Lebanon: Hezbollah the New Government by *Franklin Lamb

Beirut: This observer tends to get a haircut about every four months whether I need it or not.  But this morning I got more than a trim from my Hezbollah friend and barber, Abass, named after Abass ibn Ali, the brother of Hussein, both martyrs and heroes of the epic 680 a.d. internecine Muslim battle at Karbala in present day Iraq. The Battle of Karbala, for Hezbollah members and Shia Muslims generally, symbolizes the triumph of good over evil and the willingness to sacrifice one’s life for justice and the greater good of one’s family, community or “Ummah.” The reason for mentioning this is that my barber was ecstatic and claims his party has just experienced a “Karbala moment!”

 When I mentioned that his statement could be taken different ways, since all the resistance fighters were killed at Karbala, Abass continued:  “Well, what I mean is that we in Hezbollah are pretty well known for kicking and keeping the Zionists out of Lebanon but our Party also seems to be catching on how to work in Lebanese and regional politics. And our people will benefit as we create social programs and honest government for the first time in Lebanese history. Do you agree that we are beginning to play the Lebanese political game pretty well?”

I do agree.

With a speed that surprised many here, and with equally surprising cross-sectarian acquiescence this morning, Hezbollah and its allies constitutionally toppled Hariri’s government, constitutionally imposed new consultations to form a new government, and constitutionally transformed a minority into a majority and vice versa.

Hezbollah is known for studying political subjects very carefully and being quite flexible when events warrant. Two weeks ago when the Party of God pulled 11 MPs from the pro-US Saad Hariri government, it was thinking about nominating former PM Omar Karami to replace Hariri. The two time former Prime Minister, Karami, is strongly pro-Syrian, supports the Resistance and Hezbollah keeping its weapons. He also has zero use for the Special Tribunal for Lebanon that will likely indict a minimum of four Hezbollah officials. Now in his eighties, Karami is still fairly spry and may have assumed the post, if Hezbollah formally offered. In fact he might have thought the job was his but in the midst of fast moving events, Hezbollah decided to opt for nominating Nigib Mikati  an American educated, Sunni billionaire who made lots of money in telecommunications  and a lot more when a South African firm bought  his company. Moreover,Sayyed Nasrallah said in his last speech that Omar Karami was the favored candidate, but the latter did not offer to take the job due to his old age. So the best thing to do was thought to be to talk to Mikati, as he is known to be a centrist and that his candidacy would have a less negative impact on the Hariri camp. Mikati is not close to Hezbollah and certainly has never been an ally.  

In fact, Hezbollah, the Saudis, Europeans, and increasingly the Americans  support Mikati as a World Bank type technocrat along the lines of  former Lebanese PM Fuad Siniora or Salam Fayyad in Palestine but who can hopefully, not just ignore, but help clean up the governments rampant corruption. Hezbollah’s nominee Mikati is known as a pro western moderate who was elected to Parliament in 2009 on the US backed Hariri ticket. The US would publically endorse him except for the fact that Hezbollah nominated him with Iranian, Syrian and Saudi backing.  This hostile reactive US stance may change because Washington will find it difficult to boycott Mikati since the Europeans are endorsing him. Also, the negative international reaction to the Hariri camp violence on 1/27/11 in Tripoli and Beirut is awkward for the Obama administration to justify since the US has accused the Hezbollah led opposition of using “terrorist tactics” when some elements thought to be allied with the party engaged in similar street violence in the past. So the shoe is now on the other foot.

Some of the early winners and losers 48 hours following what the pro-US March 14 team and the US State Department are still calling “the coup”: Saad Hariri and his US backed Future Movement: Both are big political losers this morning but Saad still has a couple of important options. For the past nearly two years Saad was told by the US Embassy that Washington wanted him to “hang tough” and refuse to compromise on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. The US conceived and engineered the STL in the UN Security Council to get Syria out of Lebanon and Bashar Assad out of Damascus following the Valentine Day 2005 murder of PM Rafik Hariri and 22 others.

 Saad obediently did as told and consequently lost his premiership. Hezbollah warned him several times that he would  be out if he did not disavow the STL which Hezbollah views as nothing more than a US-Israeli bludgeon to try to destroy it. When the Hezbollah led opposition pulled down his government on January 12, 2011, Saad was ready to fight to keep his job. But his US and Saudi backers “stabbed Saad in the back as did some of his closest political and personal friends,” according to a Future Movement source.

Meanwhile, both Saudi Arabia and the Obama Administration realized that Saad could not secure the 65 votes from Parliament (they were right; he got just 60) so they decided to let Syria name the non-ideologue,  Nigab Mikati, a personal friend of President Bashar Assad. Omar Karami may have been the first choice but he too was dropped because he also could not get 65 votes and had a checkered past including being too cozy with Syria. The US and the KSA decided better to let Syria back into the Lebanese Government than risk Iran taking complete control.

Saad Hariri reportedly feels betrayed by his fellow Sunni billionaire alliance member Mikati, who he got elected MP in 2009 on his personal ticket.  But in realityMikati's  87%  election results showed that his candidacy helped Hariri's candidates because Mikati’s name was on the ballot as part of the Hariri list. Nevertheless, their meeting yesterday morning lasted about 6 minutes and was stone cold. The Hariri TV channels including Future TV chose to publish just 30 seconds of the encounter.  When Hariri left the meeting and was asked by a journalist if he would join the Mikati government he said "Lashou."  ( meaning: "For what?, or what's the use?" ). 

Just hours later, the March 14 alliance informed Makati that it would not participate in his government. But both may still. The Saudi’s are already encouraging Saad to swallow his pride and cooperate with the next government. Eventually the Americans will likely also after they get over their shock and sour grapes and Jeffrey Feltman talks with the French and some Europeans leaders this weekend.

 This morning, Saad is said to be still inconsolable by yesterday afternoon’s private session with the US Ambassador, the motherly Maury Connelly, and repeated this morning that he will not join a government “appointed by Hezbollah.” But his March 14 movement leadership is qualifying his rejection and strongly pressing PM designate Makati to put in writing for all to see a commitment that his government will not under any circumstances accept the three Hezbollah no’s. They are:  no STL funding, no STL Lebanese judges working at the STL, and no Lebanese government cooperation with the STL including scrapping the Lebanese-UN Memorandum of Understanding pledging cooperation on such matter as arresting and extraditing those soon to be named by the STL.

March 14, including their leader Hariri, is still insisting on their price for participation, which is that the new government support  the STL and that the Lebanese government control Hezbollah’s arms.  They will lose on both demands as Hezbollah will not budge on either. Yet,  discussions are being held on how to resolve these issues and, unlikely as it may appear at the moment, solutions may be found to dissolve these ‘red lines’.

 If Saad stays out of the Mikati government, he will champion the STL but he will lose more March 14th support because some of his closest team members are said to be planning to jump ship and to put politics about their claimed principles in order to grab some well-paid Cabinet chairs. March 14, via Fuad Sinoria, their Parliamentary leader is making lots of noise about Hezbollah weapons but it’s largely as a bargaining chip ploy to get good cabinet posts when the time is right.

This current March14, playing hard to get stance, suits US diplomat Jeffrey Feltman, one of the architects of the 2005 “Cedar Revolution” and who is currently on his 62nd trip to the region to assure anyone listening that he and the US government “respects the sovereignty, freedom, and independence” of Lebanon, whatever any of those words mean anymore, given US actions in the region. In Paris yesterday, Feltman repeated that there persists mutual French-U.S. concern on how the Hariri cabinet was "toppled under threat and intimidation" and he emphasized the need for the US and its allies to press for the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions 1701 (disarm Hezbollah) and 1757 (indict and convict Hezbollah).

Jeff could be forgiven for feeling a little bit like Saeb Erekat when on 10/21/09  the soon to be ex-PA “peace negotiator” complained to George Mitchell that, “The region is slipping away like sand through our hands." Feltman, not for the first time, is under great pressure from Washington and Tel Aviv to “do something!”

Rampant rumors circulating here include one that the US Embassy could be closed if, as expected, the US and Israel launch the expected massive international defamation and vilification campaign in the coming weeks timed to drive home the expected STL indictments that Washington believes will include key Hezbollah officials.

Hezbollah has the most direct control over the government of Lebanon including the Parliament, the next 30 seat Cabinet, and the government bureaucracy. Contrary to US-Israel claims the party is not thrilled with having the chance to run the government. Hezbollah sees itself as a resistance movement first, last, and always and many in the party do not relish its “pure mandate” being sullied or getting sidetracked by running Lebanon’s really complicated government.

Hezbollah will now push its clean government and anti-corruption agenda and get it enacted into law but the party is quite content to leave it to others to work constantly with all those self-absorbed sects and their leaders. To a large extent, it will operate through MPs who are not Hezbollah party members. It intends to immediately begin work on improving the big Four issues that all Lebanese urgently want addressed: water, electricity, pollution, traffic among others including the environment and jobs creation. Hezbollah wants to be seen as serving the people while it builds its resistance movement. It is preparing to unveil its domestic legislative agenda which will include most of the ten ‘good government’ initiatives that its ally Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri delivered to Mikati yesterday.

Hezbollah’s 12-member bloc told the new Prime Minster that it favored a government of “national partnership,” according to its head MP Mohammad Raad who advised the media: “Hezbollah did not set pre-conditions [on Mikati] and we won’t accept such a thing. We did not ask for specific portfolios and we await the formation process.”

Iran benefited with important political gains as it continues to rise and move in the region in the direction of Palestine.The United States’ hegemony continues to recede in the region and is increasingly viewed, post Palestine Papers, as the enemy of Arabs and Muslim. Its pariah status grows because Washington continues to prop up, fund and arm the Zionist occupation of Palestine.

* Dr. Franklin Lamb is Director of the Sabra Shatila Foundation in Lebanon. He is working with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign (PCRC), in Lebanon to encourage its Cabinet and Parliament to enact basic civil rights legislation for Palestinian refugees, including the right to work and to own a home.

Quantum Note: Arab Street in Revolt by *Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal

The proverbial Arab street is back in action. After Tunisia, it is now Egypt’s turn: the old and experienced Hosni Mubarak is facing the strongest challenge to his thirty-year-old tyranny. But one must pause here before the hyperbole gets out of hand: Is it real? Is there anything more to it than the excitement caused by the cyber world of newspapers, twitter and facebook?

Had it not been for the so-called Jasmine revolution of Tunisia, one could have easily dismissed all the hype about the Arab street in revolt, but what happened in Tunisia makes it slightly difficult to do so. To be sure, there has been a change in Tunisia, leading to the ouster of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, who stepped down from the presidency and fled Tunisia on 14 January 2011 after 23 years in power. But is this revolt in the Arab street going to spread to the other countries of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), which have two-thirds of the world’s known petroleum reserves? As analysts from around the world watch events unfolding in Egypt to see if this new Arab street revolt is a bubble that will burst in Cairo, we have it from none other than the Secretary of State that all is well. So, what does this mean?

In non-diplomatic language, it means: do not worry old chap; we are firmly behind you. Your expiry date has not come yet. In not so simple a language, it means that the Jasmine revolution in Tunisia was a calculated move; poor Ben Ali had reached his expiry date and a change was orchestrated under controlled conditions. No, this is not another conspiracy theory; all one needs to do is look at the remaking of the power clique in Tunisia to understand how this Jasmine Revolution perfectly fits the strategy outlined by Richard Nixon in his 1992 book, Seize the Moment: America's Challenge in a One-Superpower World.

Nixon had candidly admitted that in the Muslim world, “demographic, economic, and political trends make conflict increasingly inevitable” and he had advocated a control strategy that revolved around building special relationships with the most modern and moderate Islamic countries, so that they may become “poles of attraction” in the Muslim world. The four countries he selected were Turkey, Egypt, Indonesia, and Pakistan. He believed that over a generation their success would have a profound effect on political evolution elsewhere. “Now that Communism is dead,” he wrote, “we must redefine the American global mission.”

The Nixon Doctrine, establishing proxies of American power around the world, had a further policy imperative: build working relations with “moderate Muslims” around the world. Ben Ali was a perfect model. Behind the fine-tuned, over-simplified gloss lay yet another detail: attach to every “moderate” Muslim an expiry date and take action before that expiry date and replace the soon-to-expire dictator with another setup which will bring new faces to power but ensure continuity of the underline grid. That is exactly what has happened in Tunisia. Old Ben Ali is gone, not because a Jasmine revolution, but simply because he had reached his expiry date. It was imperative to remove him to save the system and the system he had constructed is firmly in place, even though he has escaped with his millions amassed over two decades of plunder.

Hosni Mubarak’s expiry date is not in sight, if we are to believe the Secretary of State’s strong words. Another problem is the lack of a substitute; no one trusts his hated son and although there is the old and tried hand of Mohammed ElBaradei, the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who was once considered a substitute for Mubarak, but he is too old for the job and he has already done enough for America by overseeing its Iraq invasion.

Thus the Arab street may be in revolt, but it is a revolt without a leadership and a revolt without a leadership is like a body without a head. No matter what happens on the Arab street, ultimately Uncle Sam is fully in control and challenge to power without a visionary leadership will lead to chaos. But even that chaos has a function: it dissipates built up anger—some Nixon had advised in his book. He had argued that from time to time, the United States must let provide escape routes to the built up anger, so that things remain within proportions. That is exactly what we are seeing: an escape valve that is allowing the Arab frustration to dissipate on the streets, leading to no real change.

There is only one real unreal in this equation: The very large percentage of young people in MENA region, desperate for jobs, food, and housing. This factor may change the old scenario and upset the equation. The youth bulge and concomitant demands on the labor force, educational, housing, health, and other social systems are putting enormous pressure on the old system. As the youth bulge reaches prime family-formation age in each country, the number of births is likely to increase, fueling considerable future growth. The population on the Arabian Peninsula is projected to double to 124 million by 2050. Iraq and the Palestinian Territory will more than double in size. Iran and Turkey are slated to have about 100 million people each. In North Africa, Egypt will continue to dominate demographically, with a population exceeding 120 million.

This population explosion—and complexity built into this process—may one day give birth to a genuine Arab street revolt with a direction and aim; that day has not come yet. All we have for now is either senseless and leaderless street revolts leading to dissipation of energy, or a controlled process to change of those faces whose expiry date has come.

*Muzaffar Iqbal is the founder-president of Center for Islam and Science (www.cis-ca.org), Canada, and editor of Islam & Science, a semi-annual journal of Islamic perspectives on science and civilization.

British Intelligence Reports…by *Wayne Madsen

British intelligence reported in February 2002 that the Israeli Mossad ran the Arab hijacker cells that were later blamed by the U.S. government's 9/11 Commission for carrying out the aerial attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. WMR has received details of the British intelligence report which was suppressed by the government of then-Prime Minister Tony Blair.

  

A Mossad unit consisting of six Egyptian- and Yemeni-born Jews infiltrated "Al Qaeda" cells in Hamburg (the Atta-Mamoun Darkanzali cell), south Florida, and Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates in the months before 9/11. The Mossad not only infiltrated cells but began to run them and give them specific orders that would eventually culminate in their being on board four regularly-scheduled flights originating in Boston, Washington Dulles, and Newark, New Jersey on 9/11.

The Mossad infiltration team comprised six Israelis, comprising two cells of three agents, who all received special training at a Mossad base in the Negev Desert in their future control and handling of the "Al Qaeda" cells. One Mossad cell traveled to Amsterdam where they submitted to the operational control of the Mossad's Europe Station, which operates from the El Al complex at Schiphol International Airport. The three-man Mossad unit then traveled to Hamburg where it made contact with Mohammed Atta, who believed they were sent by Osama Bin Laden. In fact, they were sent by Ephraim Halevy, the chief of Mossad.

The second three-man Mossad team flew to New York and then to southern Florida where they began to direct the "Al Qaeda" cells operating from Hollywood, Miami, Vero Beach,  Delray Beach, and West Palm Beach. Israeli "art students," already under investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration for casing the offices and homes of federal law enforcement officers, had been living among and conducting surveillance of the activities, including flight school training, of the future Arab "hijacker" cells, particularly in Hollywood and Vero Beach.

In August 2001, the first Mossad team flew with Atta and other Hamburg "Al Qaeda" members to Boston. Logan International Airport's security was contracted to Huntleigh USA, a firm owned by an Israeli airport security firm closely connected to Mossad — International Consultants on Targeted Security – ICTS. ICTS's owners were politically connected to the Likud Party, particularly the Netanyahu faction and then-Jerusalem mayor and future Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. It was Olmert who personally interceded with New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to have released from prison five Urban Moving Systems employees, identified by the CIA and FBI agents as Mossad agents. The Israelis were the only suspects arrested anywhere in the United States on 9/11 who were thought to have been involved in the 9/11 attacks.

The two Mossad teams sent regular coded reports on the progress of the 9/11 operation to Tel Aviv via the Israeli embassy in Washington, DC. WMR has learned from a Pentagon source that leading Americans tied to the media effort to pin 9/11 on Arab hijackers, Osama Bin Laden, and the Taliban were present in the Israeli embassy on September 10, 2001, to coordinate their media blitz for the subsequent days and weeks following the attacks. It is more than likely that FBI counter-intelligence agents who conduct surveillance of the Israeli embassy have proof on the presence of the Americans present at the embassy on September 10. Some of the Americans are well-known to U.S. cable news television audiences.

In mid-August, the Mossad team running the Hamburg cell in Boston reported to Tel Aviv that the final plans for 9/11 were set. The Florida-based Mossad cell reported that the documented "presence" of the Arab cell members at Florida flight schools had been established.

  

The two Mossad cells studiously avoided any mention of the World Trade Center or targets in Washington, DC in their coded messages to Tel Aviv. Halevy covered his tracks by reporting to the CIA of a "general threat" by an attack by Arab terrorists on a nuclear plant somewhere on the East Coast of the United States. CIA director George Tenet dismissed the Halevy warning as "too non-specific." The FBI, under soon-to-be-departed director Louis Freeh, received the "non-specific" warning about an attack on a nuclear power plant and sent out the information in its routine bulletins to field agents but no high alert was ordered.

The lack of a paper trail pointing to "Al Qaeda" as the masterminds on 9/11, which could then be linked to Al Qaeda's Mossad handlers, threw off the FBI. On April 19, 2002, FBI director Robert Mueller, in a speech to San Francisco's Commonwealth Club, stated: "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper — either here in the United States, or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere — that mentioned any aspect of the September 11 plot."

WMR previously reported that the Mossad cell operating in the Jersey City-Weehawken area of New Jersey through Urban Moving Systems was suspected by some in the FBI and CIA of being involved in moving explosives into the World Trade Center as well as staging "false flag" demonstrations at least two locations in north Jersey: Liberty State Park and an apartment complex in Jersey City as the first plane hit the World Trade Center's North Tower. One team of Urban Moving Systems Mossad agents was arrested later on September 11 and jailed for five months at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. Some of their names turned up in a joint CIA-FBI database as known Mossad agents, along with the owner of Urban Moving Systems, Dominik Suter, whose name also appeared on a "Law Enforcement Sensitive" FBI 9/11 suspects list, along with the names of key "hijackers," including Mohammed Atta and Hani Hanjour, as well as the so-called "20th hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui.

 

From the list of creditors  it can be determined that Suter had been operating in the United States since 1993, the year of the first attack on the World Trade Center. In 1993, Suter began racking up American Express credit card charges totaling $21,913.97. Suter also maintained credit card accounts with HSBC Bank and Orchard Bank c/o HSBC Card Services of Salinas, California, among other banks. Suter also did business with the Jewish Community Center of Greater Palm Beach in Florida and Ryder Trucks in Miami. Miami and southern Florida were major operating areas for cells of Israeli Mossad agents masquerading as "art students," who were living and working near some of the identified future Arab "hijackers" in the months preceding 9/11.

ABC's 20/20 correspondent John Miller ensured that the Israeli connection to "Al Qaeda's" Arab hijackers was buried in an "investigation" of the movers' activities on 9/11. Anchor Barbara Walters helped Miller in putting a lid on the story about the movers and Suter aired on June 21, 2002. Miller then went on to become the FBI public affairs spokesman to ensure that Mueller and other FBI officials kept to the "Al Qaeda" script as determined by the Bush administration and the future 9/11 Commission. But former CIA chief of counter-terrorism Vince Cannistraro let slip to ABC an important clue to the operations of the Mossad movers in New Jersey when he stated that the Mossad agents "set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists in the area, particularly in the New Jersey-New York area." The "intelligence operation" turned out to have been the actual 9/11 attacks. And it was no coincidence that it was ABC's John Miller who conducted a May 1998 rare interview of Osama Bin Laden at his camp in Afghanistan. Bin Laden played his part well for future scenes in the fictional "made-for-TV" drama known as 9/11.

  

WMR has also learned from Italian intelligence sources that Mossad's running of "Al Qaeda" operatives did not end with running the "hijacking" teams in the United States and Hamburg. Other Arab "Al Qaeda" operatives, run by Mossad, were infiltrated into Syria but arrested by Syrian intelligence. Syria was unsuccessful in turning them to participate in intelligence operations in Lebanon. Detailed information on Bin Laden's support team was offered to the Bush administration, up to days prior to 9/11, by Gutbi al-Mahdi, the head of the Sudanese Mukhabarat intelligence service. The intelligence was rejected by the Biush White House. It was later reported that Sudanese members of "Al Qaeda's" support network were double agents for Mossad who had also established close contacts with Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh and operated in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Eritrea, as well as Sudan. The Mossad connection to Al Qaeda in Sudan was likely known by the Sudanese Mukhabarat, a reason for the rejection of its intelligence on "Al Qaeda" by the thoroughly-Mossad penetrated Bush White House. Yemen had also identified "Al Qaeda" members who were also Mossad agents. A former chief of Mossad revealed to this editor in 2002 that Yemeni-born Mossad "deep insertion" commandos spotted Bin Laden in the Hadhramaut region of eastern Yemen after his escape from Tora Bora in Afghanistan, following the U.S. invasion.

French intelligence determined that other Egyptian- and Yemeni-born Jewish Mossad agents were infiltrated into Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates as radical members of the Muslim Brotherhood. However, the "Muslim Brotherhood" agents actually were involved in providing covert Israeli funding for "Al Qaeda" activities. On February 21, 2006, WMR reported on the U.S. Treasury Secretary's firing by President Bush over information discovered on the shady "Al Qaeda" accounts in the United Arab Emirates: "Banking insiders in Dubai report that in March 2002, U.S. Secretary of Treasury Paul O’Neill visited Dubai and asked for documents on a $109,500 money transfer from Dubai to a joint account held by hijackers Mohammed Atta and Marwan al Shehhi at Sun Trust Bank in Florida. O’Neill also asked UAE authorities to close down accounts used by Al Qaeda .  . . . The UAE complained about O’Neill’s demands to the Bush administration. O’Neill’s pressure on the UAE and Saudis contributed to Bush firing him as Treasury Secretary in December 2002 " O'Neill may have also stumbled on the "Muslim Brotherhood" Mossad operatives operating in the emirates who were directing funds to "Al Qaeda."

After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise to power of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Sharjah's ruler, Sultan bin Mohammed al-Qasimi, who survived a palace coup attempt in 1987, opened his potentate to Russian businessmen like Viktor Bout, as well as to financiers of radical Muslim groups, including the Taliban and "Al Qaeda."

Moreover, this Israeli support for "Al Qaeda" was fully known to Saudi intelligence, which approved of it in order to avoid compromising Riyadh. The joint Israeli-Saudi support for "Al Qaeda" was well-known to the Sharjah and Ras al Khaimah-based aviation network of the now-imprisoned Russian, Viktor Bout, jailed in New York on terrorism charges. The presence of Bout in New York, a hotbed of Israeli intelligence control of U.S. federal prosecutors, judges, as well as the news media, is no accident: Bout knows enough about the Mossad activities in Sharjah in support of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, where Bout also had aviation and logistics contracts, to expose Mossad as the actual mastermind behind 9/11. Bout's aviation empire also extended to Miami and Dallas, two areas that were nexuses for the Mossad control operations for the "Al Qaeda" flight training operations of the Arab cell members in the months prior to 9/11.

 Mossad uses a number of Jews born in Arab countries to masquerade as Arabs. They often carry forged or stolen passports from Arab countries or nations in Europe that have large Arab immigrant populations, particularly Germany, France, Britain, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands.

 Bout's path also crossed with "Al Qaeda's" support network at the same bank in Sharjah, HSBC. Mossad's phony Muslim Brotherhood members from Egypt and Yemen controlled financing for "Al Qaeda" through the HSBC accounts in Sharjah. Mossad's Dominik Suter also dealt with HSBC in the United States. The FBI's chief counter-terrorism agent investigating Al Qaeda, John O'Neill, became aware of the "unique" funding mechanisms for Al Qaeda. It was no mistake that O'Neill was given the job as director of security for the World Trade Center on the eve of the attack. O'Neill perished in the collapse of the complex.

 

Then-Israeli Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu commented on the 9/11 attacks on U.S. television shortly after they occurred. Netanyahu said: "It is very good!" It now appears that Netanyahu, in his zeal, blew Mossad's cover as the masterminds of 9/11.

*Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. He has written for several renowned papers and blogs.

For Mossad, the successful 9/11 terrorist "false flag" operation was a success beyond expectations. The Bush administration, backed by the Blair government, attacked and occupied Iraq, deposing Saddam Hussein, and turned up pressure on Israel's other adversaries, including Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Hamas, and Lebanese Hezbollah. The Israelis also saw the U.S., Britain, and the UN begin to crack down on the Lebanese Shi'a diamond business in Democratic Republic of Congo and West Africa, and with it, the logistics support provided by Bout's aviation companies, which resulted in a free hand for Tel Aviv to move in on Lebanese diamond deals in central and west Africa.

Suter was allowed to escape the United States after the FBI made initial contact with him at the Urban Moving Systems warehouse in Weehawken, New Jersey, following the 9/11 attacks. Suter was later permitted to return to the United States where he was involved in the aircraft parts supply business in southern Florida, according to an informe3d source who contacted WMR. Suter later filed for bankruptcy in Florida for Urban Moving Systems and other businesses he operated: Suburban Moving & Storage Inc.; Max Movers, Inc.; Invsupport; Woodflooring Warehouse Corp.; One Stop Cleaning LLC; and City Carpet Upholstery, Inc. At the time of the bankruptcy filing in Florida, Suter listed his address as 1867 Fox Court, Wellington, FL 33414, with a phone number of 561 204-2359.

Israel Strikes Back by *Jeff Gates

Timing is everything when waging war “by way of deception,” the motto that has long guided Israeli war-planners. Whenever Israel’s geopolitical goals are threatened, chaos is assured. In national security terminology, the January 24^th bombing at Moscow’s busiest airport was “out of theater repositioning.”

First among Tel Aviv’s priorities is their need to maintain traction for the latest geopolitical narrative: a “global war on terrorism” against “Islamo-fascism.” The fact that America’s two latest wars serve Israeli goals remains largely unmentioned in Western media.

Six days prior to the Moscow bombing, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev traveled to the West Bank to endorse a Palestinian state with its capital East Jerusalem. He pointedly noted “this was the first visit of a Russian president to Palestine not united with a visit to another country” (Israel).

Then he joined a fast-lengthening list of nations confirming that, to date, 109 of 192 United Nations member countries support a resolution recognizing Palestinian statehood.

Though the U.S. reliably vetoes Security Council resolutions at Israel’s request, sentiments are shifting as a global public awakens to the costs of the U.S.-Israeli relationship.

Numerous Latin American nations recently extended recognition to Palestine. Ireland just announced an upgrade in its relationship to embassy status.

Out-of-Theatre Repositioning

When waging war from the shadows, Zionist war-planners concentrate their efforts on key variables. Thus the fear in Tel Aviv that emerging events are loosening control of the Israel lobby over U.S. foreign policy.

To sustain a global “war on terrorism,” instability must be sustained. Anyone familiar with the Israeli use of strategic duplicity found it unsurprising when multiple crises emerged “unexpectedly” in North Africa.

Unrest in Tunisia triggered a change in government followed by unrest in Mauritania, Algeria, Yemen and Egypt. During a recent Arab League meeting, Secretary-General Amr Mousa cautioned that the contagion could spread.

If so, look for the price of energy to soar, further weakening leaders in the debt-ridden West where restive populations already face fewer services, higher taxes­—and more debt.

Misdirection also plays a role in such well-timed crises. Tel Aviv just released a report justifying Israel’s deadly boarding of a Turkish vessel last May in international waters carrying aid to Gaza. Yet a post-mortem found 30 Israeli bullets in the bodies of nine dead activists, including one shot four times in the head.

Akin to the 911 Commission Report that obscured the anti-Zionist motivation for that mass murder, news of this Israeli attack was obscured by reports of a bombing in Moscow and a leak that Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas secretly agreed to cede Palestinian land to Israel.

That well-timed leak weakened the Palestinian president while the bombing weakened the Russian president when this well-timed crisis forced his cancellation of a keynote address to world leaders at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Multiple Motives

When deploying deceit to wage war, Zionists catalyze mental impressions meant to link events in the public’s mind. Thus the critical role of timing when advancing a thematic narrative such as The Clash of Civilizations.

These latest events heightened tensions worldwide as both fear and the requisite loathing were reinforced by yet another series of well-timed crises. When faced with the threat that its Islamo-fascist storyline is losing traction, what else can Zionists do?

Confronted with the possibility that the West may withdraw support for its six-decade occupation of Palestine, what is Tel Aviv to do? Facing the prospect of global censure for its murder of Turkish activists, how can Israel divert attention?

Tel Aviv is backed into a corner. Overwhelming evidence confirms that Zionists generated the false intelligence that induced the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Though the Israel lobby retains its control over U.S. lawmakers, the American public is fast realizing how many crises originate with those who consider themselves above the law.

To Betray, First Befriend

What are Americans to do when faced with a devious enemy—posing as an ally—whose operatives consider themselves Chosen by a god of their own choosing? With mainstream media dominated by those complicit in this duplicity, how can this chokehold be released?

As a duped electorate slowly awakens to how they were deceived—and by whom—how do Americans make amends for the damage done by their Israeli-compliant lawmakers?

Those determined to defeat this ‘enemy within’ must first make this treason transparent. As the common source of this corruption becomes apparent, accountability can commence.

Americans do not yet grasp that we have long been the target of ongoing capital crimes. Zionists know that our continued ignorance is the key to their continued impunity. With knowledge comes the power to prosecute those complicit. Therein lies the challenge.

Aware of the future that awaits them, Zionists are becoming desperate and even more dangerous. An escalation of violence is assured until the full force of international law is turned on those who have long flaunted the law in pursuit of their extremist agenda.

Jeff Gates is author of Guilt By Association – How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War. See www.criminalstate.com



Media Must Follow A Model For The Positive by *Awais Bilal

In the last decade mass media has been cleverly used as a weapon to portray ‘catastrophe’ in Iraq and Afghanistan as ‘progress’ and sluttish acts as ‘sexy acts’, just as it has been used to hide the reality of intellectual murderers. Media has adopted a simple policy of ‘one size fits all’ by labelling ‘intellectual murderers’ as terrorists.  In plain language terrorists are defined as ‘individuals’ who use violence, terror, and intimidation to achieve results. Whereas aims of intellectual murderers are not just to terrorise by violence or killings, their objective are a lot bigger and are harder for common people to understand.

The notion of intellectual murderers seems to be new but in fact it has its roots in the 10th century Persia. The brutal act of murder was transformed to an art form by Hassan bin Sabah, he shifted mindless murderers to intellectuals. These intellectual murderers were also known as assassins. The English word ‘assassin’ was invented by Hassan bin Sabah as his followers use to be under the influence of ‘hasish’ while committing murders. Even today “assassination cults" are used by FBI, CIA, MI 5 and many other agencies. These agencies have incorporated many of the Hashishins' techniques into their methodologies. Hassan Sabah has been acknowledged in CIA training manual titled "A Study of Assassination".

Hassan bin Sabah was a businessman, scholar, heresiarch, mystic, murderer, ascetic, and political revolutionary. He was born in Persia around 1034. He was highly educated and was school mate of Nizamul Mulk (the future vizier to the sultan of Persia) and Omar Khayyam (the great poet/astronomer/mathematician). Hassan build the legendary "Garden of Earthly Delights", which played a remarkable role in spreading his Ismaili faith and in the initiatic rites of the Hashishins (Assassins). Powerful people of different tribes use to be drugged to stimulate their death only to awake later in Hassan’s garden. They were made to believe that it was heaven and that Hassan was a representative of God, who should be followed by them till death.  When they use to wake up from their slumber they use to be greeted by beautiful teenage girls who use to sing and dance for them. The girls use to give them full body tong massage. Initiates use to be brain washed in such a way that they use to believe in whatever they were being told and all this was so powerful that Hassan could demand absolute loyalty from his followers without any questions being asked. Hassan bin Sabah was in the days of crusades, so his brainwashing technique successfully turned a lot of crusaders into assassins. Saladin tried to stop him by capturing some of his men, but soon left them after finding a dragger under his pillow with a note stating that if this can reach you, it can kill you too. Hassan bin Sabah’s brain washing techniques were so powerful that they even polluted Saladin’s personal guards.

Ruins of Al Maut, Iran

The story of Hassan bin Sabah is a tale of sex, drugs, myth, and murder. A secluded mountain fortress, a paradise, poison dipped daggers, and covert political manoeuvrings are the ingredients of this alchemical mixture, which is undoubtedly one of the most intriguing true stories ever told. But this story is not just another exciting, fascinating and captivating story. It has all the ingredients needed to build a ‘perfect model for brain washing’ which could be implemented in any day and age.

Most recently this model has been adopted, illiterate and poor Muslims have been brainwashed in such a fantastic way that they do not fear to lose their life. Hassan bin Sabah’s model of brain washing is the perfect model of producing suicide bombers in the name of Islam. They are heavily trained in different skills like usage of modern weaponry, bomb making, speaking several languages and are also trained to behave and act as true Muslims.

The process of brainwashing is still in practice. Media could have helped in educating those who may get brainwashed, but, alas, they don’t seem to be serious in stopping the brain washing factory. It’s not possible for this model to operate without massive funding. Capturing suicide bombers and Islamic terrorists is a temporary solution of the problem.  All parties who wish to bring an end to this extremist ideology need to find the source which has implemented Hassan Bin Sabah’s model and is continuously funding it.

*Awais Bilal was born and raised in Islamabad, Pakistan. He currently lives in the UK. He is a writer and a Marketing consultant.

The Robust Man of Europe by *Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

At the end of this century’s first decade, we can observe how the locus of power has shifted in world politics. The G20 is replacing the G7 as the overseer of the global economy. The need to restructure the U.N. Security Council to be more representative of the international order is profoundly pressing. And emerging powers such as Brazil, India, Turkey, and others are playing very assertive roles in global economic affairs.

The European Union cannot be the one sphere that is immune to these changes in the balance of power. The financial crisis has laid bare Europe’s need for greater dynamism and change: European labor markets and social-security systems are comatose. European economies are stagnant. European societies are near geriatric. Can Europe retain power and credibility in the new world order without addressing these issues?

Meanwhile, as a candidate for EU membership, Turkey has been putting its imprint on the global stage with its impressive economic development and political stability. The Turkish economy is Europe’s fastest-growing sizable economy and will continue to be so in 2011. According to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development forecasts, Turkey will be the second-largest economy in Europe by 2050. Turkey is a market where foreign direct investment can get emerging-market returns at a developed-market risk. Turkey is bursting with the vigor that the EU so badly needs.

And it’s not only economics. Turkey is becoming a global and regional player with its soft power. Turkey is rediscovering its neighborhood, one that had been overlooked for decades. It is following a proactive foreign policy stretching from the Balkans to the Middle East and the Caucasus. Turkey’s “zero-problem, limitless trade” policy with the countries of the wider region aims to create a haven of nondogmatic stability for all of us. We have visa-free travel with 61 countries. This is not a romantic neo-Ottomanism: It is realpolitik based on a new vision of the global order. And I believe that this vision will help the EU, too, in the next decade.

Our intense diplomatic efforts have yielded fruit in Iraq and Afghanistan, in the Balkans, and also in regard to the Iranian nuclear program. Turkey has been an active player in all the major areas of global politics and we do not intend to surrender this momentum. Once it becomes a member of the EU, Turkey will contribute to European interests in a wide range of issues, from foreign and economic policy to regional security and social harmony.

Even though the case for Turkey’s membership of the EU is self-evident and requires little explanation, the accession process has been facing resistance orchestrated by certain member states. Unfortunately, the negotiation process is not currently proceeding as it ought to. Eighteen out of 22 negotiation chapters pending for discussion are blocked on political grounds. This is turning into the sort of byzantine political intrigue that no candidate country has experienced previously. In this treatment, Turkey is unique.

Our European friends should realize that Turkey-EU relations are fast approaching a turning point. In the recent waves of enlargement, the EU smoothly welcomed relatively small countries and weak economies in order to boost their economic growth, consolidate their democracies, and provide them with shelter. Not letting them in would have meant leaving those countries at the mercy of political turmoil that might emerge in the region. No such consideration has ever been extended to Turkey. Unlike those states, Turkey is a regional player, an international actor with an expanding range of soft power and a resilient, sizable economy. And yet, the fact that it can withstand being rebuffed should not become reason for Turkey’s exclusion. Sometimes I wonder if Turkey’s power is an impediment to its accession to the Union. If so, one has to question Europe’s strategic calculations.

It’s been more than half a century since Turkey first knocked at Europe’s door. In the past, Turkey’s EU vocation was purely economic. The Turkey of today is different. We are no more a country that would wait at the EU’s door like a docile supplicant.

Some claim that Turkey has no real alternative to Europe. This argument might be fair enough when taking into account the level of economic integration between Turkey and the EU—and, in particular, the fact that a liberal and democratic Europe has always been an anchor for reform in Turkey. However, the opposite is just as valid. Europe has no real alternative to Turkey. Especially in a global order where the balance of power is shifting, the EU needs Turkey to become an ever stronger, richer, more inclusive, and more secure Union. I hope it will not be too late before our European friends discover this fact.

*Erdogan is prime minister of Turkey.

(Ab)using the BDP by *Yusuf Ergen

It is the most irreparable notch to be carved upon the new Turkey to try to explain the state’s positioning vis-à-vis society by referring only to the Kurdish issue among many other elements in the history of Turkish democracy. Turkey is neither Iraq nor Iran.

In those countries, the Kurds are, unlike in Turkey, approached as an ethnic group and there is always a certain margin of flexibility between the regime and the issue. However, the constituent element of Turkey has a regime mentality that does not use ethnicity for everyday politics and that, at the same time, does not turn a blind eye to it. While lacking flexibility, this mentality may produce an accordion-like approach in daily political matters. Consequently, it is safe to argue that Turkey’s Kurdish issue is a problem specific to the ideology that was forced upon our republic. Accordingly, it can be said the Kurdish feudal or clan-oriented social fabric that accommodates diverse Kurdish sub-identities in Turkey has been prevented from being able to unite its political opportunities since the beginning of the republic. In this context, the areas with dominantly Kurdish populations were problematically left outside of the National Pact (Misak-ı Milli) borders. Madrasas were the common denominators for a feudal or clan-oriented society. Indeed, with the establishment of the republic, madrasas started to serve as institutions where Kurdish identity, social fabric and political life were shaped and where the Kurdish language and Kurdish culture could flourish. The establishment of secular mentality  The methodology of government adopted by the constituent elements of the republic imposed the closing down of madrasas and the establishment of a secular mentality. First, madrasas were closed down and then religion, which normally is the domain of society, was nationalized and, more importantly, Turkified. The political channels that were closed down during the era of a single-party regime that lasted for 27 years caused Kurds, Kurdish sub-identities, community identities and traditions to see the unifying power of religion as a haven. The resulting breakdown could not be ameliorated with the introduction of the multi-party regime as a consequence of democratic developments around the world. In accordance with the conditions prevalent in Turkey, Kurds’ capabilities to form a political party concerned with their own issues could not go beyond the confines of Ankara. When these limits were trespassed a 35-year-long trauma began. However, this is not the case in the countries neighboring Turkey. These countries did not attempt to take religion and ethnicity out of the hands of society and give them to the state. For instance, Iraqi Kurds have been using their own political parties that emerged out of their own society during the political struggle in northern Iraq for more than 50 years. Likewise, the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI) and Komalah are Kurdish parties built upon the social fabric of Iran. The regime tradition of Turkey created by the National Pact also politically required establishing relations with figures from the Kurdish community from one election to another. Every political party tended to nominate for Parliament a certain agha, chief, tribal boss or certain members of Kurdish families that were regarded as rebellious, insofar as the regime would allow. Thus, Kurdish society in Turkey has been deprived of the opportunity to develop its own political dynamics. Accordingly, Kurdish society in Turkey has suffered from a continual dialectic of separation from or integration with its own political dynamics and development opportunities. On the other hand, experiencing these realities, Kurdish intellectuals have realized that they live in despair. Some Kurds who were not sufficiently integrated with the rest of the country and who maintained their traditional values within the ossified feudal/clan fabric of Kurdish society followed in the footsteps of aghas, chiefs and clan leaders. Realizing that they would not be able to express themselves through their Kurdish identity, this group had the courage to participate in politics by producing their own political identity. Those who had this courage adopted the leftist values that were also popular in the country from the early 1960s onward. Or in other words, leftist values have lent support to those who had such courage. However, they soon started to blend the socialist values they had developed with the above-mentioned ideology of Turkey. Thus, it can be argued that Kurdish politics has been in contact with various hues of the nationalist left that has been diversified at an international level. With the opportunities afforded to them by the leftist movement, Kurdish intellectuals and youth had their hopes for overcoming the obstructions that lay before them renewed. But, how could they get their search for freedom in line with their own society amid these ebbs and flows? Indeed, Turkey had entered a new era with the left, and the sole channel that could put the Kurdish reality on the political agenda was the left or, more correctly, socialist opening. Kurdish linguistic values Still, there was an egregious contradiction as Kurdish intellectuals, idealist youth and the new generations inspired by them would adopt a unique and expected approach in opposition to clan-oriented feudal forces, but unfortunately steered clear of the Kurdish language. This was because all Kurdish linguistic values were part of the underdevelopment of their social fabric. This implied the abandonment of linguistic and cultural values that were the product of thousands of years. Distancing themselves from their mother tongue and verbal culture would mean a great danger for Kurds. It was evidence of strength to be able to leave behind feudalism, but it was a weakness to not preserve their social fabric. Ideally, one should fight against the negative aspects of society and at the same time protect Kurdish identity. With about 2 million voters who voted for the now-defunct Democratic Society Party (DTP), Kurdish politics had thought it had a more robust way to become free of this vicious cycle. Indeed, there was a left that was not influenced by the ideology of the republic, but a “new Turkey.” Under these conditions, such energy should not be allowed to dissipate. Thanks to suitable conditions, for the first time Kurdish politics saw itself outside of the ideology of the republic. It also believed that it would not be able to create any other mass other than its own mass of followers. Thus, it was not possible to exclude the DTP and search for political unity. Indeed, politics is not something that can be planned at the table. Instead, it must be born and take shape in daily life. One mistake by a political player cannot automatically justify another player. Under the existing conditions, Kurdish politics had to carry a heavy burden to a safe harbor without the help of others. However, on Dec. 11, 2009, the Constitutional Court closed down the DTP on charges of being a focal point of activities that would undermine the integrity of the state, given their activities as well as their ties to a terrorist organization. This decision also blocked all the pathways available to Kurds. But this time the dominant ideology of the republic was not to be blamed. Perhaps, what should be blamed for this deadlock was the DTP’s failure to make an accurate assessment of the conditions and to opt for siding with the most intractable political movements, which had plans to strictly pursue their own interests, not those of the public, and which were planned at the table with self-styled actors. With the closure of the DTP, Kurdish politics had the willpower to continue with a new party under a different name and a partially changed shell. However, the new conditions were no longer those of previous years. In other words, Turkey’s new players have already taken their positions. However, the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) is still fumbling for its own position in the political scene of Turkey, far from its own society. This is continually leading the BDP to mistake its own position, causing its own constituency to lose time. The worst of it is that this is transforming the BDP into an intermediate actor that is (ab)used by political players. The BDP should urgently decide whether it can be a party of Turkey without betraying its own society.  Indeed, the threat to the dignity of the Kurdish people is currently the biggest of all. The BDP’s biggest challenge is to maintain justifiable Kurdish political demands and to search for peace as well as keep its institutions and civil society free from manipulation.

* Yusuf Ergen, Politcal Analyst based in Ankara

US: NSA ‘Q’ Group Harassing its Own Informers by *Wayne Madsen

 

WMR's intelligence sources report that the National Security Agency's "Q Group," the directorate responsible for overall security for NSA, is actively investigating and harassing NSA employees who have reported on senior officials at the sprawling intelligence agency, which now includes the new U.S. Cyber Command, of engaging in adulterous trysts with subordinates and possessing improper sexual material, including child pornography.

WMR has previously reported on the improper activities of the Q Group, which has become a virtual uncontrolled FBI within the NSA. Q continues to protect NSA senior officials who engage in and promote a culture of sexual exploitation of junior employees at the intelligence agency. Q Group has also misused NSA psychologists and psychiatrists to deem anyone who charges senior officials of the agency with sexual misconduct or harassment unfit to hold a security clearance for reasons of mental impairment.

On August 28, 2009, WMR reported: "NSA Security, headed up by Kemp Ensor III, and NSA medical worked in tandem to deny security access to employees determined to be mentally unfit to have access to classified information at NSA.

However, due to the attrition of highly-qualified personnel, the security-medical duo is now prescribing Prozac and Zoloft for NSA employees who refuse to fall into line. NSA is abuzz with the new requirement for employees to take what they call "happy pills."

The sexual harassment scene has also reportedly changed at Fort Meade. In the past, sexual harassment at NSA involved older male managers preying on young female employees. That has now changed in what has become an environment of 'do ask and do tell.' WMR has been informed that there is an increase in complaints about sexual harassment from new young male hires about being forced into 'kinky rendezvouses' with older male managers."

Q Group has also gone outside of its legal authority to harass the families and friends of former agency employees who have brought charges against NSA for sexual harassment and misconduct. WMR has learned of NSA personnel illegally masquerading as phone company technicians who entered the property of the family of one such ex-employee. In another case, Q Group personnel poisoned two pet dogs of the family of an ex-employee under NSA surveillance. Q Group personnel have also been used to harass the ex-spouses of senior NSA officials involved in child custody cases. WMR has also been informed that Q Group has harassed NSA employees who have married the ex-wives of NSA senior officials who have ongoing legal battles with their ex-husbands.

Q Group is able to conduct its harassment of civilians in the Fort Meade area with a "wink and a nod" from local law enforcement and other officials. NSA senior managers have dipped into NSA's substantial slush fund to lavish money on community service projects and programs in cash-strapped local municipalities and counties. The concept of the "friendly NSA that provides funds and jobs" has bought loyalty and silence from local and state of Maryland officials. In addition, WMR has learned that NSA has placed agents within the congressional offices of local members of Congress in order to interdict and retaliate against NSA whistleblower congressional complaints. The NSA "embeds," who work in concert with NSA's Office of Legislative Affairs, are found within the offices of Maryland Senators Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin, and Maryland Representatives C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger, Steny Hoyer, Elijah Cummings, Chris Van Hollen, and Paul Sarbanes, and is currently inserting an agent into the office of freshman Representative Andy Harris.            
                 

As discovered in a January 2005, Q Group Personnel Security organizational chart obtained by WMR, Q2 contains an office of counter-intelligence, which WMR has reported has been involved in illegal surveillance of individuals far beyond the NSA infrastructure.

On July 3, 2009, WMR reported: "The Obama administration, rather than lessen the pressure on the NSA personnel, has turned up the heat and is resorting to even more draconian methods to ensure silence. The word from inside NSA is that a state of fear exists and the mission of the agency, to conduct surveillance of foreign communications to provide threat indications and warnings to U.S. troops and policy makers and protect sensitive U.S. government communications from unauthorized eavesdropping is suffering as a result." Our latest information is that the Obama administration is increasing pressure on NSA personnel to deter leaks.

Obama's Justice Department is now actively retroactively pursuing U.S. intelligence community leakers from the time of the Bush administration. Former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling has been arrested and indicted for revealing information to New York Times reporter James Risen concerning Iran's nuclear program. Former NSA official Thomas Drake has been indicted by the Obama administration for leaking details on NSA contract fraud to reporter Siobhan Gorman of The Wall Street Journal and formerly of the Baltimore Sun. Former State Department analyst Stephen Kim has been charged with leaking top secret information on North Korean nuclear testing to Fox News.

WMR has learned from informed sources that the indictments of Sterling and Drake are just the beginning of the Obama administration's policy to crack down on leaks. With the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attack coming up this year, the U.S. Intelligence Community, working closely with Mossad, have made plans to stop any new revelations that would point to high-level U.S. and Israeli government involvement in the 9/11 attacks. The Wikileaks affair was partly concocted to draw out and identify as many potential leakers as possible, including US Army Private Bradley Manning, now imprisoned at Quantico, Virginia on suspicions that he leaked classified documents to Wikileaks.

WMR has learned from an NSA source that this editor continues to remain a top priority for NSA electronic surveillance, including phone tapping and e-mail interception. NSA is also monitoring all those who are in communications with this editor via electronic means. WMR has previously reported on this web site's sources and contacts being major targets for NSA surveillance.

WMR's foreign intelligence sources also report that there is an ongoing project by Israeli agents-of-influence in the United States to determine the sources of information on the 9/11 attacks. This project involves in-depth probes by the Israeli agents of retired Pentagon and FBI personnel believed to possess information about the U.S. and Israeli governments' involvement in the attacks. WMR can report that radio show host Alex Jones's information and funding sources are of particular interest to the Israeli cell.

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. 

Industrial Policy Comes Out of the Cold by * Justin Yifu Lin

One of the best-kept economic secrets was strongly reconfirmed in 2010: most countries, intentionally or not, pursue an industrial policy in one form or other. This is true not only of China, Singapore, France, and Brazil – countries usually associated with such policies – but also for the United Kingdom, Germany, Chile, and the United States, whose industrial policies are often less explicit.

Given that industrial policy broadly refers to any government decision, regulation, or law that encourages ongoing activity or investment in an industry, this should come as no surprise. After all, economic development and sustained growth are the result of continual industrial and technological change, a process that requires collaboration between the public and private sectors.

Historical evidence shows that in countries that successfully transformed from an agrarian to a modern economy – including those in Western Europe, North America, and, more recently, in East Asia – governments coordinated key investments by private firms that helped to launch new industries, and often provided incentives to pioneering firms.

Even before the recent global financial crisis and subsequent recession, governments around the world provided support to the private sector through direct subsidies, tax credits, or loans from development banks in order to bolster growth and support job creation. Policy discussions at many high-level summits sought to strengthen other features of industrial policy, including public financing of airports, highways, ports, electricity grids, telecommunications, and other infrastructure, improvements in institutional effectiveness, an emphasis on education and skills, and a clearer legal framework.

The global crisis has led to a rethinking of governments’ economic role. The challenge for industrial policy is greater, because it should assist the design of efficient, government-sponsored programs in which the public and private sectors coordinate their efforts to develop new technologies and industries.

But history also tells us that while governments in almost all developing countries have attempted to play that facilitating role at some point, most have failed. The economic history of the former Soviet Union, Latin America, Africa, and Asia has been marked by inefficient public investment and misguided government interventions that have resulted in many “white elephants.”

These pervasive failures appear to be due mostly to governments’ inability to align their efforts with their country’s resource base and level of development. Indeed, governments’ propensity to target overly ambitious industries that were misaligned with available resources and skills helps to explain why their attempts to “pick winners” often resulted in “picking losers.” By contrast, governments in many successful developing countries have focused on strengthening industries that have done well in countries with comparable factor endowments.

Thus, the lesson from economic history and development is straightforward: government support aimed at upgrading and diversifying industry must be anchored in the requisite endowments. That way, once constraints on new industries are removed, private firms in those industries quickly become competitive domestically and internationally. The question then becomes how to identify competitive industries and how to formulate and implement policies to facilitate their development.

In developed countries, most industries are advanced, which suggests that upgrading requires innovation. Support for basic research, and patents to protect successful innovation, may help. For developing countries, Célestin Monga and I have recently developed an approach – called the growth identification and facilitation framework – that can help developing-country governments increase the probability of success in supporting new industries.

This framework suggests that policymakers identify tradable industries that have performed well in growing countries with similar resources and skills, and with a per capita income about double their own. If domestic private firms in these sectors are already present, policymakers should identify and remove constraints on those firms’ technological upgrading or on entry by other firms. In industries where no domestic firms are present, policymakers should aim to attract foreign direct investment from the countries being emulated or organize programs for incubating new firms.

The government should also pay attention to the development by private enterprises of new and competitive products, and support the scaling up of successful private-sector innovations in new industries. In countries with a poor business environment, special economic zones or industrial parks can facilitate firm entry, foreign direct investment, and the formation of industrial clusters. Finally, the government might help pioneering firms in the new industries by offering tax incentives for a limited period, co-financing investments, or providing access to land or foreign exchange.

Our approach provides policymakers in developing countries with a framework to tackle the daunting coordination challenges inherent in the creation of new, competitive industries. It also has the potential to nurture a business environment conducive to private-sector growth, job creation, and poverty reduction.

As economies around the world struggle to maintain or restore growth in 2011, industrial policy is likely to be under a brighter spotlight than ever before. Given the right framework, there is no reason for it to remain in the shadows.

*Justin Yifu Lin is Chief Economist and Senior Vice President for Development Economics at the World Bank.

Istanbul talks: A Move Forward? by *Mohammad Reza Kiani

One month ago, Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations plus Germany met for the first time in 13 months in Geneva to move negotiations further—a proposition which was offered by Iran. After the negotiations drew to an end, Iran and the six world powers agreed to meet again in Istanbul, although the wording of the agreement was disputed within hours.

In another remarkable move, a letter was recently made available by senior Iranian envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh, in which Iran has invited Russia, China, the EU, and its allies in the Arab world and developing world to tour its nuclear sites, an apparent move to gain support before the fresh round of talks with six world powers. Some diplomats and Western officials view such developments pessimistically; however, such actions and reactions means that Iran, affected by domestic and international pressures, was bitterly forced to step up efforts to achieve a comprehensive rapprochement with the West concerning continuation of its controversial nuclear activities. Iran’s leaders are aware that in such a critical situation, particularly in the field of its domestic economy which is seriously affected by UN crippling sanctions and those enforced by the West, at least within the short term they should avoid any further actions which could frustrate the new momentum created for negotiations.

Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran and close ally of Ahmadinejad, who has been named caretaker foreign minister, is also a key variable for understanding new directions in Iran nuclear policy. Salehi has significant experience with life abroad. He studied at the American University in Beirut and at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). After he fired Manouchehr Mottaki and appointed Salehi in his place, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on state television that the negotiations in Geneva with the P5+1 countries had been “very good”, adding that it was time to move from the “politics of confrontation to the political agreement.”

This is the first time a possible continuation of negotiations beyond the Istanbul meeting scheduled for late January was discussed. “I hope we are moving toward understanding and cooperation. The people of Iran welcome cooperation with the great powers,” the president added. The current situation is quite appealing for negotiations, and could benefit all parties involved. In other words, the so-called crisis situation not only provides European countries with an opportunity for entering into ongoing negotiations but also for the Obama administration to resume previous diplomatic efforts for rapprochement—which were made before the disputed presidential election in Iran. American political realities strongly suggest the need for a comprehensive approach to US–Iranian diplomacy, just as mounting Iranian strategic concerns do.

Should this process proceed, it can be a prelude to further cooperation on common grounds and regional security, including the Arab–Israeli conflict, Iraq’s stability and Afghanistan, plus curbing terrorist threats and nuclear proliferation and ensuring an adequate long-term flow of oil and natural gas to international energy markets. Otherwise, and in the long-term, if the prevailing crisis condition continues, stubborn policies and radical measures will likely lead to outbreak of war in the region.

* Mohammad Reza Kiani is final year PhD candidate at Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch. 6 January 2011 

The Seduction of the Knowledge-Based Society by *Jeff Gates

The most promising trend in geopolitics is the transition from hydrocarbon-based economies to knowledge-based societies. Leadership for that change is emerging from Arab nations.

The appeal of the Knowledge Society is apparent. Who could object to nations preparing their citizens for the 21^st century? Yet unless knowledge is changed, the result could worsen an already dangerous situation.

The sharing of values and knowledge has long been the best way to bridge cultures and promote peace. That strategy is now essential to counter the success of those promoting The Clash of Civilizations.

Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are breaking new ground with education models that build on state-of-the-art information and communication technologies.

This is the inevitable path for the Middle East and North Africa. Yet despite the best of intentions, if knowledge itself is not changed, the impact on Arab societies could aggravate trends that undermine progress.

Just consider the costs when knowledge is corrupted….

How Zionists Corrupt Knowledge

Those who induced the U.S. to war in the Middle East deployed knowledge like a weapon. With lengthy pre-staging, a narrative emerged that made it appear plausible—even desirable—to invade Iraq in response to the provocation of 911.

In retrospect, we now know that the knowledge on which the U.S. relied was false. All of it.

Iraqi WMD. Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda. Iraqi meetings in Prague with Al Qaeda. Iraqi yellowcake uranium from Niger. Iraqi mobile biological laboratories. All false, all traceable to pro-Israelis and all portrayed as true by media outlets dominated by pro-Israelis.

The Knowledge Society holds great potential to connect the Arab world globally. And to build with the West cross-border understanding and empathy. That is the Knowledge Society at its best. At its worse, knowledge can be exploited to manipulate behavior.

The ongoing manipulation of thought and emotion in the U.S. typifies the danger. When Arab nations grasp the common source of the false knowledge that brought war to the region, both the perils and the promise of the Knowledge Society will become apparent.

Yet even the risk of being seduced to war understates the threat. In the modern era, psychological operations (“psy-ops”) are routinely deployed to create consensus opinions and generally accepted truths—akin to the truth of Iraqi WMD.

Mindset Manipulation

The modern-day battlefield is the shared field of consciousness. Where else could consensus opinions reside? Or generally accepted truths. There too are found “field-based” phenomena such as credibility and celebrity that are also deployed to exploit thought and emotion.

When waging field-based warfare, the power of association ranks near the top as effective weaponry. For example, with global public opinion the target, Zionists arranged for U.N. testimony in February 2003 by Secretary of State Colin Powell who vouched for intelligence showing that Iraq had mobile biological weapons laboratories.

When the U.N. Security Council and a global television audience watched the testimony of this former four-star general, what they saw was his reputation for honesty. By the power of association, his credibility “bled over” to grant legitimacy to phony intelligence.

General Powell was only a celebrity prop in an elaborately staged play meant to enhance the plausibility of a global war on terrorism. That war began six weeks later.

Where other than in plain sight could such duplicity succeed? You can be watching field-based warfare and still not see it.

Even now, Powell may not yet grasp how two field-based properties (credibility and celebrity) were key to the psy-ops that seduced the U.S. to war for an Israeli agenda.

Freedom from Deceit

Mental and emotional exploitation lie at the heart of how knowledge is corrupted to catalyze conflicts, manipulate behavior and influence affairs from afar.

With a solid grasp of the methodology of deceit, the Knowledge Society can expose and, by design, displace those complicit in this cunning form of combat.

In preparing for the 21^st Century, Arab nations have an opportunity to free their citizens from the exploitation of those who for centuries have abused knowledge for their selfish ends.

Much of that abuse now proceeds through the unfettered freedom allowed finance. Educated over decades in a “consensus” mindset, lawmakers worldwide now believe in financial freedom as a proxy for personal freedom—regardless of the real-world results.

For the Knowledge Society to realize its potential, modern-day information and communication technologies must make these various forms of duplicity apparent and the perpetrators transparent.

Only with widespread knowledge of how facts can be displaced with false beliefs can the Knowledge Society be protected from such treachery.

Jeff Gates is author of Guilt By Association—How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War. See www.criminalstate.com