory government since the war. We survived the economic downturns that come every ten years or so and we enjoyed the good times in between. But most of the improvements have come from the scientists not the politicians. The scientists gave us modern medicine and labour-saving devices and the politicians gave us mass immigration and unemployment. The UK is owned and controlled by big business. BP has got more power than the Bank of England and Tesco is more influential than the government. Our armed forces are under NATO command, our economy is controlled by the World Trade Organisation and our foreign policy is dictated by Washington. Putting our illiterate crosses on ballot papers every five years is therefore a complete waste of time. But things are starting to change. The Rothschild deficit spending system depends on a growing economy to keep up the repayments and a compliant population to keep paying taxes. But the economy is standing still and people are worried about their declining standards of living. The dollar has reigned supreme for nearly a century but it’s now being challenged. India is negotiating to buy Iranian oil with gold. This could be the beginning of the end for American hegemony. Having the dollar as a reserve currency has enabled Wall Street to dominate the West but they don’t have the same power in Asia. And China holds $1 trillion of American bonds. Most of the UK press is owned by big business and committed to the status quo. We can only hope that falling newspaper circulation means that people are starting to think for themselves. At present they get their opinions from billionaires like Rupert Murdoch. On his instructions the great British public voted for the Tony Blair/Gordon Brown circus three times in a row. They believed the lies about “weapons of mass destruction” and allowed a spendthrift government to borrow £1 trillion from their friends in the City of London. The system that made this possible is plutocracy not democracy. Colourful Language The websites and publications of the far-right like to use colourful language; much of it borrowed from the great religions. We therefore hear about the “Abyss” in connection with the EU. We have apparently been pushed into the Abyss by the “Juggernaut of Doom,” and we are now facing “Armageddon.” “Admin” posting on the BNP Ideas website used some hair-raising phrases: “The difference between Brazil and Britain’s economies is apparent and vast: the Brazilians have ensured that their government acts in the national interest, while the British people have continuously voted for a vile nest of vipers who seek nothing less than the entire destruction of our country at all levels. The work of the traitors in the House of Treason has already plunged Britain below a Second World nation like Brazil. Let us all pray that the coming year brings about a change in the fortunes of our nation, before it sinks ever lower into the Third World.” It’s hard to believe that Dave Cameron and his team seek our “total destruction.” And it’s hardly surprising that we have been overtaken by Brazil; a huge nation of nearly 200 million people with abundant natural resources. Our decline is surely the result of efficient competition from abroad. But the BNP puts it down to a “Vile Nest of Vipers.” Not to be outdone for hyperbole the “official” BNP website offered the following careful analysis: “William Hague has got a nerve lecturing the DR Korea and Burma, for all their faults at least the native inhabitants can walk their capitals safely unlike the third world sewer called London with its criminal knife-wielding scum ruling the streets…” This sort of language is counter-productive. Nobody in their right mind thinks that North Korea is a better place to live than the UK. If the BNP wants to be taken seriously they should drop the purple prose. Changing Times Our school holidays date back to the days when the kids helped out with the harvest. But today only 1.5% of our workforce manages to produce an impressive 60% of our food. Machinery has replaced manpower in most industries. It used to take weeks for a gang of men to unload a ship but now containerized cargoes are unloaded by crane in a matter of hours. Open-caste mines excavate near-surface coal by dragline in a fraction of the time taken by miners working in deep pits. A truck driver using a vehicle-mounted crane can unload palletised materials in minutes. And the thousands of printers that used to produce our newspapers have been replaced by a few technicians. Automation has made life easier but it has put people out of work. New jobs have been created in electronics and telecommunications but they require higher levels of skill. This will change patterns of immigration and education. The days of recruiting cheap labour from all over the world are numbered. People will still go abroad to find work but the free-for-all of recent years will give way to a more selective system as specialized labour becomes more expensive. Economic forces are starting to work against globalism. Chinese labour costs are escalating as migration from the country to the cities drives up rents and prices. The Chinese economy is growing at 9.7% per year and inflation is running at 4.2%. At the same time the rising cost of oil is making shipping dearer. This means that products can now be made competitively in North America and Europe. British manufacturing suffered badly from “outsourcing” but it’s now recovering. Our top exports are; nuclear reactors, fuel oils, cars, electrical machinery, pharmaceuticals, precious metals, optical and surgical equipment, aircraft, space equipment and plastics. We cannot compete with Asia for mass production but we are winning orders for quality products. Many of our manufacturers are foreign-owned but they employ British workers and pay British taxes. Of course it would be better if our industries were British-owned but it’s good that people are employed instead of living on the dole. Racism The conviction of two white men, Gary Dobson and David Norris, for killing a black man, Stephen Lawrence, revived the debate about racism in the UK. At the same time Luis Suarez a Liverpool footballer from Uruguay called Patrice Evra a “negro”; he is a Manchester United player from Senegal. Now Chelsea’s John Terry is accused of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand, a mixed-race player for Queens Park Rangers. Both men are important members of the England squad. The murder of an innocent man naturally upset the black community but their sensitivity to “racism” is hard to understand when they listen to black music, study black history, believe in black power and take every opportunity to celebrate their blackness. The French believed that culture would prevail so they insisted on speaking French and refused to collect racial statistics or work to racial quotas. The result is that their black and brown people have confined themselves to ghettos and occasionally riot. In the UK we took the opposite approach and “celebrated diversity” by encouraging every language and culture. We also introduced “positive discrimination” to promote blacks over whites. The result is that our black and brown people have confined themselves to ghettos and occasionally riot. The truth is that immigration is all about numbers. A trickle of black or brown people can be absorbed into the culture of a white country but an uncontrolled flood is overwhelming; and when entire areas are taken over assimilation becomes impossible as invasion turns into colonization. Most of the Third World immigrants who came to Europe looking for a better life found jobs and settled successfully. But the factories that used to employ them are now shut and many of them have been forced onto the dole queue. It’s time to look at the problem of supply and demand. It is not racist to conclude that a country with nearly three million unemployed does not need more immigrants. The Myth of Competition Conservatives insist that nationalized industries are wasteful and inefficient. But some private companies are dependent on subsidies and the banks are effectively a cartel offering similar rates and services. We were told that privatization would bring competition and bring down prices. This has happened with telecoms but the private railway companies get £4 billion a year from the state and we still have the dearest railways in the world. Gas, electricity and water companies appear to be competitive but there is actually nothing to choose between them. Privatization only works when there is genuine competition and a level playing field. Industries that depend on subsidies and hide behind regulation deserve to be nationalized. Let’s start with the banks. They take no risks because they only grant loans and mortgages to customers with collateral. Years ago the interest rates on savings and loans were only separated by a couple of percentage points. Now they give you a pathetic 0.5% on deposits and charge a massive 19% on loans. A state bank could provide all the services offered by the private sector without getting involved in casino capitalism. The state is the guarantor of the banks so it might as well own them. The image of nationalized industries being drab and old-fashioned dated from the post-war Labour government that created them. That was because the old Labour Party was comprised of drab and old-fashioned people mostly from Marxist and Methodist backgrounds. They were suited to the austere conditions of the time. The Labour Party was obliged to have food rationing and exchange control regulations because of the desperate shortages they had to contend with. But they kept them much longer than most countries because grim austerity suited them; they actually liked the idea of people queuing for everything and having to carry ration books. But it doesn’t have to be like that. There is no reason why the banks, the railways and the utilities should not be state operated. With modern management skills nationalized industries could be efficient and profitable. No private company can afford major infrastructure works like railways, motorways, power stations and hospitals without government help. The idea that private enterprise is better than the state at running things simply isn’t true. Some of our biggest companies only stay in business by milking the taxpayer and even private hospitals depend on the National Health Service to train their doctors, nurses and technicians. Reforming the System Banks charge interest on loans according to the risk involved. Borrowers without collateral pay the most and property owners pay the least. This logic applies to high street banks lending individuals money for a new car and to international banks lending governments the money to build hospitals or fight wars. Without it the world economy would grind to a halt. The Bank of England has been nationalized since 1946. It issues money backed by the sale of interest bearing bonds. But since 2009 it has bought £325 billion of government bonds from financial institutions. This incestuous practice known as “quantitative easing” is a dangerous experiment that could end in disaster; but if it works it could stimulate the economy and get us out of recession. Even revolutionary regimes relied on the banks; the Soviets borrowed from international bankers such as Kuhn Loeb & Co and made huge profits from the worldwide wheat shortage following WW1. The Chinese communists followed the Soviet example and are now a formidable capitalist power that holds more than $1 trillion of American bonds. The National Socialists in Germany denounced finance capitalism but they ran an entirely conventional economy driven by rearmament and funded by international banks including Harriman and Warburg & Co. Fascist Italy was also part of the international financial system. At the end of the war the Italian Social Republic adopted syndicalism but before it could get going Benito Mussolini’s fledgling republic was destroyed by Allied bombing and shelling. Apart from a few fortunate counties like China, Iran and the Gulf States the world relies on borrowing to pay for social security, health care, education, defence and all the services of a modern state. We have been living on credit for so long that we take it for granted. But the Rothschild model is not the only way to run an economy. Before the disastrous Vietnam War the United States balanced her books without recourse to borrowing. One day Europe will unite and self-sufficiency will liberate us from global capitalism. But for the time being all we can do is regulate the banks and reduce government spending. Forces that shape the world The Frankfurt School was a group of almost exclusively Jewish academics who set out to create a Marxist society by manipulating teaching. They are accused of promoting feminism, multiracialism and the dumbing down of education. They may have influenced events but the main causes of change have been economic and technological. Of course critics of the Frankfurt School would describe this interpretation as “Marxist.” Emmeline Pankhurst and Germaine Greer both helped to liberate women but Gavril Princep was their real benefactor. When he shot Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914 he started a world war that conscripted Europe’s men to the front and replaced them at the workplace with women. For the first time women earned their own money and it wasn’t long before they won voting and property rights. Their liberation was complete when the availability of contraception allowed them to control their own fertility. For centuries men controlled women with oppressive religious and political constraints but one bullet changed things forever. The slave trade from Africa to the Americas proved the viability of mass migration. William Wilberforce and the abolitionists are credited with ending slavery but it was stopped when destitute labour from Europe became available after the Napoleonic wars. Lessons learned about logistics were used to populate North and South America in the nineteenth century; and again after WW2 to bring African, Asian and Caribbean immigrants to Europe. The purpose was to provide cheap labour and the result was that the races of the world were redistributed. According to the 1841 UK census 33% of men and 44% of women were illiterate. The Education Act of 1880 instituted elementary education but education from the ages of 5 to 14 was not made compulsory until the Education Act of 1918. Many of the men who fought in WW1 were illiterate. And even in WW2 education was sadly lacking amongst the working class. Standards may have fallen in recent years but “dumbing down” is largely an urban myth. The Frankfurt School did not cause mass migration or the peacetime rejection of authority. Left-wing academics might have welcomed such changes but Soviet communism collapsed over twenty years ago. And it’s not Karl Marx’s fault that people watch TV trash and read the popular press. Western liberalism lacks order and discipline but the Soviet Union was authoritarian and patriotic. They also tried to deconstruct the Arts. But artists like David Hockney, authors like AN Wilson, actresses like Maggie Smith, architects like Norman Foster and musicians like Andrew Lloyd-Webber are the living proof that all is well with the Arts. It’s time to reevaluate the effectiveness of the Frankfurt School. Their long march through the institutions may have been a waste of time because intelligence is a matter of heredity not conditioning. Karl Marx said: “It is absolutely impossible to transcend the laws of nature. What can change in historically different circumstances is only the form in which these laws expose themselves.” Blaming the decline of education, morals and manners on the Frankfurt School is rather like believing in conspiracy theory. It may be hard to admit it but our current situation is our own fault and our eventual recovery is in our own hands. Liberty Within a European Confederation By John Bean The Confederate States of America , 1861-65, advocated the preservation of individual states rights, including its own tariffs, within the Federal Government. Although opposed to international slavery and slave trading, it included the right to hold slaves within each state. This writer does not support slavery in any form – and never has. A new Confederate Constitution of June 29, 2005 stresses that it wants a return to the importance of individual liberty, on which the republic was founded in 1776. This has been superseded by what is in reality an American Empire. In the same manner, a European Confederation would enhance individual liberty and give the right to operate selected tariffs ( Greece please note) in place of the existing ‘Empire’ of the European Union. Today in the USA the states still maintain more power that the counties of Britain or regions of France to legislate different taxes on many goods – notably fuel, drinks and tobacco – and laws governing driving and marriage licences, for example. In Europe we must not forget that Germany, a Federal Republic, is still made up of 16 states, of which Bavaria, Saxony and Thuringia are most important. Again, unlike Britain, many retain some powers that are similar to those of the individual states in the USA. It should not be overlooked that Great Britain is already heading towards a United Kingdom Confederation with more powers increasingly being given to the Scottish and Welsh parliaments and the Northern Ireland Assembly. However, it is the example of Switzerland that could provide a working template for the development of a European Confederation, not least because it has shown that people who are German, French and Italian have learnt to get on with each other, plus the small number who speak Romansh. Switzerland is a Confederation of 26 cantons which enjoy some degree of autonomy. An aspect of its democracy is expressed in its regular referendums that enable ordinary citizens to propose a change to the constitution as long as it is supported by 100,000 votes of the approximate 5.8 million total electorate. Referendums have gone through that restrict the number and heights of mosques in Switzerland . Others have helped to control immigration numbers. Retain Different Currencies Much of the depth of the economic depression that has hit all Europe , but particularly the South, is down to the common currency of the Euro. Surely logic dictates that with the abolition of the Euro it would allow each nation’s currency to find its own exchange rate against each other, as opposed to being in reality pegged to what is best for Germany’s exchange rate. It would not come about overnight but with reduced exchange rates Greece , Spain and Italy , for example, would find a rising demand for their goods and services. Machine tools and cars for Italy , and a marked rise in tourists for Greece and Spain where holidays would become cheaper for those coming from north of the Alps . This ignores Spain ’s additional advantage of its own overlooked modern manufacturing industry. Therefore, a Confederation would keep its individual currencies where this was most advantageous to the nation concerned. Spain and Portugal might decide to use a common currency. Ireland – who have been commended for their hard work and resilience in overcoming their fall from euroland grace – might decide to go back to the pound, even if they wish to call it the punt. Retain National Armies Because of the reduced size of the British Army the last 30-40 years has seen the disappearance, mainly through amalgamations, of many of the former county regiments – eg the Suffolk Regiment is now absorbed in the East Anglian Regiment. Most military analysts and historians believe that this has reduced their effectiveness to some degree, not least in serving with your own local people and its resultant competitiveness. Although Robert E.Lee was the Confederate Army’s most brilliant and effective General in the American Civil War he was only the General of the Virginian Army. All the other Southern States had their own armies which, of course, worked closely with Lee. French hegemony over Western Europe in the 18th Century was finally overcome by an alliance of separate national forces from Britain and the German states under Marlborough and then the downfall of Napoleon by the alliance of the Duke of Wellington’s army, Dutch soldiers and the invaluable help of Blucher’s Prussians at Waterloo . Thus history suggests that we should still retain our national forces within a Confederation but working in close co-operation. That is already being seen with future plans for the British and French navies and the limited joint ‘strikes’ made by British and French aircraft in the recent Libyan campaign (not that I supported this interference in Libyan affairs). Finally in this brief outline of how a European Confederation would function, we must avoid a common police force. We do not need some imitation of the FBI but rather an Interpol that is upgraded by the tools of the electronic age. It could become more useful in tackling illegal immigration into Europe , particularly by destroying people-smuggling gangs. Editor’s Opinion I asked JB to explain the idea of European Confederation. I believe in a united Europe with a strong central government for defence and the economy and national governments for domestic affairs. I understand that members of the BNP and related parties are hostile to the EU and would prefer a looser arrangement. Their fears are rooted in their own propaganda but without a common market and economic cohesion I doubt that a confederation would hold together. The European Union is a political reality that would have to be dismantled in order to construct a confederation. Those of us who believe in “Europe a Nation” support the efforts of the campaigning group Federal Union who are petitioning the European Parliament for closer fiscal union. Instead of allowing narrow self-interest to undermine European solidarity we should encourage European consciousness and dump the insular nationalism that led to two disastrous world wars. Times are hard at present but we will recover from the worldwide recession that has hit America and Japan as well as Europe.
Sunday, 19 February 2012
If you want to know how our various 'leaders', police, and journalists, hide corruption and serious crime please read about poor Hollie Greig and her treatment. Proper exposure of these crimes on the media would bring down bothe the Scottish and British governments! Scottish Government Cover Up of Hollie Greig Part 1 - How it all came to light Saturday, 13 March 2010 12:26 Added by PT Editor maysaa jarour SalmondUK, March 13, 2010 (Pal Telegraph) - I have decide to reveal the Hollie Greig's story in fine detail so that you the public can read for yourself exactly how this sordid story came about and how the Scottish Government suppressed this terrible crime. It covers not only Hollie but also includes other children that fell victim to this ring of pedophiles. This series will not hold back any information and will include names of the offenders and their victims. It will also include articles that were bouncing around at the time. In writing this series. It is also an open invitation for anyone to write to the Palestine Telegraph who feel they have information relating to this or any other case involving children in Scotland who may have succumbed to the same group of the so called Scottish Justice System. I thought it would be best to actually let you read the story overview that was put together by the Investigator of this case - Robert Green who has since become a victim of the Scottish Government without just cause. Robert's article was titled: The Shocking Story of Hollie Greig and is shown in its entirety as per below. I will also include relevant documentation that is part and parcel of this obscene cover-up by the Scottish Government and its Legal System. The ultimate blame must rest on the shoulders of the First Minister for Scotland - Alex Salmond who is very much aware of this appalling story but still sits on his hands and does nothing. We at the Palestine Telegraph will continue to support Hollie and her mum Anne with, continued hardhitting articles until Alex Salmond or Gordon Brown bow down to the pressure. The "Hollie Army" continue to grow and we can say, with great confidence, that we will not need the assistance of NATO to win this battle...we are strong and will not give up until Hollie and the other children involved have their day in court. Hollies Story by Robert Green to the BBC "The Shocking Story of Hollie Greig" Grampian_Police22 In June 2000, Mrs. Anne Mackie, as she then was at the time, following a violent outburst by her husband Denis Charles Mackie, was told by her daughter Hollie, who has Down's Syndrome, that she had been raped and sexually abused by her father and brother Greg. The abuses by her father had been going on for fourteen years. Since Hollie was just six. Anne went with Hollie to Bucksburn Police Station, Aberdeen, to report the crimes, moving out of the family home, of course. Late that summer, in August, Hollie revealed that her attackers extended far beyond her father and brother. Denis Charles Mackie had shared his young daughter with members of a pedophile ring operating in Aberdeen, including a Sheriff Graeme Buchanan, a police officer, Terry Major and Hollie's own carer, Helen Macdonald. After contacting the police again, Anne and Hollie were asked to attend at Bucksburn on 25th August 2000, to make their allegations. Whilst Anne was being interviewed, officer Leanne Davidson, who in turn, left Hollie alone with a social worker, Nicola Foot, questioned Hollie. Foot immediately called Hollie a liar and assaulted her by injecting a needle into Hollie's leg, which must have contained a drug to temporarily disorientate Hollie. Anne, of course, knew nothing of this until she was driving Hollie home, when she became aware of Hollie's unusual behaviour, which she could not explain fully to her mother due to the effect of the drug. Anne returned immediately to the police station, demanding that a doctor examine Hollie without delay. Davidson played for time by saying that a doctor was being sought, but after two hours claimed that no doctor could be found. Even worse was to follow just a few days later. On the 5th September, a medical team unexpectedly arrived at Anne's home, on the instructions of Dr. Alistair Palin, to literally drag Anne from her home. She naturally resisted, but her clothes were pulled down and she too was forcibly injected by one of the team. Angiolini She was taken by force to a mental institution run by Palin, where he described her as "schizophrenic." The object was to return Hollie into the hands of her abuser father. Anne managed to get out of the institution after a few days and had the foresight to demand a full examination by a mental health expert. Dr Helen Smith, who pronounced that Anne was in perfectly good mental health. A result, even Palin had to concede in writing there was nothing whatsoever wrong with Anne. The police investigation meanwhile, despite medical and other expert witness support fully vindicating Hollie's story, was eventually dropped on the orders of one of Sheriff Buchanan's associates, Elish Angionlini, the Aberdeen's Procurator Fiscal, now Lord Provost. Anne and Hollie have carried on their battle for justice ever since the, although no independent Scottish solicitor could be found to even take up their case. Nonetheless, after a few years, with the assistance of Nicola Smith, Hollie was awarded £13,500 by the Criminal Injury Compensation Authority, despite the fact that officially, no crime had even been committed. None of the experts spoken to have ever heard of such a thing before, the only possible motive being that the award was made in the hope of buying Anne and Hollie off. This point was picked up by the News of the World in April this year when the story was finally broken, albeit in a very abridged form. A version of this was also published by the Shropshire Star, the local paper now for Anne and Hollie, as they had to flee Scotland due to the danger posed to them. The BBC's investigative reporter, Mark Daly, then approached us. After requesting that we deal exclusively with the BBC, he assured us, after numerous discussions and examination of documentary evidence, that two programmes had been commissioned, one to be broadcast on Scotland's BBC TV and the other on BBC Radio Scotland, handled by his colleague, Kathy Long. With Her, and Panorama's team MacDougall, they came to interview Anne and Hollie on 4th June this year at their Shropshire home. They also informed us that their investigations had led to them to other serious cases systematic sexual abuse of minors and adults with learning difficulties in Scotland. Buchanan2On 10th June, Mark Daly phoned to tell us that not only had the team been prevented by a senior BBC figure from making any further investigations into pedophile rings, but also that the team would be sacked if they continued to persist. Despite all attempts, Daly and the others refused to divulge who it was who blocked them and efforts to elicit this information from the Director-General and the head of the BBC Trust have thus far failed to find a response. However, Grampian police, under persistent pressure, agreed to conduct another investigation into Hollie's case, led by Tanya Leiper. No urgency whatsoever was attached to this, however and it was only when a shot was fired at the window of Anne and Hollie’s home this August that any firm action was taken, after I had written to both the Grampian Police and Alex Salmond, who had previously been informed about the case, that I would hold the individuals concerned personally responsible if any hard should befall Anne and/or Hollie. Tanya Leiper and Lisa Evans came down to Shrewsbury on 8th September to interview both Anne and Hollie. I was able to listen to the interview conducted with Hollie by Lisa Evans from the next- door room of the house. It lasted around three and a half hours in which Hollie explained and relived her multiple rape ordeals in precise and intimate detail. It was horrifying, but Hollie was magnificently heroic and remained strong and throughout, answering the questions with tremendous composure, squaring exactly with everything I had understood as a result of my own observations. Let it not be forgotten that she had already endured such an interview on August 25th 2000. I have previously written to Sheriff Buchanan with a list of his fellow rape gang visitors to the house, along with Hollie's name and a picture of her. He, denied, in writing, any knowledge of any of them. Below is the list: Aberdeen Pedophile Rape Ring Members: Denis Charles Mackie Greg Mackie Graeme Mackie Gillian Mackie Jack Buchanan Evelyn Buchanan Sheriff Graeme Buchanan David Smith Wyn Dragan Terry Major (Police Officer, Grampian) Sylvia Major Helen MacDonald (Carer for Hollie Grieg) Ian MacDonald Carol Low Known Victims Hollie Greig Richard Dragan Katherine Major Jennifer Major Two children of Ian and Helen Macdonald Two children of Graeme and Gillian Mackie I know all these names as a result of my extensive investigations and I believe this to be true. Robert Green I have recently listened to the most harrowing interview I have ever experienced, where Hollie Greig spent three and a half hours reliving her multiple rape and sexual ordeals at the hands of Sheriff Buchanan and his gang, mainly conducted in the home of his sister Evelyn. Surely there are highly placed individuals within the BBC with sufficient integrity and courage to help to expose these appalling crimes and protect some of our country's most vulnerable young people. I expect an answer from you personally, not someone delegated to do so. Yours Sincerely Robert Green, Investigator Cc Sir Michael Lyons Kenny_122I found the following statement on the city visitor web page concerning Bucksburn Police: "If you find yourself in trouble or wish to report something suspicious you'll need to call the police in Bucksburn. Police here deal with an array of incidents from domestic violence to stolen goods and vehicles and it's always nice to know that there are helpful and sympathetic people to call upon during your time of need. I wonder what went wrong during Hollies years of need!!! The Hollie story has so far been aired on US Radio Stations, UK and European Radio Stations. Articles have been printed in the US, Middle East and soon in New Delhi. Public demonstrations are starting to get underway in Glasgow, Edinburgh and London. Many web pages now contain every aspect of Hollie's story and every article written by myself has been forwarded to the following: Gordon Brown, David Cameron, Kenneth Clarke, William Hague, Nick Clegg, Danny Alexander and Ester Rantzen. Others notified by Robert Green are Alex Salmond - Scottish First Minister, All SNP Scottish Cabinet members, All 43 Aberdeen City Councillors, Colin McKerracher, Chief Constable, Grampian Police, Peter Watson, Levy & McCrae, solicitors, Dr Alistair Palin, Royal Cornhill Hospital, Fiona Palin, Social Work Manager, Ann Begg, MP, George Galloway, MP, Angus Robertson, MP, Ann McKetchin, MP, Jim Murphy, MP and again Nick Clegg, MP, David Cameron, MP, Gordon Brown, PM. It must be emphasized that all of the above are "Civil Servants" who are put into office to "Serve the People" and "Listen to the People" and to date not one response...their arrogance will be their failing.... now you know where not to vote at the next General Election! Part 2 will start to work through the minefield of the Scottish (extremely evasive) legal system. It will show a total lack of duty of care by the Grampian Police and Mental Health etc with appropriate letters relating to Anne and Hollie's case (or should I say no case!). When one adds the historical lists of pedophiles to the existing FBI list we can see that this reaches all levels of those who are supposed to care for us in Health and Mental Welfare, Schools and Education, Police, Care Homes and Politically... No party is exempt. There is no limit as to how high this goes in all of the above areas...including of course the upper crust of Freemasons. We, the public, must remember to keep up all the media activities and the protests until these so-called "Gentlemen of Conscience" (who represent we the people) succumb to the pressure! The public will be the jury in Hollie's Case, which I will now place before you and you can reach your own conclusions. Peter Eyre - Middle East Consultant - 13/3/2010 Scottish government cover-up of Hollie Greig, part 2: notification of crime & reaction Monday, 15 March 2010 11:12 Added by PT Editor maysaa jarour Buchanan222UK, March 15, 2010 (Pal Telegraph; commentary by Peter Eyre) – In Part 1 of this series we covered the general overview of the Hollie Greig story as told by Robert Green. We will now continue by explaining the initial notification to the Grampian Police and to other authorities and events that followed after this initial response. It was back in 2000 that Hollie's mum had been beaten by her husband and she decided to leave him and went to a hostel with Hollie. It was whilst they were alone together in the hostel that Hollie told her mum that they had to go and get the dogs. Anne said not to worry we will get the dogs but Hollie insisted that they go otherwise he will kill her two pet dogs. Anne then started to question Hollie on this issue and the story of abuse slowly came out. Apparently her father used this tool as a leverage for him to carry out his activities...he had also told Hollie that he would also kill her mum. Hollie by this time was 20 years old. The next day Hollie's Carer came around and so Anne decided to discuss this with her. Anne was shocked with her response to the story...it later came out that the Carer was part of the ring of pedophiles. Anne then decided to take Hollie to the Bucksburn Police station in Aberdeen to report the incident. At this stage it was only concerning the abuse by her father. Hollie spent around three days with the police who cross-examined her over her sexual abuse. Hollie had told the police that her father had started doing this when they were on holiday in Brazil, which meant that this was when she was only 6 years old. The police had not given any feedback to Anne during, or after, the three-day's questioning. Brian Adam MSP also wrote a letter to Elish Angiolini (the Procurator Fiscal in Aberdeen) as an introduction to Hollie's case. This letter is shown at the end of this article Anne had been at the hostel from May - 10th of July 2000 and eventually was given accommodation by Aberdeen Council and some weeks after this Anne received a call from the Procurator Fiscal's Office at 6-30pm on night to say that they were sorry, that it wasn't because they did not believe Hollie but the evidence provided was not substantial and the case would not be going to court. Grampian_Police Anne continues talking to Hollie over the summer break and it was then that the involvement with others started to come out. Hollie had said that her brother was also involved. It appeared that the father first sexually abused her brother and that he had then become a pedophile and part of the ring. Apparently Anne's son had been involved in some other incident in Aberdeen but got away with it after a lawyer called Buchanan handled the case. This lawyer himself was involved in the pedophile ring and later became the Sheriff of Aberdeen (the office he still holds to this day). Anne then decided to speak with the police officer involved in Hollie's case and asked if there was an expert that Hollie could be referred but the police notified Anne that there was no funding for this. Anne became very upset about this and told the officer that if he didn't have the funding then she would do this herself. This cost Anne between 600-700 pounds to get hold of a doctor (DR. Jack Boyle) in Glasgow where Hollie was interviewed. The doctor eventually wrote a full report and told Anne that her daughter had described to him that Hollie had been subject to sexual activity etc. On the 25th of August 2000 Anne went back to the police station to tell them about these other people in the hope that something would come out of this. Anne was now aware that many people were involved covering the Sheriff of Aberdeen - Buchanan, police officer involved in forensics, fireman, accountant, lawyer, oil engineer, women etc all amounting to around 14 people approximately. At times it would appear that Hollie was subjected to what can only be described as "Gang Rape." Anne eventually managed to access Hollie's Medical Reports and found out that back in 1990 a Dr.Paul Carter who was connected to the Children Hospital in Aberdeen and Hollie's school had reported to her GP and Headmaster that Hollie had contracted a sexually transmitted disease. Anne was never told about this despite the fact that Hollie was only 9 years old at the time. No action was taken on this issue, which would indicate some sort of cover up. Two years later in 1992 her teacher reported to Dr. Carter that Hollie was showing signs of sexual abuse because she was pelvically thrusting. This was also reported to her GP and Headmaster and again Anne was never told. (The Palestine Telegraph holds Copy of this letter as proof). The Police also accessed her medical notes and Anne spoke with an Inspector Dowell who was asked if he had read Hollie's medical notes...the Inspector stated that he had not read them personally to which Anne said "I think you should" and went on to describe to him that at the age of 9 Hollie Alex_122had a Sexually Transmitted Disease and in 1992 was showing signs of sexual abuse and that nothing had been done about it. The fact that Hollie was in a Specialist School one would have thought that any wrong-doings would have involved notification of the parents. It became very clear that one big cover up was going on here. It later became known to Hollie's mum that the Policeman and his wife who were all involved in the Pedophile Ring knew the Headmaster. Hollie later told her mum that the headmaster had sexually abused her also. One has to understand not only the size of the ring of Pedophiles but also the level of sexual abuse that took place. Hollie was subject to being raped both back and front. Hollie complained of pain in her bottom and a medical check was carried out which revealed damage etc. To recap on this story we have all of the above being reported to the Grampian Police.... the list of offenders, list of other victims and the medical records and still the police did nothing. The Procurator Fiscal Office had said they couldn't do anything. Later that summer Anne and Hollie went back to the police station and they were both separated from each other. Anne was interviewed by Leanne Davidson and a Police Sergeant and she explained what Hollie had told her and Davidson took her statement. After Anne had finished she joined up with Hollie who was sitting with Nicola Foot (a Social Worker) and Hollie was crying. Mum told Hollie not to worry and took her for her favourite meal at MacDonalds but Hollie was too upset to eat it. Anne took Hollie home and on the way Hollie told her mum that the Social Worker had stuck a needle in her leg. Anne immediately went back to the police station and told them what had happened. Leanne Davidson said she would try and get a police doctor. They both waited for two and a half hours only to be told that they couldn't find a police doctor so they would have to go home. Anne managed to get an appointment with a new local GP who refused to do a blood test as in her opinion it was not necessary. The doctor did suggest Hollie does a urine test and to go home and post the sample in. Some days later it came back negative. Just before the 5th of September 2000 Anne got a phone call from the above GP who asked Anne to come up to the surgery. Anne said what for and the GP said we are concerned about your finger (which had been previously broken by her abusive husband when they split up). Letter_to_Angiolini22Anne became extremely concerned as to why after such a long period of time the doctor would want her to go up to the surgery...it was obvious that the GP had something else in mind. The following Tuesday Anne was making up some curtains when Hollie asked her to make her a sandwich. Anne opened a tin of ham and made a sandwich. She then decided to go down to the bin room to throw it away as her own bin was full. She went to the bin room and on the way to the front door she found police and other men and women standing there. Anne walked past them to the bin room and on the way back was approached by the GP. The lady doctor addressed her and Anne said, "What's going on here" and the doctor asked her to come inside. Anne again asked the doctor why was she here and the doctor replied "We are here to section you" and replied "There is no way, these are just lies from my husband, something has to be done about this as I am the innocent party"...at that stage four men came and bodily lifted me up and taken into the entrance to the building where I was thrown onto the concrete floor, turned on to my stomach, my trousers and pants were taken down, I was screaming blue murder at the time and all my neighbours were out shouting leave her alone she has not done anything. I was injected in my backside and knocked out. Hollie was watching all this and must have wondered what the heck was going on. Anne woke up in a mental hospital with two doctors talking blood out of my arm. This became the start of another battle for Anne, as she was very concerned as to what had happened to Hollie. Anne later found out that I was taken away in an ambulance and they went into my home and took Hollie into care. Whilst in care they took her to see her father, despite the fact that they knew that the father had abused her. It was Social Services who had done this and one would ask why on earth they would do such a thing? Anne, in the meantime, got a lawyer and also at this time she noticed a board with numbers on it so she phoned help line. The adviser said to her that if she does not agree to what they are saying, they would slap another section on you. She had already been sectioned for three days and if they had done another section it would have been for possibly another six weeks and if you still do not agree they will slap another 6 months on you. After Anne got out after the three days she accessed her medical notes, under the freedom of information. Whilst she was in the hostel Anne was being watched with an intended plan to section her.... which is what they did...all of this information was in the medical notes. The two Doctor's watching her were a Dr. Henderson and a Dr. Sweeney. Anne drove down to Fife to see a lawyer and she put her in touch with a top psychiatrist and both Anne and Hollie went down to Glasgow for that appointment. She spent the whole day with the Doctor and a report was written. The psychiatrist told Anne she was a normal person and issues a report accordingly. Her lawyer then complained to the authorities that Anne was perfectly ok. The Mental Health Commission wrote back to the lawyer and said that Anne would have to make this complaint herself. Anne then wrote a letter of complaint and she got her letter back stating they had received my letter of complaint. Anne lawyer did get a letter back eventually which stated that they had no record of Anne sectioning and no reference to Anne being seen by a Dr Palin or the legal people in Aberdeen etc. One can sense here a total cover up by the Police, the Scottish Legal System and the Mental Health. It is at this stage that I will stop this story right there and return with Part 3, which will reveal the next horrific chapter in Anne's life concerning the death of her brother Robert under very suspicious circumstances. I again repeat that each of these articles is copied to the Prime Minister's Office, To David Cameron and Nick Clegg with no response whatsoever. It should be noted that on TV last night (The Politics Show) Gordon Brown again said we have to protect our children...So Mr. Brown go and do it. It is left to we the public to continue applying the pressure in order to bring justice for poor Hollie Greig and her mum. Peter Eyre - Middle East Consultant - 15/3/2010 Scottish government cover-up of Hollie Greig, part 3 – The death of Robert Greig Tuesday, 16 March 2010 16:18 Added by PT Editor maysaa jarour Alex_Salmond_copy UK, March 16, 2010 (Pal Telegraph)- In my previous article I discussed the initial notification to the Grampian Police and their response in regard to Hollie’s allegations. Before moving on into the final part of this terrible story we must look at another family tragedy when Anne lost her Brother Robert under very suspicious circumstances. Anne was preparing for Hollies 18th Birthday and Robert came around for a visit. Anne eventually had to nip out and told Robert. That was the last time that Anne saw her brother. On the 17th of November 1997, long before any of this had erupted, Robert was found dead in his burnt out car on the outskirts of Aberdeen, Anne received a knock at the door at around 2130 and found two policemen at her door. They asked Anne if she was the sister to Robert to whom she replied yes and the policeman then requested if they could step inside. They then reported to Anne that her Brother Robert had been found in a burnt our car etc. Anne eventually went to see the coroner, regarding the death of her brother, to be told that they had found a length of pipe besides the car (which was not attached) and indications show that he was two and a half times over the limit and that they suspected suicide. Anne obviously was extremely upset and couldn't imagine that Robert would do this. She later checked her brothers bank transactions and noticed that he had only put 5 pounds worth of petrol in the car, which to Anne was normal for the small amount of running around he did. She did however think that if he had wanted to carry out this act he would have fuelled his car much more. She was not shown the autopsy report and only received a death certificate; with the cause of death being smoke inhalation and not carbon monoxide poisoning that one would associate with the pipe etc. Kenny222One year on she received a call from the undertakers to say that Roberts's funeral had still not been paid for and that she would be put on their Black List. She was shocked to learn this and immediately contacted Ian MacDougall as to why.... he said he would look into it. What should be pointed out here was that the instructions in the will would reveal that the main bulk of any monies would be paid to Anne and her Husband and any residue would go the children. It transpired that the funeral was eventually paid out of the children's money and there were clear signs that some sort of fraud had taken place. Anne decided to investigate this and started to take photocopies of all the dealings. It was at this stage that her husband beat her up very badly and this caused Anne to leave home with Hollie and go to stay at a hostel Z9Hollie had revealed to Anne, after her brother's death, that Uncle Robert had walked in on them one day and caught her father interfering with her. He had warned her father that he must never lay a finger on Hollie ever again. Anne tried to ask Hollie when had this taken place and it would appear it was after their return from Canada in September of 1997. Anne worked out that her brother actually found out only weeks before his death, which caused Anne to investigate further. It became obvious to Anne that Robert knew too much and may have died because of this. She tried to obtain the Autopsy report but without success and it was only on New Years Eve 2009 that she managed to obtain the report. She didn't want to read it as it was New Years Eve celebrations but she decided to take a look. She was shocked to read that Robert had a fractured skull, broken ribs and a broken Sternum, which is extremely strong and difficult to break. It became apparent to Letter_to_Alex222Anne that her brother had been brutally attacked and then dumped in the car before it was set alight. The autopsy revealed that he was still alive at that stage and that burning plastic had dropped onto his legs etc. The report also found brown liquid in his stomach, which apparently was Whiskey, which Robert hated. We can see a major cover-up on all fronts and no one can do anything about it because Scotland is controlled by Alex Salmond and by two powerful legal supporters, namely, The Cabinet Secretary for Justice - Kenny MacAskill and The Lord Advocate for Scotland - Elish Angiolini. These three partners in crime are totally aware of the Hollie Case including the mystery behind the death of Robert Greig and do absolutely nothing. It is clear that should Hollie's case move forward this could cause the current Scottish Government to collapse. The manipulation by MacAskill, Angiolini and one of the offenders, Aberdeen Sheriff Buchanen is obscene to say the least and all should be removed from office without delay pending a full inquiry (don't hold your breath). One should also add that Peter Watson, Levy & McCrae, solicitors has also played a major role in gagging those that may want to talk about this case and is a disgrace to his profession. This is a "Name and Shame" list of all those informed to date by various people and still they all sit on their hands and do nothing. All of my articles are copied to all the political leaders - Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg. The full list is: Alex Salmond - Scottish First Minister All SNP Scottish Cabinet members All 43 Aberdeen City Councillors Colin McKerracher, Chief Constable, Grampian Police Peter Watson, Levy & McCrae, and solicitors Dr Alastair Palin, Royal Cornhill Hospital Fiona Palin, Social Work Manager Ann Begg, MP George Galloway, MP Angus Robertson, MP Ann McKetchin, MP Jim Murphy, MP Nick Clegg, MP David Cameron, MP Gordon Brown, PM Mrs_CurrieThe letter to Mrs. Currie as described in the letter to Alex Salmond is shown to the left. We will take a closer look at the response to these letters and other topics relating to Hollie's fight for justice. In Part 4 we will look into this response and some other interesting aspects of the Dunblane Massacre that took place some years ago. One can draw one's own conclusions as to who is or was abusing their power of authority and who is still clearly in office manipulating the law for their own hidden agenda. It is ironic that Scotland will host the ICC Conference on the 7-10 October 2010, which is advertised as follows: Scotland to host ICC Biennial Scotland is to host a major international conference for National Human Rights Institutions. The 10th International Conference of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) will take place at the Scottish Parliament from 7 - 10 October 2010. Delegates from over 80 countries including national human rights institutions (NHRIs), international and regional experts, United Nations officials, government representatives, civil society and business organisations will discuss human rights issues on the theme of Business and Human Rights, and the role national institutions can play in improving human rights in a globalised world. It will be the first time an official United Nations-supported event has taken place in Scotland. I am sure you would all agree that if the Hollie Case does not come before the courts by the time this event takes place.... we would all know where to hold a protest. It would be impossible, given normal circumstances, for this case not to be before the courts based on current available evidence. The big question now is can we all continue to maintain the pressure in order to gain a result. The pressure must remain relentless and timely protests should be maintained. There is extremely good international support now and I believe we are close to having some sort of action in the pipeline that will force this out into the open. Remain strong and with your determination we can turn this around...we owe this to Hollie and her mum and not forgetting dear Uncle Robert who paid for his life as a result of knowing too much. Bless you all and keep up the good fight. Peter Eyre - Middle East Consultant - 16/3/2010 Scottish government cover-up of Hollie Greig, part 3 – The death of Robert Greig Tuesday, 16 March 2010
Monday, 13 February 2012
Sunday, September 17, 2000 Jewish Myths about the Berlin Olympic Games (1936) Le Monde, journal oblique (continued) In today’s Le Monde, Sylvain Cypel devotes an article to Jesse Owens, the American mulatto who won four gold medals at the Olympic Games in Berlin in 1936 (“1936, à Berlin, l’Aryen ‘Lutz’ devient l’ami de Jesse, le métis” (“1936, at Berlin, the Aryan ‘Lutz’ befriends Jesse, the mulatto”), 17-18 September 2000, p. VI). The journalist is forced to acknowledge that the story of chancellor Hitler refusing to shake Jesse Owens’ hand is but a legend. Still in 1991, Le Monde accredited that legend under the by-line of Claude Sarraute, who had dared to write: “Hitler indeed refused to shake the hand of Jesse Owens, the black American champion at the Berlin Olympics in 1936” (“Bleu, blanc, noir”, 3 December 1991, p. 34). The protocol had not provided for the athletes’ presentation to the chancellor and J. Owens himself afterwards denied ever having been in Hitler’s presence. What S. Cypel could have pointed out is that, having noted the defeat of Ludwig (“Lutz” or “Luz”) Long in the long jump, Hitler, on his dais above, made at first, like many other Germans, “a sign of disappointment, then applauded the black American’s performance” (J.-P. Rudin, Nice-Matin, 4 April 1980). The same S. Cypel fails to add that the name of J. Owens was engraved four times on the tower of honour at the Olympic grounds. A photograph has immortalised the act of the German sculptor inscribing the illustrious name for the second time at the very top of the monument. Once back in the United States, the athlete was to experience anew, on public transport as elsewhere, the daily humiliations inflicted on blacks in his country, and would not fail to make a comparison with the treatment that had been reserved for him in Germany. In 1984, four years after J. Owens’ death, his widow recalled that he had never made any complaints about Hitler’s Germany. How could he have done so? When he walked off the field side by side with his German friend and rival, an ovation saluted the two athletes. In the two-volume photographic album devoted to the Games, Hitler is shown six times, J. Owens seven times and the black athletes in general twelve times. The chapter covering foot racing opens with “The fastest man in the world: Jesse Owens-USA”. The opening page of the first volume bears a photograph of Adolf Hitler amidst a group of German officials, and that of volume two, a portrait of Theodor Lewald, a Jew and president of the German Olympic organising committee (Olympia 1936, Die Olympischen Spiele 1936 in Berlin und Garmisch-Partenkirchen, 2 vol., 1936, 292 p.). The Jewish athletes at the Olympics S. Cypel writes that “the German-Jewish athletes [were] prevented from participating” in the Games. One will remind him that, as I have just mentioned, the president of the German Olympic organising committee was the German Jew Theodor Lewald, that the German Jewess Helene Mayer won the silver medal in fencing; as for the German Jew or half-Jew Rudi Ball who, at the Winter Games of 1932 had been a member of his country’s bronze medallist ice-hockey team, he again played on that team in the 1936 Games held at Garmisch-Partenkirchen. It is true that at the last moment the German star high-jumper Gretel Bergman was cut from the team but that could not be for her Jewishness, as is proved by the examples of the two other athletes. Hitler had expressly stated before the games that Jewish athletes must not be excluded from the German team (Eliahu Ben Elissar, La Diplomatie du IIIe Reich et les juifs, Paris, Christian Bourgois, 1981, I, p. 164). On the subject of German-Jewish athletes’ participation in those Olympics, one noteworthy reaction was that of Victor Klemperer, cousin of the orchestral conductor Otto Klemperer. The son of a rabbi and husband of an Aryan wife, he spent the entire National-Socialist period, including the war years, in Germany and, more precisely, in Dresden which he had to leave after the terrible Allied bombings of February 1945. In his private diary, under the date of 13 August 1936, he noted: I find the Olympic Games, which will soon be over, doubly repulsive. As an absurd over-estimation of sport; the honour of a people depends on whether one of its members jumps ten centimetres higher than the others. And besides, it’s a nigger from the United States who has jumped the highest, and the silver medal in fencing for Germany has been taken by the Jewess Helene M[a]yer (I don’t know what is more indecent, her participation as a German of the 3rd Reich or the fact that her performance should be claimed as a victory for the 3rd Reich (Journal, I, Paris, Seuil, 2000, p. 286). It must be said that V. Klemperer was fiercely anti-Zionist. For him, Zionism was “pure Nazism” and “repugnant” (Ibid., p. 438). Entente between National Socialists and Zionists A good number of Zionist Jews held an ideology similar to that of the National Socialists. Efforts are made today to keep this point under wraps, at the risk of thwarting completely the comprehension of a whole series of historical facts among which may be cited: 1) the August 1933 Ha’avara Agreement (transfer agreement) reached between Zionists and the authorities of the 3rd Reich with the aim of breaking or getting round the formidable economic boycott of Germany, decreed by the other international Jewish organisations as early as March 1933; 2) the approval by a sizeable part of the Zionist camp, in 1935, of the Nuremberg Laws for the protection of German blood (these Zionists were in favour of the protection of Jewish blood and thus against mixed marriage); 3) the co-operation, all throughout the war, of the “Brown Jews” or the “International of Jewish Collaborators” with Adolf Eichmann, himself pro-Zionist and pro-Jewish, as well as with other German officials; 4) the innumerable contacts between Jewish officials and the German authorities during the whole of the war, going as far as the offer on the part of the Lehi, alias Stern Group, of a military alliance against Great Britain (January 1941) or the meeting, in April 1945, between Heinrich Himmler and a prominent member of the World Jewish Congress, Norbert Masur. Zionists and National Socialists were also in favour of a “territorial final solution” of the Jewish question (territoriale Endlösung der Judenfrage). It goes without saying that, as in all collaborations, co-operations or co-habitations, especially in political matters, ulterior motives, manœuvres, machinations, and turnabouts were not lacking. The rise of German Zionism in 1936 In February 1936, that is, some months before the opening of the Olympic Games, the German Zionists had officially held their congress in Berlin. By that very year, Germany hosted about forty Zionist training centres (Umschulungslagern) for the instruction of young Jews in farming or other skills that they would need to use later on in Palestine. The Jewish press in Germany at that time experienced a prodigious expansion. There was talk of a reawakening or revival of Jewish consciousness. Assuredly the anti-Zionist Jews deplored or condemned this state of things. Many Jews, particularly those of the older generation, proudly laid claim to a certain Germanity: amongst them, the project held by young Jews to be a solution for the future was seen as a disaster in the making. The Germans authorised the setting up of uniformed Jewish paramilitary groups under a blue and white flag (the flag of the future state of Israel), albeit on the condition that they not parade in the streets but only within their school grounds or barracks. Sometimes there were sporting events between young Zionist and young National Socialist teams. On all of these aspects one may especially read either the book by Francis Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (Austin, University of Texas Press, 1985), or Otto Dov Kulka’s noteworthy study “The reactions of German Jewry to the National-Socialist Regime” on pages 367-379 of the work by Jehuda Reinharz, Living with Antisemitism (Hanover, New Hampshire, University Press of New England, 1987), or the book by the French author Emmanuel Ratier, Les Guerriers d’Israël (Paris, Facta, 1995). One may also consult either the Encyclopaedia Judaica or the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust; I recommend this latter book’s entry “Lohamei Herut Israel”, on the subject of the proposal by the Lehi, to which Yitzak Shamir belonged, of a military alliance between Jews and Germans against Great Britain. The case of Marty Glickman Keen to detect the least hint of anti-Semitism and to take advantage of it so as to find fault, wail, and make new demands, S. Cypel is not afraid of attacking the heads of the 1936 American delegation. He states that this squad included only two Jewish athletes, Marty Glickman and Sam Stoller. At the last minute, these two relay racers were replaced by two blacks, Ralph Metcalfe and Jesse Owens. One sole explanation for Le Monde: Glickman and Stoller were dropped because they were Jews! The argument is inadmissible since in the end the choice proved to be one of the most fortunate, with the blacks taking the gold medal. In any case, if certain persons are to be believed, in the 1980s M. Glickman, then best known in America as radio commentator for the New York “Giants” football club, stated that he had an “enthusiastic” remembrance of those games (G. Frey ed., Vorsicht Fälschung !, Munich, FZ-Verlag, 1994, p. 119). The case of Horst Wessel S. Cypel evokes: “the Horst Wessel Lied, that song of the SA in honour of an anti-Semitic hooligan, bellowed after the Olympic anthem”. A Jewish and Communist tradition has it that Horst Wessel met his death either in a street battle with the Communists or in a fight in public with a pimp. The truth of the matter appears to be that this pastor’s son, a militant anti-Communist active in the SA, law student and, in his free time, poet, was shot in the face by a Communist at his home and died in a Berlin hospital in 23 February 1930. In September 1929, he had published a poem to the glory of the SA and it is that poem, set to music after his death, which became the second German national anthem. Less lying propaganda? It is somewhat difficult these days to keep pace with the daily Le Monde in its production of errors or lies relating to the 3rd Reich or the Shoah. I have made a duty of sending both to its managing editor, Jean-Marie Colombani, and to the authors of grossly mistaken or mendacious articles, my humble inventories, invariably set forth under the heading: “Le Monde, journal oblique (suite)”. I am aware of the fact that this newspaper, which has great need of money and fears the wrath of the Jews, steadily tries to make atonement for its cardinal sin: did it not proceed, in its issues of 29 December 1978 and 16 January 1979, to print my iconoclastic observations on the physical and chemical impossibilities of the Nazi gas chambers? That act is what remains etched in the minds of those who profess never to forget and never to forgive. So be it! But there ought to be limits to servility. Jean-Christophe Mitterrand has seen in Le Monde the “echo chamber” of “a certain Jewish lobby” (Libération, 30 August 1999, p. 15). That lobby bursts our eardrums with its lying propaganda, as with its “Holocaust” industry’s inventions and the fabrications of its Shoah-Business. It is time that Le Monde ceased being its “echo chamber”. For my part, I await the review that this newspaper will not fail to do of a work which is among the most horrid that the holocaustic propaganda outfits have ever produced. It is the book chosen by French Education minister Jack Lang for the mandatory teaching of the Shoah to the children of France from the third year in secondary school. Concocted by Stéphane Bruchfeld and Paul Levine, it is to be published by Ramsay under the title: Dites-le à vos enfants. I shall, upon its release, give an account both of this book as such and of its review by Le Monde. NB: In its issue of 29 September, Le Monde was to publish, under the by-line of Philippe-Jean Catinchi, a brief review of a book by Jean-Michel Blaizeau, Les Jeux défigurés de Berlin (“The Disfigured Berlin Games”). A passage in this account reads that, of the 1936 Olympics, what has been retained is “the fury of Hitler refusing to shake the hand of Jesse Owens”. Nothing in the piece indicates that this is the stuff of myth. September 17, 2000 (revised October 24) Posted by N
Sunday, 12 February 2012
Will Iran Be Attacked? 44 US military bases surrounding Iran... By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts February 8, 2012 paulcraigroberts.com Washington has made tremendous preparations for a military assault on Iran. There is speculation that Washington has called off its two longest running wars--Iraq and Afghanistan--in order to deploy forces against Iran. Two of Washington’s fleets have been assigned to the Persian Gulf along with NATO warships. Missiles have been spread amongst Washington’s Oil Emirate and Middle Eastern puppet states. US troops have been deployed in Israel and Kuwait. Washington has presented Israel a gift from the hard-pressed american taxpayers of an expensive missile defense system, money spent for Israel when millions of unassisted americans have lost their homes. As no one expects Iran to attack Israel, except in retaliation for an Israeli attack on Iran, the purpose of the missile defense system is to protect Israel from an Iranian response to Israeli aggression against Iran. Juan Cole has posted on his blog a map showing 44 US military bases surrounding Iran. In addition to the massive military preparations, there is the propaganda war against Iran that has been ongoing since 1979 when Washington’s puppet, the Shah of Iran, was overthrown by the Iranian revolution. Iran is surrounded, but Washington and Israeli propaganda portray Iran as a threatening aggressor nation. In fact, the aggressors are the Washington and Tel Aviv governments which constantly threaten Iran with military attack. Neocon warmongers, such as David Goldman, compare the Iranian president to Hitler and declare that only war can stop him. Washington’s top military officials have created the impression that an act of Israeli aggression against Iran is a done deal. On February 2 the Washington Post reported that Pentagon chief Leon Panetta believes that Israel is likely to attack Iran in two to four months. Also on February 2, Gareth Porter reported that General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, informed the Israeli government that the US would not join Israel’s aggression against Iran unless Washington had given prior approval for the attack. Porter interprets Dempsey’s warning as a strong move by President Obama to deter an attack that would involve Washington in a regional conflagration with Iran. A different way to read Dempsey’s warning is that Obama wants to hold off on attacking Iran until polls show him losing the presidential election. It has generally been the case that the patriotic electorate does not turn out a president who is at war. On February 5, President Obama canceled Dempsey’s warning to Israel when Obama declared that he was in “lockstep” with the Israeli government. Obama is in lockstep with Israel despite the fact that Obama told NBC that “we don’t see any evidence that they [Iran] have those intentions [attacks on the US] or capabilities.” By being in lockstep with Israel and simultaneously calling for a “diplomatic solution,” Obama appeased both the Israel Lobby and Democratic peace groups, thus upping his vote. As I wrote previously, this spring is a prime time for attacking Iran, because there is a good chance that Russia will be in turmoil because of its March election. The Russian opposition to Putin is financed by Washington and encouraged by Washington’s statements, especially those of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Whether Putin wins or there is an indecisive result and a run-off election, Washington’s money will put tens of thousands of Russians into the streets, just as Washington’s money created the “Green Revolution” in Iran to protest the presidential elections there. On February 4 the former left-wing British newspaper, The Guardian, reported a pre-election protest by 120,000 anti-Putin demonstrators marching in Moscow and demanding “fair elections.” In other words, Washington already has its minions declaring that a win by Putin in March can only signify a stolen election. The problem for Obama is that this spring is too early to tell whether his re-election is threatened by a Republican candidate. Going to war prematurely, especially if the result is a stiff rise in oil prices, is not an aid to re-election. The willingness of peoples around the world to be Washington’s puppets instead of loyal citizens of their own countries is why the West has been able to dominate the world during the modern era. There seems to be an infinite supply of foreign leaders who prefer Washington’s money and favor to loyalty to their own countries’ interests. As Karl Marx said, money turns everything into a commodity that can be bought and sold. All other values are defeated--honor, integrity, truth, justice, loyalty, even blood kin. Nothing remains but filthy lucre. Money certainly turned UK prime minister Tony Blair into a political commodity. The power of money was brought home to me many years ago. My Ph.D. dissertation chairman found himself in the Nixon administration as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security affairs. He asked if I would go to Vietnam to administer the aid programs. I was flattered that he thought I had the strength of character to stand up to the corruption that usually defeats the purpose of aid programs, but I declined the assignment. The conversation was one I will never forget. Warren Nutter was an intelligent person of integrity. He thought regardless of whether the war was necessary that we had been led into it by deception. He thought democracy could not live with deception, and he objected to government officials who were not honest with the American people. Nutter’s position was that a democratic government had to rely on persuasion, not on trickery. Otherwise, the outcomes were not democratic. As Nutter saw it, we were in a war, and we had involved the South Vietnamese. Therefore, we had obligations to them. If we proved to be feckless, the consequence would be to undermine commitments we had made to other countries in our effort to contain the Soviet Empire. The Soviet Union, unlike the “terrorist threat” had the potential of being a real threat. People who have come of age after the collapse of the Soviet Union don’t understand the cold war era. In the course of the conversation I asked how Washington got so many other governments to do its bidding. He answered, “Money.” I asked, “You mean foreign aid?” He said, “No, bags of money. We buy the leaders.” He didn’t approve of it, but there was nothing he could do about it. Purchasing the leadership of their enemies or of potential threats was the Roman way. Timothy H. Parsons in his book, The Rule of Empires, describes the Romans as “deft practitioners of soft power.” Rome preferred to rule the conquered and the potentially hostile through “semiautonomous client kings which the Senate euphemistically termed ‘friends of the Roman people.’ Romans helped cooperative monarchs remain in power with direct payments of coins and material goods. Acceptance of these subsidies signified that an ally deferred to imperial authority, and the Romans interpreted any defiance of their will as an overt revolt. They also intervened freely in local succession disputes to replace unsuitable clients.” This is the way Washington rules. Washington’s way of ruling other countries is why there is no “Egyptian Spring,” but a military dictatorship as a replacement for Washington’s discarded puppet Hosni Mubarak, and why European puppet states are fighting Washington’s wars of hegemony in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia. Washington’s National Endowment for Democracy funds non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. It is through the operations of NGOs that Washington added the former Soviet Republic of Georgia to Washington’s empire, along with the Baltic States, and Eastern European countries. Because of the hostility of many Russians to their Soviet past, Russia is vulnerable to Washington’s machinations. As long as the dollar rules, Washington’s power will rule. As Rome debased its silver denarius into lead, Rome’s power to purchase compliance faded away. If “Helicopter Ben” Bernanke inflates away the purchasing power of the dollar, Washington’s power will melt away also.