Hoax: Video Showing Heavy Weapons Discovered on Mavi Marmara is a Fraud

A video has been racing around the Internet — purportedly showing heavy weapons discovered behind bags of flour on the Mavi Marmara. The find would serve to justify the lethal raid on the flotilla to Gaza and some posters have asked why no uproar? The answer is because the video is a fraud — it shows a boat that was actually searched in 2009.

The video is often accompanied by the same text, which was posted by a commenter on this blog:

This video shows that during the unloading of the Marmara boat in the port of Ashdod, behind the bags of flour were boxes of heavy weapons and ammunition: mortars, artillery shells, bazookas, without counting a trunk where more than one million euros was found intended for Hamas. This video should be widely distributed as evidence of why the IDF Naval commandos were dispatched to intercept the six vessels including the M/S Mavi Marmara. One wonders what is aboard the Irish vessel, the M/S. Rachel Corrie, that Israel will intercept sometime today when it approaches the Naval blockade line off the coast of Gaza. Clearly the Turkish AKP Islamist government is complicit in permitting this military cargo to be loaded on the ‘peaceful’ Free Gaza Flotilla. Please distribute this video widely. If you had any doubt about what was on the flotilla, here is the video. The French explains that the arms on display were hidden behind sacks of grain.

There appears to be a conscious misinformation campaign afoot. The people who originally posted this video obviously knew it was false but wanted to mislead viewers. They succeeded.

147 thoughts on “Hoax: Video Showing Heavy Weapons Discovered on Mavi Marmara is a Fraud

  1. SO what do you expect. They have the Bush Cheney information team at work. True capitalism at its best

  2. Considering that Israel’s Foreign Ministry already has people on their pay-roll for the express purpose of ‘shouting’ down blog posts/news stories/comments which show Israel in a negative light (a program, by the way, which our own military had already warmed to), it’s well within the realm of possibility that the “conscious misinformation campaign” mentioned above is less a conspiracy theory and more a reality.

    History has already shown us that if one repeats a lie often and loudly enough (or backed by force or the threat of force) it eventually becomes a sort of truth.



  3. @AY: That could also read ‘the Obama/Biden’ information team. Any difference between the two regimes is purely cosmetic at this point in time. Just looking at the situation at hand, let’s not forget that Obama has not condemned the flotilla attack (waiting for that the facts to come in, apparently) and that Biden has defended Israel’s actions.


  4. This disinformation campaign points out the necessity of an impartial investigation of events. So far we have Israel admitting they doctored sound on tape. We also know the confiscated every video or recording of events as they were happening. Just as I’m certain the torture tapes still exist, these tapes are somewhere. I hope they are leaked. Better yet, I hope they are demanded by the international community. We also have autopsies showing that people were shot in the back and/or at close range in the forehead. These autopsies do not comport with statement that the commandos were only acting in self defense.

    There are many eye witness accounts that do not mesh with accounts given by Israel. Physical evidence is available that does not mesh with Israel’s version of events. I would think they would jump at the chance to clear things up with an impartial investigation–NOT. But that is what the international community should demand. Neither the US or Israel has any effective break on their actions, no matter how illegal. When leaders know they can do anything and get away with it or worse can manufacture support for their illegal and immoral actions, do you think they will stop them?

  5. Let’s not forget that Obama has not condemned the flotilla attack (waiting for that the facts to come in, apparently)

    *Shocked gasp* Someone wanting to know what actually happened before he changes national policy based on first appearances and visceral reaction? Yes please.

  6. Jill,

    We also have autopsies showing that people were shot in the back and/or at close range in the forehead. These autopsies do not comport with statement that the commandos were only acting in self defense.

    But they don’t actually contradict Israel’s version of events. When people are attacking you with clubs, shooting them at short range can still be self defense. As for shooting people in the back–people miss. In a confused melee, doubly so. Just because someone was shot in the back in this type of situation doesn’t mean he intentionally shot while fleeing (as it might in a domestic criminal context if he was shot by the police).

  7. James M.,

    We don’t simply have a national policy towards Israel, we also have a national policy towards Turkey, a member of NATO. Obama’s statement would have to have been something like, we need an independent inquiry to understand what happened here. I don’t believe Obama’s reaction has been one of a neutral party, only wishing to ascertain the facts before he speaks out. Reality contradicts this point of view.

  8. James M.,

    I’m willing to let independent investigators look into the events. Are you? Do you think Israel should turn over all the tapes/records of events to a neutral party? If not, why not? There’s a lot of contradiction and mismatching of evidence to events. There’s confiscated and doctored evidence. Why should a nation that has already manipulated and confiscated evidence be now trusted to investigate itself?

    “guardian.co.uk, Sunday June 6 2010
    Harriet Sherwood in Gaza City, Adam Gabbatt and agencies
    The UN secretary general called today for a multinational investigation of Israel’s raid on the Gaza-bound aid flotilla that left nine dead but the proposal was swiftly rejected by the Israelis….”

  9. The claim that it was from the Mavi Marmara is false it was from the Francop.

    The video, is a reminder that an attempt was made to smuggle weapons into Gaza.

  10. Bülent Yildirim, the main organizer of the Gaza Flotilla, spoke at a Hamas rally held in Gaza in February 2009. The rally was organized in support of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who stormed out of a debate on the Gaza war in Davos. The speech appeared on the Internet.

  11. Jill,

    I don’t think Israel thinks it would get a fair investigation from the UN. For that mater, if we were in the same situation, the United States would do the same thing for the same reason.

    I would like to see Israel turn over copies of all of the unedited tapes to allies they trust (e.g. the United States) so that there could be an independent assessment of what happened. I don’t think that Israel will publicly release the tapes or turn them over to an untrusted third party because of the propaganda value they would have for groups like Hamas, even if independent investigators determined Israel was in the right.

  12. tapes to allies they trust (e.g. the United States)

    Ah don’t think the trust thing is working anymore not since the last year. This administration has shown on several occasions has shunned Israel and their leaders.

  13. James M.,

    If you think the UN would be unfair to Israel, here is something they could do immediately so the truth could get out. They could release the tapes openly for everyone to see. Then they could return them to their rightful owners. That would show good faith.

    Again, why should a nation who has confiscated and manipulated evidence be trusted to self investigate? Why should I trust the US to investigate? We have knowingly destroyed evidence of torture and refuse to release pictures of our own war crimes. I do not consider these actions which inspire trust.

    You talk of propaganda from Hammas. That may well be. Right now we have clearly seen propaganda coming from Israel. Release the tapes–all of them, unedited. Return the property to its owners.

  14. Can anyone ever think, that a white male who has a different opinion of a female is not a sexist pig? Can it ever be true? Please tell me Judy, is it true? I want to know.

  15. @James M.:
    “*Shocked gasp* Someone wanting to know what actually happened before he changes national policy based on first appearances and visceral reaction? Yes please.”

    The attack on the flotilla happened in international waters – at best this is an act of piracy, at worst an act of war perpetrated against the countries where the ships were registered (namely the US and Turkey). This alone should have garnered a strong response from our government.

    And, as far as our national policy towards Israel goes, perhaps it should have been changed when they refused to sign the NPT (as an aside, the Symington amendment and the Glen amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act makes any military or economic assistance to a country who hasn’t complied with IAEA inspections outlined in the NPT illegal, yet we still send millions to Israel). Perhaps it should have been changed after the Goldstone report, which outlined Israeli war crimes in Gaza. Perhaps our stance towards Israel should have changed after they were caught in government organized identity theft in Europe and Australia in order to facilitate an assassination in a sovereign country (Dubai). Perhaps when Israel recently parked three subs with nuclear missiles off the coast of Iran, a pure act of provocation, we should have reviewed our policy. And let’s not forget the USS Liberty incident. None of these actions received a proper and public official denouncement from our Government.

    This begs the question, James M.: what is it going to take for our government to take a good, long, hard look at our relationship with Israel? As far as I’m concerned, the straw has already broken the camel’s back.

  16. johneboy,

    The attack on the flotilla happened in international waters – at best this is an act of piracy, at worst an act of war perpetrated against the countries where the ships were registered (namely the US and Turkey).

    This is clearly not an act of piracy and it detracts from the perfectly reasonable arguments against Israeli policy to make wild claims like that. This was a nation state enforcing a blockade. Whether you think the blockade is lawful or proper, or was enforced in an improper way, enforcing a blockade is clearly not piracy.

    You are against the U.S.’s close relationship with Israel — that’s fine. But I think that also colors how serious you think the incident that occurred was. An act of war? Really? It’s not like this was done to a US warship.

  17. James M,

    One of the vessels was US-flagged http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_flotilla_raid#Ships_in_flotilla

    And Israel has attacked US warships in the past, namely the USS Liberty.

    Israel killed one US citizen (dual citizen with Turkey) in the flotilla raid.

    Israel has injured a number of US citizen protesters recently (Emily Henochowicz, Tristan Anderson).

    If anyone else (say, Iran?) was doing this to American citizens, the bombs would already be falling.

  18. FFN,

    I like to think we wouldn’t t go to war that lightly. There’s a major difference between targeting Americans because they are Americans (i.e. striking at America through its citizens), and having American activists caught up in a group targeted because of their activism (what happened here).

  19. @James M.:
    Of course it’s not an act of piracy, as the military action was at the behest of a government; like I said, that was a best case scenario. The Law Of the Sea is very clear on the rules of international waters, and the legal status of a ship in said waters. Water borne vessel, much like an embassy, is considered an extension of the country which it is flagged under. In the case of the flotilla, when the Israeli military decided to board the ships in international waters they, in effect, invaded the territory of a sovereign nation which is an act of war – whether the vessels attacked were of a military nature or not is immaterial.

    If the ships were boarded in Israeli waters, the entire complexion of the debate would, naturally, be different; while I don’t support the blockade of Gaza, what Israel does in its own territorial waters is entirely up to them. But the indisputable fact that these ships were attacked far from Israel’s maritime jurisdiction makes this an act of aggression (war, if you will) against the countries who held flag on these vessels.

    And I personally have no problem with the US having a cozy diplomatic relationship with any country, but I do not think that said relationship should be used as a tool to protect and coddle a country who’s actions of late make them out to be more like the so called ‘rogue states’ which the TV news tells us we are ‘supposed’ to be afraid of. Take the headline of your choice – the Goldstone report, sending three nuclear subs off of the coast of another country, the flotilla attack, unwillingness to cooperate with the IAEA – and plug in the word Iran (or North Korea, or Pakistan, or Syria, or Libya) in place of Israel. Do you think our government’s reaction would be different to the stance they are taking currently?

  20. johneboy:

    “The Law Of the Sea is very clear on the rules of international waters, and the legal status of a ship in said waters. Water borne vessel, much like an embassy, is considered an extension of the country which it is flagged under. In the case of the flotilla, when the Israeli military decided to board the ships in international waters they, in effect, invaded the territory of a sovereign nation which is an act of war – whether the vessels attacked were of a military nature or not is immaterial.”


    Of course, this is not the law. The law with respect to blockades during time of belligerency does permit stopping vessels in international waters if the demonstrated intent is to run the blockade. The correct inquiry is the threshold one: whether the Israeli blockade is legal in the first place, which I believe it to be. The law in this area is neatly summarized in the link I cited in a prior post. Here it is again from Professor Guilfoyle.


    I have no idea where you get the “extension of country” status argument. Any vessel may be stopped in international waters, regardless of flag, if suspected of piracy or slave trading or other international offense. (Try that argument with a guard at an embassy). It may also be stopped with permission of its flag state as Professor Guilfoyle states.

  21. mespo727272, from the same article cited:

    “The BBC has reported UN agencies as saying that insufficient aid is reaching Gaza, possibly less than one quarter of daily needs. This raises serious questions about the underlying legality of the blockade.

    The relevant rules of armed conflict prohibit intentionally starving the civilian population and require that humanitarian supplies essential to survival must be allowed to pass, albeit subject to certain controls by the blockading power.

    To maintain a population at a level just above the bare minimum needed for survival might arguably be within the strictest letter of the law, but could never seriously be thought consistent with its spirit.

    Calls for the immediate cessation of the blockade may well have a good case in law as well as in humanitarian policy.”

    And a differing view of the validity of the blockade being little if anything more than collective punishment:


    “Gaza Closure Defined: Collective Punishment
    Position Paper on the International Law Definition of Israeli Restrictions
    on Movement in and out of the Gaza Strip
    December 2008”

    How long after one determines that an opposer will or can not change their actions or mindset does one make them suffer before it becomes punishment for punishments sake?

  22. What investigation? Didn’t the peace loving World already condemn Israel?

    The EU condemns the use of violence that has produced a high number of victims among the members of the flotilla.”

    “The President [of France] expresses his profound emotion in the face of the tragic consequences of the Israeli military operation. . . . He condemns the disproportionate use of force.”

    “Spain unequivocally condemns the Israeli attack on the humanitarian flotilla and it does so as a country and as the acting president of the EU Council.”

    South Africa recalled its ambassador to Israel, Ismail Coovadia, “to show our strongest condemnation of the attack.”

    India announced that “there can be no justification for such indiscriminate use of force, which we condemn.”

    “The Argentine Government expressed on Monday its condemnation of Israel’s naval attack to an humanitarian six-ship flotilla.”

    The Brazilian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that “Brazil strongly condemns the Israeli attack, because there was no justification.”

    Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini: “I deplore in the strongest terms the killing of civilians. This is certainly a grave act.”

    The News, the leading Pakistani English daily: “This monstrous outrage has caught the world’s attention and once again put the spotlight on the activities of a state that has been a law unto itself for most of its life.”

    China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu: “We were shocked by the Israeli attack which led to severe casualties and condemn it.”

    How can Israel be in the right, ever?! Impossible!

    Maybe if Gazans produced anything other than suicide bombers and rocket barrages, they would not depend on that humanitarian aid? Neah, of course the blame cannot lie with them and Hamas who declared war on Israel.

  23. Just Wondering, I have deleted your last comment about Jill. I ask that you refrain from personal attacks on this blog and to abide by our civility rule.

  24. Illness precludes me from engaging in this conversation, but I would like its participant to consider the fact that Egypt was also blockading Gaza/Hamas? Now some of you might answer: because the US pressured them to, but that would be a false reading of the geopolitical issues involved and current history. Hamas itself represents a destructive force bent on destroying Israel in toto and so is an unlikely participant in any peace process.

    Of course many here might believe in the proto-Palestinian cause for the reason that you sympathize with the cause of people you deem oppressed and while I might disagree in this instance with your take on things, I understand and commend your sensitivity to oppression. Then too, Israel is not helped by the stupidity of Bibi and his claque. Nor does AIPAC intelligently represent them.

    Others my believe as Helen Thomas does, that the Jews should return back to Germany and Poland. I find that belief disturbing coming from someone I’ve long respected, especially because she lived through WWII as a young adult. As for bdaman we know by his own statement that the Jews are “Christ Killers,” which I think would sum up his views on all of this.

    However, currently bound up in a struggle to save my life I have not been a presence here of late. I admit that for the first time in my life I lead a rather self centered existence and have little time nor energy to engage in political polemics. I miss being here and I miss all of you, despite current or past disagreements. Perhaps if I make it through, a good possibility I’ll be able to return to our verbal combat.

  25. Mike:

    As I have expressed directly to you by email, we are all quite worried yet hopeful for your recovery and your return. You remain one of the most influential voices on this blog and I appreciate your keeping us informed on your status. You have a large family here on the blog and we are all pulling for you and your “other” family.


  26. May the One who was a source of blessing for the ancestors, bring blessings of healing upon Mike Spindell, a healing of body and a healing of spirit. May those in whose care he is entrusted be gifted with wisdom and skill, and those who surround him be gifted with love and trust, openness and support in his care. And may he be healed along with all those who are in need. Blessed are You, Source of healing.

  27. Mike S:

    We all await your inevitable return with your full force and vigor. Keep up the fight.

    “Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.”

    -Mahatma Gandhi

  28. Mike,

    Everyday you are not here fighting the good fight, the absence of your wit and wisdom is most sorrily missed. As a fellow deist, I’m not the praying type, but not a day has gone by since you told us of your situation that I haven’t wondered how you were doing and sent all the good energy at my disposal your way. Be well, brother.

  29. Mike S, words fail me in the face of your extraordinary struggle, I can only second the words of the other posters who have stated my wishes for you far more eloquently than I ever could. As always, you make a good point and your passionate voice has been truly missed. I greatly look forward to your return.

  30. Mike S:

    Although I do not know you, having read your past posts leads me to believe that you are a righteous man.

    Fight the good fight – Peace.

  31. lottakatz:

    “The relevant rules of armed conflict prohibit intentionally starving the civilian population and require that humanitarian supplies essential to survival must be allowed to pass, albeit subject to certain controls by the blockading power.

    To maintain a population at a level just above the bare minimum needed for survival might arguably be within the strictest letter of the law, but could never seriously be thought consistent with its spirit. ”


    As we’ve discussed before, the threshold question here is one of the legality of the Israeli blockade itself. The London Declaration of 1909 specifically acknowledges the legality of blockades in times of belligerency.

    You take the position (as do many others including presumably Professor Turley) that the blockade is “collective punishment” and thus illegal under Article 102 of the San Remo Manual, which is in accord with the London Declaration. Article 102 of the San Remo Manual states that a blockade is prohibited if “(a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or (b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.”

    The view that the blockade is illegal has wide spread support because most argue, as do you, that minimum subsistence of the civilian population is not what is intended by the spirit of the law. Most take this position because they know that Israel has permitted continuous supplies of food and medicine into Gaza thus removing the argument that the IDF is starving the Gazans out or denying them medical supplies. But does Article 102 it really require more than Israel is doing?

    As you know, Hamas has refused and refuses to recognize the right of Israel to exist. In fact, its charter commits this terrorist organization to the destruction of the Jewish state (From the Hamas Charter: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”) Scores of suicide bombers from Hamas plying their trade deep into Israel attest to this goal. A goal, which is incidentally, supported by other terrorist regimes – most notably Iran.

    What is not well-known is that when Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, it did so with the express pledge of specific security measures by the Palestinian Authority (PA). In exchange, Israel agreed to free movement across the border of goods and supplies. The PA never implemented those security measures. When Hamas won the parliamentary elections in 2006, it publicly declared its intentions to disregard any agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including the security measures. In 2007 Hamas forcibly took control of the Gaza Strip from the PA.

    Even this rebuff did not immediately lead to a blockade. Only after Hamas ambushed two Israeli soldiers and kidnapped another young Israeli soldier, and then began raining down more rockets into southern Israel did the blockade declaration issue from Israel.

    What the pro-Palestinian faction fails to acknowledge is that Hamas and Israel are in a state of war. Nothing in San Remo Manual or the London Declaration requires the Israelis to make the citizens of Gaza comfortable. In fact, an argument can be made that Israel is within its rights to make the citizenry of Gaza uncomfortable so as to provide incentives for them to overthrow their terrorist leaders which they, themselves, installed into positions of power.

    The other argument under subsection (b) deals with “damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.” It would be hard to argue that the blockade has not provided concrete and direct military advantage in the form of making Katyusha rocket attacks against Israeli civilian targets almost non-existent. In addition, the cease fire appears to be holding. I would think maintaining a belligerent nations population at the subsistence level would be a fair moral price to pay for keeping that same population from killing your own citizens. It would be a price I would pay if I called the shots, I can assure you.

    My last point is that the Israeli actions in detaining and boarding the flotilla were in compliance with the law as stated in the San Remo Manual especially given the Israeli attempts to work a compromise with the flotilla to provide for their stated goal of insuring that aid got to the citizens of Gaza after an inspection.

    The following provisions of the San Remo Manual apply:

    98. Merchant vessels (defined as a vessel, other than a warship, an auxiliary vessel, or a State vessel such as a customs or police vessel, that is engaged in commercial or private service) believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked. [emphasis mine]

    103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to:

    (a) the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted; and

    (b) the condition that the distribution of such supplies shall be made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power or a humanitarian organization which offers guarantees of impartiality, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross.

    104. The blockading belligerent shall allow the passage of medical supplies for the civilian population or for the wounded and sick members of armed forces, subject to the right to prescribe technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted.

    The IDF encountered armed resistance only on the ship carrying Turkish “activists.” On the other ships, no violence was encountered or required to enforce the blockade.

  32. mespo,

    Exceptionally well reasoned and argued.

    To everyone, I’m regretting having never taken a course in international law or the law of war — does anybody have a recommended text? (or even just a text currently being used in somebody’s syllabus?)

  33. James M:


    Exceptionally well reasoned and argued.”


    Well, as my law partner, and a host of local judges would likely say, there’s a first time for everything. Thanks.:)

  34. The Philanthropic-Zionist Complex

    By Michael Barker

    We live in a world of unnecessary illusions and unnecessary death, but there is no doubt that capitalism must be eradicated to dispel the ongoing spectre of mass slaughter. The ruling classes Necessary Illusions must be dismantled:[1] however, to successfully replace “our” current system we must first identify the root causes of the problems we face. In this regard it is vital to observe that the military-industrial complex is not the only enemy of anti-capitalist activists, as arguably our most insidious enemy is what I refer to as the Philanthropic-Zionist Complex.[2] Instead of being composed of die-hard war-profiteers, like for example Haliburton, the main purveyors of the latter form of violence mask their militarism under a veil of humanitarianism, thus rendering most of their potential critics inert. One significant, but by no means only proponent of such profitable propaganda is the Chicago real estate mogul Lester R. Crown. By reviewing the Crown dynasties outstanding commitment to charitable Zionism this article will throw some light on an oft neglected side of elite power.

    Lets begin by sketching out the Crown families profitable involvement with one of the United States most powerful military contractors, General Dynamics – a group that a long history of dealing with “Israel’s Apartheid [weapon] contractor,” Elbit Systems. Lester Crown’s father, Henry Crown, first took a “controlling block of stock” in General Dynamics in 1959, and when Henry passed away in 1990 (having retired some years earlier) Lester was already serving as their chairman; although at present the only member of the Crown family serving on General Dynamics board of directors is Lester’s son James S. Crown (who is also a board member of JPMorgan Chase). Given the Crown’s families interest in charity and war, it is fitting that The New York Times’ obituary for Henry noted that his “personal style was reported to be self-effacing and elusive”; adding that he “would portray himself as a ‘sand and gravel man’ of limited education, veiling his moves and quietly consolidating his power.” Thus given Henry and the Crown family’s ability to work quietly and methodically behind the scenes, it is important to explore the extent of their influence.

    Since 2004 Lester Crown has been the chairman of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a group whose longstanding board members include Michelle Obama, the present First Lady of the United States; and whose president (Marshall Bouton) came to the post after spending two decades working with the Asia Society in New York.[3] The Chicago Council was created in 1922 and their founding president was former US Secretary for War (1909-11) Jacob Dickinson, so it is perhaps fitting that before Lester became chair of the Council his predecessor had been the former CEO of Boeing Company, Philip Condit. This coincidence is especially relevant with respect to this article as Noami Klein notes: “Israeli defense giant Elbit… partnered with Boeing to construct the Department of Homeland Security’s $2.5 billion ‘virtual’ border fence around the United States.” The current chair of Elbit Systems is Michael Federmann, an individual who In addition to making generous profits from death is presently the chair of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, having taken on this role in 2009 when he replaced recent General Dynamics board member Charles Goodman. Keeping the Crown the family in the picture, one should add that Goodman’s late wife (Suzanne Crown) was one of Lester Crown’s cousins, and Goodman himself is presently vice-chair of the investment firm, Henry Crown and Company.

    Michael Federmann and Lester Crown solidify their Zionist interests by acting as representatives of the Jerusalem Foundation, an organization which ostensibly “seeks to create a just society for all citizens of Jerusalem” and was founded by the well-known Zionist the late Teddy Kollek (the Mayor of Jerusalem from 1965 until 1993).[4] Best illustrating the disturbing links between Zionism and “good work” (environmentalism in this case) we can turn to former Jerusalem Foundation board member Richard N. Goldman, who used to be a president of the Jewish Community Federation — a group whose current CEO is the former AIPAC executive director, Thomas Dine (1980-93). Goldman commitment to charitable Zionism means that he is also a member of the national council of the conservative free-market group, The Conservation Fund, a member of the board of counselors of the eugenic-inspired Save the Redwoods League, and in 1990, along with his wife Rhoda Goldman (of Levi jeans fame), he founded the world famous Goldman Environmental Prize. Given such ideological serviceable chartable work it should come as no surprise that the former propaganda Director of the Jerusalem Foundation is now the chief Israel emissary to the tree-planting Jewish National Fund, which is better known as the principal Zionist “colonialist agency of ethnic cleansing.”

    But it’s not all roses and Zionism at the Jerusalem Foundation, as weapons manufacturers and big oil are represented on the Foundations board as well. For instance Elbit Systems board member, Avraham Asheri, sits on the Jerusalem Foundation’s board of governors; while the Foundations emeritus chair, Joseph Vardi, is the cofounder of major Israeli defence contractor, NESS TSG, is the former chair of the Israel National Oil Company, and has served as an adviser to the CEO’s and the chairmen of Occidental Petroleum Corporation.[5] These few connections, however, do not do justice to the full extent of Vardi’s elite networking, and to sample just a few of his other ties we might note that he is a member of the board of governors of Hebrew University, was Consul for Economic Affairs of the State of Israel in New York, a cofounder of Israel’s largest venture capital firm (Pitango), and is a former board member of the US-based State of Israel Bonds.[6]

    This is not just to say that the Jerusalem Foundation is simply concerned with oil, guns, and Zionism, as their members include leading human rights activists too!: for example, another member of their board of governors is Ruth Gavison. Gavison helped cofound the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (in 1974), serving for many years as its chairperson (and most recently as their president, 1996-99); and at present she is senior fellow at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute, whose mission is “based on the Van Leers’ vision of Israel as both a homeland for the Jewish people and a democratic society, predicated on justice, fairness and equality for all its residents.” In the latter organizations case, what this means in reality, is justice for Zionists. Thus the Insitute’s hononary chair (Zelman Cowen) is an advisor to the B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation Commission, and their chairman is Dutch banker Tom de Swaan. It just so happens that Tom is the vice-chairman of the supervisory board of the global retail chain, Royal Ahold, where he serves alongside the former executive vice president and CFO of Sara Lee Corporation, Judith Sprieser.[7] Sara Lee is of course famous supporter of Israel, and one of their current board members is James S. Crown, the president of Henry Crown and Company.

    Remaining on the trail of the Dutch industrialist, the late Bernard Van Leer (1919-1958), we might notice that his major philanthropic legacy is the Van Leer Group Foundation. Here we find Foundation trustee Amos Mar-Haim who serves on the Jerusalem Foundation’s board of governors and is the former deputy chairman of the Israel Corporation. Sitting alongside Mar-Haim on the Van Leer Group Foundation’s board of trustees is former senior partner at McKinsey & Company, Wilfred Griekspoor (who also served as vice chairman of Doctors Without Borders Holland, see footnote # 6), a board member of the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors (Rien van Gendt), and human rights activists extraordinarie, Peter Bell. Given the fascinating (read: sickening) relationship between the Philanthropic-Zionist Complex and human rights it is worth briefly looking at Bells background in more detail.

    For a start, Peter Bell is a former board member of the imperialist Human Rights Watch (1988-95) and currently serves on their Americas advisory committee; while more recently, in 1999, Bell helped found the Business Humanitarian Forum, which works to “bridge the gap of understanding and promote cooperation between humanitarian organizations and private business, encouraging both sides to work together to solve complex development problems.” Other notable individuals involved in founding this dubious group included notable “humanitarian” warriors John C. Whitehead and former US Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick.

    More recently, Bell has served as the president of the inhumanitarian CARE International, a body whose current chair of Lydia Marshall, a former managing director of Rockport Capital Incorporated. This latter finance group belongs to Peter Ackerman, who also runs the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict which employs the liberal Zionist “peace activist” Stephen Zunes as the chair of their board of academic advisors. Bell formerly used to serve alongside Ackerman and Marshall on the board of CARE USA, and presently sits with him on the international management advisory group of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. Finally, returning to the Crown family, it is noteworthy that Susan Crown has been a board member of CARE USA since 2006, and is also the vice-president of Henry Crown and Company.

    Lester Crown’s daughter, Susan Crown, is the former chair, now board member, of the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation, which was founded in 1994 by Steven Spielberg, the “prominent Hollywood Zionist” who became “inspired” to take charitable action while making Schindler’s List (for a detailed examination of Hollywood Zionism, see “Hollywood’s Corporate Conservation Collaborators”).[8] Now known as the University of Southern California Shoah Foundation, their honorary co-chairs are media mogul’s Lew Wasserman and Edgar Bronfman, Jr. (the latter of whoms father is the former president of the World Jewish Congress), and Lester Crown’s wife Renée Schine Crown. Lester and Renée’s daughter, Susan, is also senior mentor for the Aspen Institute’s Henry Crown fellowship program (as is their son James S. Crown). This program is an exemplar of elite social engineering, and was set up in 1997 to “develop” the “next generation of community-spirited leaders, providing them with the tools necessary to meet the challenges of corporate and civic leadership in the 21st century.” To be chosen for this program is a sign of future (and previous) success, as only twenty “accomplished entrepreneurial leaders (between the ages of 25 and 45)” are selected each year to “hone their skills in values-based leadership.”[9]

    Lester Crown serves on the board of overseers of Aspen’s Henry Crown program, but amongst the leading capitalists serving alongside him the most interesting is Margot Pritzker (who similarly sits alongside Lester on the board of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs). Pritzker is a committed new humanitarian which is evident by her serving on the committe of the Chicago chapter of Human Rights Watch, and by her service on the board of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, a group that apparently provides “non-sectarian disaster relief and long-term development assistance worldwide.” Call me cynical, but this type of language reminds me somewhat of the noxious discourse adopted by the Zionist-linked Project for a New American Humanitarianism. Not surprisingly other board members of this “aid” Distribution Committee include Ronald Lauder and Stanley Chesley, who are respectively the chairman and president of the ethnic cleansing outfit, the Jewish National Fund. This is not to imply that the Committee’s humanitarian aid is used to directly kill people, far from it, it does help some people, if only to help legitimize the murder of Palestians.

    It is fitting that Margot should serve alongside a vertiable orgy of democracy-manipulating elites on the advisory board of a group called the America Abroad Media which was founded in 2001 and apparently aims “to harness the power of media to inform America and the world about the critical international issues of our time.” Particularly notable advisors include former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, Peter Ackerman, John C. Whitehead, Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Martin Indyk, and Vin Weber.[10]

    The political repercussions of the lack of critical commentary regarding the power of the Philanthropic-Zionist Complex are tragic, and sadly “Zionism is alive and well, even in some of the most self-proclaimed radical or progressive political spaces in the United States.” This is no accident of nature. Rather it is the logical result of a highly sophisticated propaganda campaign: a Zionist strategy which “strategically uses the discourse of ‘civil rights’ to promote Zionism” while “promoting extremely right-wing, white supremacist viewpoints in relationship to the Arab world in general and Palestine in particular.” This cynical strategy “impacts every community’s access to resources in that individuals, organizations, or communities of color who oppose Zionism risk defunding or slander.”[11] The Philanthropic-Zionist Complex is a more than capable ally of the Zionist Power Configuration, and taken together these two bodies play an integral function in contributing to what Edward Herman and David Peterson refer to as The Politics of Genocide (Monthly Review Press, 2010). In a sorry reflection on the state of progressive activism, Herman and Peterson conclude that: “The inability of any sector of the U.S. establishment to recognize fully that the human and material destruction in Southeast Asia and the Middle East are the consequence, not of accident, much less error, but of deliberate policies that produced this result, ranks among the greatest intellectual and moral failures in U.S. history.” Only by challenging the legitimacy of all aspects of Zionism’s genocidal legacy will anti-capitalist activists be able to unite to work to systematically build viable human-centered alternatives that can end our worlds “politics of genocide.”

    [1] While Noam Chomsky’s work on propaganda is very useful (see Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies), his work on the influence of liberal foundations and Zionism leaves much to be desired: for criticisms, see Michael Barker, “Noam Chomsky and the Power of Letters,” Swans Commentary, December 15, 2008; James Petras, “Noam Chomsky and the Pro-Israel Lobby: Fourteen Erroneous Theses“, James Petras Website, June 4, 2006; Jeffrey Blankfort, “Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict“, Voltaire, September 20, 2006 (see 2010 radio interview with Blankfort); M. Shahid Alam, “Chomsky on Oil and the Israel Lobby“, Dissident Voice, January 31, 2009.

    [2] The Philanthropic-Zionist Complex is by no means unique and its works alongside the secular Non-Profit Industrial Complex, building upon decades of experience of the United States leading so-called liberal foundations. For two seminal critiques of elite philanthropy, see Robert Arnove (ed.), Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism: The Foundations at Home and Abroad (G.K. Hall, 1980); Joan Roelofs, Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism (State University of New York Press, 2003). Liberal foundations and elite social engineering more generally have also been heavily critiqued by William Domhoff who is the coauthor along with Richie Zweigenhaft of Jews in the Protestant Establishment (Praeger, 1982).

    [3] Lester Crown notes that: “On the national front, the most noteworthy Council [on Global Affairs] activity was the landmark study of the importance of agricultural development to reducing global hunger and poverty, made possible by a generous grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, that became the blueprint for the Obama Administration’s global food security initiative.” (For a critique of the Gates Foundation’s take on feeding the poor, see “Bill Gates as Social Engineer: Introducing the World’s Largest Liberal Philanthropist” – ironically this conference paper was presently at the Hilton Hotel (Brisbane, Australia), a hotel chain that Lester Crown has a major financial stake in.)

    Here it is worth adding that the Asia Society provides an early example of a “democracy promoting” organisation (i.e., it served as a conduit for CIA funding). Founded in 1956 by John D. Rockefeller III to foster understanding between Asians and Americans, the Asia Society’s current president and CEO, Vishakha Desai, is married to former Asia Society president, Robert Oxnam, who in turn is a trustee of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Asia advisor to Bill Gates.

    [4] The chairman of the US board of the Jerusalem Foundation, Alan Hassenfeld, is the former CEO of toy manufacturer Hasbro, an emeritus board member of the imperialist Refugees International, and is a board member of the Committee to Encourage Corporate Philanthropy. (For a critique of corporate “philanthropy,” see “Corporate Social Responsibility as a Political Resource.”) US board member of the Jerusalem Foundation and former US Deputy Secretary of State, John Whitehead, cofounded the Committee to Encourage Corporate Philanthropy in 1999 (with Peter Malkin), and notable honorary chairs of this group include David Rockefeller and Paul Volcker.

    [5] Current Occidental Petroleum board members include former US Ambassador to Israel, Edward Djerejian; the powerful right-wing Christian Zionist Spencer Abraham; and Occidental Petroleum’s chair and CEO is Ray Irani, who serves on the advisory board of the Center for Middle East Public Policy (where he mixes with the likes of Frank Carlucci).

    [6] Jewish National Fund president and AIPAC luminary, Stanley Chesley, is a former board member of the State of Israel Bonds (also known as the Development Corporation for Israel); while the former CEO of State of Israel Bonds, Nathan Sharony (1994-97), is a board member of military giant Elbit Systems.

    Pitango Venture Capital cofounder, Rami Kalish, used to serve on the board of directors on the Zionist non-governmental organization, the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace (now known as the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education). Needless to say this organization might be better known as the Center for Enabling War and Legitimating Intolerance as their advisory board includes the infamous right-wing Zionist Daniel Pipes. That said, another board member of the “Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace” is Jean-Christophe Rufin, the former vice-president and cofounder of Doctors Without Borders (also known as Médecins Sans Frontières or MSF). This implies that some limited form of peace might possibly be promoted at the Center. Yet a closer look at Rufin’s background suggests that his inclusion on their board is another Zionist smokescreen, as Rufin is currently the president of Action Against Hunger, a group whose most notable board member is the former vice chairman of Rothschild Inc., Yves-André Istel. On top of this, it is interesting to highlight the fact that Séverine Autesserre — who served as an advisor to the imperialist Center for Preventive Action in 2008, see “Preventing independent Action in the Congo” — acted as an advisor for Action Against Hunger’s work in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (between 2005 and 2007), and prior to this worked in a variety of jobs (including as a consultant for Doctors Without Borders, in the Congo and elsewhere (between 2001 and 2004).

    Doctors Without Borders has come along way since their founding in 1971, as Bernard Kouchner, another cofounder, “left MSF in 1979 to form a break-away organization called Medecins Du Monde” which “later developed the doctrine of the ‘right to intervene’” (Richard Seymour, The Liberal Defence of Murder, p.172.) Initially MSF and Rufin did not follow this imperialist evolutionary pathway and they were one of the few humanitarian organizations that subjected their colleagues to critical scrutiny; for an example, see former MSF research director Fiona Terry’s Condemned to Repeat? The Paradox of Humanitarian Action (Cornell University Press, 2002). However, things appear to have changed in recent years, as the former recent chair of MSF’s US advisory board is Richard Rockefeller (the head of Rockefeller Brothers Fund), while another notable advisory board member is the treasurer of Goldman Sachs Group, Elizabeth Beshel.

    [7] The longstanding CEO of Sara Lee, John Bryan (1975-2000), is the former chair of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a board member of Goldman Sachs, and serves on the international board of governors of the Peres Center for Peace (along with the likes of Desmond Tutu, Henry Kissinger, and Lester Crown).

    The chair of Royal Ahold’s supervisory board is Rene Dahan, who is the former president of Mobil Oil, and who until recently served as a board member of Exxon Mobil.

    [8] One might add that Steven Spielberg is a trustee of the Museum of Jewish Heritage, where he serves alongside Bruce Ratner (who is a member of the board of overseers of the CIA-linked International Rescue Committee), and Howard Rubenstein (who is an adviser to the right-wing human rights outfit AmeriCares).

    [9] The executive director of the Henry Crown fellowship program, Peter Reiling, had prior to joining the Aspen Institute in 2004, served for eight years as the president and CEO of TechnoServe – a group formed in 1968 to “grow businesses and industries in the developing world.” TechnoServe’s two largest funders are the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Google, closely followed by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations (Peter Ackerman even rears his nonviolent power head again as a TechnoServe member). At present TechnoServe’s work is being directed by Bruce McNamer who used to be an investment banker at Morgan Stanley and a management consultant at McKinsey & Company.

    [10] Margot Pritzker’s husband is Thomas Pritzker, an individal who amongst his many other corporate affiliations is the chair of Global Hyatt Corporation. Thomas’s cousin, Nicholas Pritzker, who is vice-chairman of Global Hyatt Corporation, is a former chair of the biotech corporation Eos Biotechnology, and is the co-vice-chair of Conservation International (see “When Environmentalists Legitimize Plunder”). Nicholas’s wife Susan is in turn a board member for Mother Jones magazine (see “Mother Jones and the Defence of Liberal Elites”). Here one might add that James S. Crown’s wife, Paula Hannaway Crown, who is a principal of Henry Crown and Company, presently serves on the board of directors of Conservation International, and is a trustee of the Museum of Modern Art (a body whose honorary chairs are Ronald S. Lauder and David Rockefeller).

    [11] Nadine Naber, Eman Desouky, and Linda Baroudi (for Arab Women’s Solidarity Association, San Francisco Chapter), “The Forgotten ‘-ism’: An Arab American Women’s Perspective on Zionism, Racism, and Sexism,” In INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence, Color of Violence: The INCITE! Anthology (South End Press, 2006), p.98, p.110. As Soraya explains: “Since Zionists have a long history in progressive circles in the US even though their stance on Palestine contradicts their stance on other political issues, they play a role in the funding of non-governmental organizations. Many activists fear publicly supporting Palestine because a precedent has already been set that you will lose your funding or you will not be funded at all if you support Palestinian liberation.” (p.110) For a related discussion of funding problems, see “Engineering Human Rights in the Israel-Palestine Conflict.”

  35. Mike Spindell:

    I really do hope you resume posting soon. Good luck with your health issues.

    I will say a good word to Pope Agapetus for you:)

    As they said in the 70’s you are a “righteous” guy (definition #3 Urban Dictionary).

  36. mespo’s argument is indeed well reasoned and presented.

    It is also imperfect.

    Mostly due to the 2005 Israeli “withdrawal” and the fact Hamas is not a state actor.

  37. I agree with Buddha on his analysis of Mespo’s stance on the violation of international law.

    Mespo keeps referring to the right of states to enforce blockades in “times of belligerancy”. The rules he cites certainly would apply to the blockade of the South by the North in the Civil War. But they don’t apply to this situation. There is no declared war between Turkey and Israel [yet], hence there is no “belligerancy” within the meaning of the statute. The intervention of the Israelis was an act of piracy in international waters, pure and simple.

    One doesn’t even have to address the issue of whether the blockade is legal because the ship didn’t even get far enough to try to break through the blockade. The legality of the blockade is a red herring and irrelevant to the question of whether Israel was entitled under international law and centuries of naval custom to board a ship in international waters and kill people.

    The Israelis have refused to conduct even an internal (i.e., all Israeli) investigation into this incident. Probably because they realize their doctored videos and other trickery will not pass the laugh test.

    Mike S. I hope you are feeling better soon. Best wishes for a speedy recovery. Isabel

  38. Isabel,

    I don’t have the background to address whether a state of belligerency technically exists, but you are wrong on a couple of other points.

    First, the fact that this occurred in international waters is irrelevant. The key is that reasonable grounds existed that the merchant vessels (defined as non-military vessels) were breaching the blockade. From The Times article mespo provided (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7142055.ece):

    “Historically, such a blockade had to be conducted close to shore. In modern law, however, a blockade may be enforced against neutral vessels on the high seas, where the events on the Marvi Marmara took place.

    A belligerent may stop, inspect and divert any vessel it suspects of intending to breach its blockade, which is what Israel says it intended to do.

    While a merchant vessel has a right to freedom of navigation on the high seas, it can be intercepted legally when its express intention is to breach a blockade.”

    In the video Jill provided (http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/52872), one of the organizers of the flotilla says that they flat out told the Israeli military that they considered the blockade illegal and intended to go to Gaza.

    QED, if the blockade was legal, Israel was within its rights to capture the ship. (A ship which resists capture may be attacked)

    Second, lots of people love throwing the “p” word around, but this was not piracy. Quoted from The Times article mespo provided:

    “Was this piracy? If the blockade was unlawful, then enforcing it was unlawful. This, however, would still not make Israel’s actions piracy. Under the UN Law of the Sea Convention, piracy can be committed only by military forces that have mutinied or by private persons. As a technical matter states cannot commit piracy, only private individuals can. Even if the interception lacked a basis in law, it was not piracy. “

  39. Karl Friedrich,
    A rather interesting post, chock full of lineages, connections and overall use of Zionist as an epithet. Frankly, I have neither the will, nor time to work through your convoluted assertions. However, I will comment that your case, while amply illustrated follows the typical web of conspiracy connectivity and your characterizations are much more ominous then can reasonably be construed.

    Your Zionist points become epithets as you use them. It really comes down to whose ox is being gored. To the Turks and Iraqi’s
    no doubt it may be “Kurdist” epithets describing the situation. To those who back the proto-Palestinians (my own epithet if you regard my reading of the history), the Jordanians who back the
    legitimacy of their King to the Saudi Throne (a valid cause) may us “Wahabist,” or “Saudist” as an epithet and so on and so on, the examples being too numerous to detail.

    Had I any fame you probably would refer to me as a Zionist, since I am a Jew who supports (with many previously expressed quibbles and qualification)who supports Israel. If you did then you would be somewhat wrong. I am an American first and have never had any desire to emigrate to Israel, nor do I think all Jews should. Is this really different than Irish Americans who supported the IRA with guns and money? Does it different from Italians who march on Columbus Day? I’ve known of the German American Bund which supported their “old country during WWII and did so in a manner I would deem traitorous to the US. Here too I could give numerous instances of people supporting their “old country” politically and financially.

    Are Jews not entitled to the same freedom, or do you see as is apparent a vast Zionist conspiracy to undermine our country.
    For the sake of brevity we could call it “ZOG.”

    On another note, to all my friends here I am genuinely touched by your concern. It gives me yet an1other goal to fight through this and return to the discussion. My biggest enemy is malaise (besides an atrociously bad heart that needs replacement) and you’ve broken through it. Buddha is correct and as a fellow Deist I’m not a believer in prayer, yet I’ve had people I know of divers faiths who have prayed for me and I welcome them all. Please continue. As for me besides following a strict medical regimen I use my training in creative imaging to keep my spirits in the fight. In that respect I will return here again when this is all over.
    Thank you all

  40. Isabel/James M:

    The state of war exists between Israel and Hamas. The essential question of a blockade is not the relationship between waring antagonists, whose vessels may be attacked on the high seas by either side, but rather the relationship between the blockading entity and neutral vessels (like the Turkish vessel) seeking to avoid the enforcement of the blockade. That is the point addressed by the San Remo manual.

    AS for Buddha’s assertion that Hamas (which is a duly elected representative of a distinct population) is not a “state actor” for purposes of international law, I think that argument would be hard to make and likely irrelevant even if established. In 1861 Lincoln imposed just such a blockade on the Confederate States. The US Supreme Court upheld Lincoln in the Prize cases (1862) even though the CSA was not recognized as a sovereign state merely an agent of insurrection like Hamas. (See Eric Posner’s recent article Wall Street Journal.) Terrorists like Hamas deserve no greater protection that a sovereign nation. Indeed, they deserve none. As a commentator I read in The Weekly Standard noted “… international law, like the US Constitution, is not a suicide pact.”

  41. Mike S:

    Great to read you once again. Keep it up as your strength allows — it looks like good therapy for you.

  42. This on top of the 2009 monies.

    President Barack Obama said Wednesday the United States was to unveil a 400-million-dollar civilian aid package for the Palestinians, as he called the situation in the Gaza Strip “unsustainable.”

  43. Weapons were also found on the Francop but the video shows different weapons and a different picture of them.

  44. Weapons were also found on the Francop but the video of those weapons shows different weapons and a different picture of them.

  45. The video is real, BUT it’s not from de Mavi Marmara.

    If you look at the date, it reads: 05/11/2009.

    It’s from the Francop vessel last year.

    That’s why Israel cannot permit this vessels.

  46. Mike.

    Only dropped in on this thread by accident, so I hope you are still keeping tabs on it.

    If I had not, I probably may not have been aware of your illness.

    Best of luck during the times that you are going through. I hope that your condition permanently improves and look forward to the pleasure of reading your posts regularly again real soon.

  47. And yet what is a blockade but an occupation from without? As you pointed out on another thread (for which I am still anxiously awaiting your thoughts vis a vis the Fermi paradox), he who can destroy a thing ‘controls’ a thing. But is that truly control or the illusion of control? Destruction by bombs, destruction by starvation and deprivation – it’s all still destruction. Just as oppression is oppression no matter the source. Fear and resentment will still breed discontent and perpetual oppression leads to perpetual war. You don’t hand out an olive branch with one hand and use a club in the other unless you desire mixed results. That’s Bibi’s approach – use both sticks at the same time, screw the carrot. It comes back to fear and hatred as societal control mechanisms being self-destructive.

    If our species is to survive, we must come to the conscious conclusion that wars and occupations are outmoded.

    Especially in space. To return to the Fermi paradox.


    Rocks are cheap, plentiful and easy to throw. Just park in the Oort cloud or asteroid belt and give a nudge. Gravity will do the hard part. If aliens can get here? They can destroy us in a blink of an eye. All it takes is one well placed comet.

    I believe intelligent technologically advanced life is so rare that aliens would dare not contact us as long as we keep proving we can’t even coexist with each other without violence and fouling our nest. We’re too inherently unstable and dangerous to risk exposure. Our behavior as nations only reinforces this idea.

    Israel has more than once crossed the line from self-defense and into provocation. A line the US also crossed when they invaded Iraq for the personal profit of the Bush administration instead of going after the manpower and money behind 9/11 in Saudi Arabia – the Bush family’s BFF. For what is provocation but a preemptive strike? A PR campaign? A blockade of humanitarian aid?

    As to state actors, would you consider a radical political party such as the Teabaggers state actors? Or a fringe group of racist, theocratic ideologues blinded by the general climate of engendered by fear and hatred and able to leverage that fear and hatred into a form of control?

    This problem goes beyond the messy law behind it (which the article shows is not as clear cut as you present it) and straight to the cause: using oppression against the whole to punish a subset.

    Germany after WWI. What created the environment that Hitler flourished in? Economic oppression from the West as punishment for the acts of imperialist Germany kept the Weimar Republic in a state of constant disequilibrium through hyperinflation and shortages of basic necessities. Add to this the aggravation of the Allies retribution and continued hostility giving rise to a radicalized military.

    Sound familiar yet?

    What was a Hamas electoral victory but the very portrait of radicalization? Just as the Teabaggers represent that same threat here. Just as it engenders hatred and fear, oppression is the soil in which radicalization flourishes.

  48. Left-Wing Icon Daniel Ellsberg

    ‘Obama Deceives the Public’

    Daniel Ellsberg, legendary leaker of the “Pentagon Papers” in 1971, still has a bone to pick with the White House. In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, the 79-year-old peace activist accuses President Obama of betraying his election promises — in Iraq, in Afghanistan and on civil liberties.


  49. Even if the far left, anti-Israel, Professor Turley is correct that the video is of the weapons in the Francop, can he dispute that if there is no Israeli blockade and no inspection of cargos brought to Gaza, the ships will be carrying the same kind of arms that were found on the Francop?

    Professor Turley should read Andrew McCarthy’s “The Grand Jihad” which shows that the animus which has motivated attacks on the Jews in Palestine since the 1920s is the same as the motivation for the animus against the US and the UK, i.e. religous jihad or holy war against infidels. Israel is our first line of defense.

    Far leftists such as Professor Turley share with the Islamists a dislike of the United States under a Republican form of government with a capitalist economy. Remember Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Turley is one of those who wants to punish the CIA for their harsh interrogation of Khalid Sheik Mohammed and two or three others Guantanamo detainees that resulted in saving three more tall buildings in the US and the many lives that would have been lost and we not gotten the information from the enemy combatants.

  50. U.S. Constitution

    Article VIII

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

    Article X

    Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

    Yeah, some people are against torture because IT’S AGAINST THE LAW TO DENY HABEAS CORPUS AND TORTURE PRISONERS.

    Apologist propaganda troll nitwits.

  51. What a surprise. The Israely government lies so that can continue their reenactment of the Warsaw Ghetto days with Israel playing the part of Germany.

    Or South African aparthied will do as well.

  52. Buddha:

    I think our disagreement centers more on the “reasonableness” of the blockade rather than the Fermi paradox. (By the way, I am doing some reading on the topic. I have started with the classic book “The Ghost in the Machine” by Arthur Koestler.)

    You quite properly express sympathy for the Gazan civilian population facing “oppressive” (your word) conditions due to the Israeli blockade which admittedly has slowed the flow of goods and supplies to a fraction of its pre-occupation days. My sympathy is for the Israeli innocents preyed upon by terrorists who now stand in positions of power in Gaza due to their election by these same “oppressed” Gazans.

    Let me agree with you that armed conflict in the nuclear age is both outmoded and dangerous. It is likely to fail in the long run, but that is not universally the case (for example, the destruction of the Nazi regime in 1945). We seem to agree with David Wilson that, “War creates peace like hate creates love.” Nonetheless and, in this case, sadly, we are lawyers and not poets or moralists and it is upon the law that we rely for guidance to intellectually resolve these dilemmas.

    I see the issue quite simply as this: Israel has the right by virtue of casus belli to defend itself from its avowed enemies by force of arms. It must do so with the least harm possible to the surrounding civilian population, but that does not mean the civilian population mustn’t suffer at all.

    I accept Justice Grier’s analysis in the Prize cases of the rights of belligerents in an internal war. The Justice said:

    WAR is simply the exercise of force by bodies politic, or bodies assuming to be bodies politic, against each other, for the purpose of coercion. The means and modes of doing this are called belligerent powers. The customs and opinions of modern civilization have recognized certain modes of coercing the power you are acting against as justifiable. Injury to private persons or their property is avoided as far as it reasonably can be. Wherever private property is taken or destroyed, it is because it is of such a character, or so situated, as to make its capture a justifiable means of coercing the power with which you are at war. For war is not upon the theory of punishing individuals for offenses, on the contrary (except for violations of rules of war), it ignores jurisdiction, penalties and crimes, and is only a system of coercion of the power you are acting against.

    Hamas is a declared terrorist organization with demonstrated proclivities to ignore the rules of war and engage in attacks against innocent civilians by means of suicide bombers and rocket attacks against, inter alia, Israeli school children.

    The blockade is an intermediate step to suppress arms shipments and war-making supplies to Israel’s enemies and is a lawful exercise of state sovereignty following numerous attacks by Hamas. Israel appears to be in compliance with the San Remo Manual and is thus acting reasonably and avoiding harm to the Gazan citizenry as “far as it reasonably can be.”

    Where we disagree is whether the actions of Israel are reasonable. That is to say, whether the blockade is founded on a rational basis or interposed merely to collectively punish the Gazans for their harboring of terrorists and their elevation of same to positions of power. If we accept the proposition (as we must as rational humans) that coercion of your enemy is a rational response to unprovoked attacks against Israeli citizens, the issue becomes one of degree. How much suffering is too much for Gazan civilians to bear under international law? Here the amount of acceptable suffering is established by law, specifically Article 102 of the San Remo Manual which prohibits blockades only if “it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or (b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.” [emphasis mine]

    Thus even if the effect of the blockade did serve to starve out the Gazans, it is still permitted under international law if it serves another rational purpose, to wit, the interdiction of arms to be used against Israeli civilians. This is incredibly harsh law, but it is the black letter law of war and blockades. I can find no support under international law for the notion that the suffering of civilians – unintentionally inflicted and in the furtherance of a legitimate objective of war – is grounds for declaring a belligerent the perpetrator of a war crime or in violation of international law. Perhaps you can help me here.

  53. mespo,

    I do not think that is an unfair analysis. However, San Remo does not exist in a vacuum and we must look at the totality of Israel’s bad actions to get the whole picture. Were this an isolated episode of disproportionate response, I might be more forgiving, but the State of Israel has gone well beyond reasonable in toto. I’d be more sympathetic now if this was not a recurring pattern with them. Patterns concern me as they are a good gauge of the systemic health of a government. Much like our own government (lest we be accused of living in glass houses), Israel suffers from a dark malaise of bad leadership. I’d hope that they’d have learned the bitter lessons of history better as victims of genocidal state actions by Germany and be better judges of when lethal force is appropriate in both the general and the specific.

    The boarding and inspection of the flotilla simply did not merit lethal force. I’m no commando, but I’m fairly well trained and I know for a fact the Mavi Marmara could have been taken with no loss of life via technology applied in a properly designed strategic and tactical manner and good old fashioned martial arts on behalf of the commandos. These were people (admittedly with clubs and knives) repelling boarders by force – a right under international maritime law. The crew and passengers were not violating any law by defending themselves and they also tried non-lethal force first via the fire hoses – an ethical decision. If I can disarm someone with a knife trying to harm me and not kill them in the process (and I have – twice, a would be mugger in New Orleans who crawled home with a severe beating and my drunken ex-wife who was disarmed without a scratch or bruise to show for her efforts)? I have no doubt that an Israeli commando can do the same. There was no need to kill anyone. The deaths are due to Israeli incompetence at a minimum.

    The reasonableness contention lies with me in this instance has more to do Israeli misapplication of force and a pattern of bad behavior by state actors – in specific actions that violate the Geneva Convention. I will for the sake of argument stipulate Hamas as state actors for the instant argument although I think they are just common terrorist thugs. Indeed, it’s not the blockade proper I have issue with, it’s their execution of said blockade. But now, the pattern . . .

    Israel has created a situation where they cannot “safely” attack the thousands of Hamas members because they’ve quarantined them in Gaza along with 1.5 million people, most of whom just want a normal life – including food, adequate facilities and medical care. The Geneva Convention provides that “[i]n the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

    (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

    To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;“. (Protocol I, Art. 3, Sec. 1a-c)[emphasis added]. Ghettoizing the Palestinians in itself can be characterized as religious/ethic based confinement that is an outrage upon personal dignity and both humiliating and degrading. Most Palestinians in the territory live in conditions I wouldn’t be able to characterize as anything other than horrific. That Israel created this circumstance is not inconsequential.

    For one example of the pattern, past bad actions by Israel include rocket attacks that have targeted civilians (including children). Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited under the Geneva Convention. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 4). Combatants must distinguish between civilian and military objects and attack only military targets. (Protocol I, Art. 48). Attacking children is right out too (be this by discriminate or indiscriminate attack) because combatants “must respect children, provide them with any care or aid they require, and protect them from any form of indecent assault (Protocol I, Art. 77, Sec. 1).” This applies even if the children themselves engage in hostilities. (Protocol II, Art. 4, Sec. 3d).

    Another pattern element? The Mossad assassinations in Dubai. This not only violated international law by using fraudulent documents to misdirect blame to other nations, but it is in violation of the Geneva Convention again as Protocol I, Art. 4, Sec. 1d prohibits “the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.” It would be hypocritical to decry the war crimes of Cheney as a violation of our Constitutionally guaranteed right to due process and point out that these assassinations were executions without due process being provided the victims on the Israelis part.

    Then there is the question of disproportionate response. As I said before, Israel brought guns to a knife fight. They have a history of disproportionate response as illustrated by the rocket attacks and the use of white phosphorus shells – something Israel admits to using (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/21/gaza-phosphorus-shells). Chemical weapons are generally prohibited by the Geneva Convention.

    While here is an argument to be made that San Remo spells out the terms for a blockade, conversely there is a counter argument that in attacking civilians they have again violated the Geneva Convention. This is compounded by the fact that the civilians killed were from non-combatant and ally states – which would make their deaths simply murder and not casualties of war.

    I do not question Israel’s right to self-defense, however, that right also comes with a responsibility to use force wisely and never do more harm than required especially where civilians and civilians of non-combatant states are the targets.

    Israel has failed in these respects. They are becoming an oppressive regime that has sad and striking similarities to the state sponsored crimes that led to their creation. Do I blame the Jews for this? No. I blame their government, which like ours, is corrupted by Neocon warhawks with vested interests in violence and perpetual war. Fear and hatred are their tools in this endeavor and it what they sow. How can they expect to reap anything but more of the same? I weep for the people of Israel just as I weep for the people of America – all victims of our respective governments corruption by zealots and sociopaths. The deaths on the Mavi Marmara is just further proof the government of Israel is rapidly becoming an uncontrolled and uncontrollable aggressor willing to follow no law except perhaps the law of expedience.

    This is also one of the reasons the United State government, unlike most of the rest of the world including our allies and fellow NATO memebers, have been slow in governmental condemnation of the botched blockade. The Bush Administration (and by extension the Obama Administration) are guilty of the very same kind of bad behavior vis a vis the Invasion of Iraq. One does not attack a third party in self-defense of an attack by a second party. That is unethical.

    SIDEBAR: Personally, I think we are both a bit poetic. Artful language is something neither of us lack. As to moralists? I prefer the term ethicists but in chasing that shadow of justice via the rule of law, do we not seek to bring peace, promote the common good and encourage the better angels of our human nature by using rules and due process over brute force? Is that not the paradigm of both ethics and good strategy? Just as Sun Tzu advised that “It is best to win without fighting” he also said “Appraise war in terms of the fundamental factors. The first of these factors is moral influence.” Methinks you may sell us a bit short, my friend. We call this fight, our shared battle we regulars wage, the “good fight” for a reason.

  54. Here are two important updates to this story: “EXCLUSIVE: New Video Smuggled Out From Mavi Marmara of Israel’s Deadly Assault on Gaza Aid Flotilla

    In a Democracy Now! exclusive we bring you a sneak preview of previously unseen raw footage from the Mavi Marmara that will be formally released at a press conference at the United Nations later in the day. The footage shows the mood and the activities on board the Mavi Marmara in the time leading up to the attack, and the immediate reaction of the passengers during the attack. We are joined by filmmaker and activist Iara Lee, one of the few Americans on the Mavi Marmara ship. Her equipment was confiscated but she managed to smuggle out an hour’s worth of footage.


    “Published on Thursday, June 10, 2010 by McClatchy Newspapers
    Israeli Document: Gaza Blockade Isn’t About Security

    by Sheera Frenkel

    JERUSALEM — As Israel ordered a slight easing of its blockade of the Gaza Strip Wednesday, McClatchy obtained an Israeli government document that describes the blockade not as a security measure but as “economic warfare” against the Islamist group Hamas, which rules the Palestinian territory.

  55. mespo,

    Thank you, kind sir, and right back at you. It is an honor to argue with one of such obvious skill.

  56. BUddha:

    “Just as Sun Tzu advised that “It is best to win without fighting” he also said “Appraise war in terms of the fundamental factors. The first of these factors is moral influence.” Methinks you may sell us a bit short, my friend. We call this fight, our shared battle we regulars wage, the “good fight” for a reason.”


    “The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.”

    ~Sun Tzu

    I think it applies to lawyers, too.

  57. mespo,

    I couldn’t agree more. Sadly, it seems to me that is a sentiment sorrily lacking the legal profession as a whole though. There are way too many people in the profession who are there strictly for the money, damn the consequences or their actual utility to the system.

  58. Now that the “wrong” information is coming out, this story has gone MIA. Our news is nearly compete in its management by our ruling elite. Here are two headlines from Democracy Now:

    “Israel & US Agree on Israeli Probe into Flotilla Attack
    The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reports Israel and the United States have agreed on the nature of the Israeli probe into last week’s deadly raid on a flotilla of humanitarian aid ships bound for Gaza. The committee is being formed after Israel and the United States rejected calls for an international inquiry into the assault. There will be no official international role in Israeli’s investigation, except one American and one European will be allowed to observe the proceedings.
    Video Shows Israeli Commandos Executing Flotilla Passenger

    Video has been posted on the internet that apparently shows Israeli commandos executing a passenger aboard the Mavi Marmara. In the video, Israeli commandos are seen kicking a passenger while he lies on the deck of the boat. The commandos are then seen firing one and possibly two point-blank shots from above into the victim. The video was first aired on Turkish TV. It has been claimed the video shows the nineteen-year-old US citizen Furkan Dogan being killed, but it has not been possible to verify the identity of the victim.”

  59. Jill,

    MIA is probably a kind description of what’s happened to the coverage of this story. I think a better term might be drawn from the historical lessons of oppression in Chile: “disappeared”.

  60. Buddha:

    From the op-ed:

    What Israel in turn must realize — before it is too late — is that the real threat it faces today is not one of destruction but of de-legitimization. Its tactical lurches, often violent, do not add up to a strategy; they have resulted in a shocking erosion of Israel’s stature. I was talking the other day to the Israeli ambassador to a West European nation and he complained that he could rarely set foot on a university campus these days. Universities represent the future.

    While I agree with the general sentiment that de-ligitimization is a threat to Israel’s survival, I do not believe it paramount to security. It’s Maslow’s “Heirarchy of Needs” adapted for the body politic: Safety for the citizenry must be secured before seeking legitimization.

  61. mespo,

    I have no issue with the application of Maslow’s hierarchy, I just thought Cohen penned an interesting op-ed. Another picture to add to the collage. I do, however, think security and legitimacy go hand in hand in the nuclear age but especially when the state’s legitimacy in question is a nuclear power. True, terrorists gaining a warhead would be a worst case scenario. But how is that any different than if a country, isolated by their own bad actions and growing fearful and stupid in that isolation, deciding that it has nothing to lose by playing the “ultimate trump”? As crazy as Kim Jong Il is, there is a reason China hasn’t just invaded North Korea. A destabilized state can be every bit as dangerous as a terrorist organization. Possibly more so. Damaging and potentially losing their legitimacy can only destabilize and further isolate Israel from the international community. And I think Bibi is, in his own way, just as insane as Kim. Both are dangerous dogs when backed into a corner and unafraid of Pyhrric “victory”.

  62. “OT, but I think you’d find this appalling. Check out the link below I originally posted to the Corrections thread for the Prof to consider for an article.”


    Like most crass attempts to garner attention by substituting shock value for talent, Wilder Publishing has lost its power to appall me – maybe just make me wonder how we can spawn punks like this who would sell their soul and freedom for a few dishonorably acquired shekels.

  63. Buddha & mespo,

    That’s a non-story. Their webpage turned up the fact that they have a large catalog of classics that appear geared for middle and high school classroom use. Amazon “Look inside” feature turned up the fact that they all have the same disclaimer on the copyright page. This isn’t them making a political statement about our founding documents or looking for “shock value”–it’s a standard policy that no one was smart enough to say, “Hey, maybe let’s not put that on this one.” BOOOOooo Fox News. Boooo.

  64. James,

    Non-story? Eh, perhaps. Extremely lazy from an editorial standpoint at a minimum. Maybe it’s the Ghost of Jefferson in me or the training, but I still find the disclaimer attached to the Constitution inexcusably offensive and doubly so to the Declaration. Nonetheless, any reason to boo FAUX is also acceptable. They do indeed suck.

  65. Back to something more on topic: Saudi Arabia being the vile shit disturbing enemy of peace everywhere that isn’t a Wahabist Islamic theocracy clears Israel to use their airspace to bomb Iran.


    Is there any doubt now that Saudi Arabia needs to be wiped from the face of the Earth in order to promote peace? This is the very definition of playing both ends against the middle.

  66. More video has come out. Also, wikileaks is about to let loose State Dept. cables that should give us some accurate information concerning what our own govt. is up to. This information can be found at the Daily Beast. There is also an interview with Daniel Ellsberg about the threats to the founder of wikileaks, Julian Assange. We need more truth and this leaks are just about the only way we have to get it.

    Dave Lindorff

    The false narrative initially put out by the Israeli government of hapless IDF commandos severely threatened by hardened “terrorists” on the Mavi Marmara has fallen apart, amid revelations of doctored photos, dubbed voices and other deceptions and the patent absurdity of the claim that the commandos had boarded the ship armed only with “paint guns” and low-caliber pistols. Now the Big Lie stands fully exposed, thanks to a smuggled-out video showing IDF commandos kicking a prone, helpless victim and then executing him with semi-automatic rifle fire.

    This smuggled video, showing IDF commandos brutally kicking their captive, who is clearly posing no threat to them, and then firing four shots down at him from almost point blank range, proves these commandos were on the ship with intent to kill and injure, and that is what they did.

    There are claims from Turkish sources that this clip shows the 19-year-old American-born Furkan Dogan being executed. Dogan’s autopsy showed he was shot four times in the face, and at least once in the back.”


  67. Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites.

    Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times can reveal.

    In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran.

    To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defence systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defences will return to full alert.


  68. Actually, the whole area known as “israel” is in itself one shameless fraud.

    I would not expect anything less coming out of that s-hole !

  69. Considering that israel actually created Hamas to counter Arafat’s PLO, who were originally a humanitarian organization, there is no doubt in my mind that the perpetual state of victimhood being experienced by israel is the creation of israel. The so called rockets fired by “Hamas” which very rarely find a significant target could very well be “By deception… There is no reason to trust the israelis they are human garbage to me

  70. The biggest hoax in the history of man kind is this.
    Benjamin H. Freedman, Jewish Historian – Researcher – Scholar.
    From “Common Sense”, p. 2-1-53 and 5-1-59

    Christians have been duped by the unholiest hoax in all history, by so-called Jews. This is considered their most effective weapon.”

    “This ‘big lie’ technique is brainwashing United States Christians into believing that Jesus Christ was “King of the Jews”, in the sense that so-called ‘Jews’ today call themselves ‘Jews’. This reference was first made in English translations of the Old and New Testaments, centuries before the so-called Jews highjacked the word ‘Jew’ in the 18th century A.D. to palm themselves off on the Christian world as having a kinship with Jesus Christ. This alleged kinship comes from the myth of their common ancestry with the so-called ‘Jews’ of the Holy Land in the Old Testament history, a fiction based on fable.”

    “American Christians little suspect they are being brainwashed twenty-four hours of every day over television and radio, by newspapers and magazines, by motion pictures and plays, by books, by political leaders in office and seeking office, by religious leaders in their pulpits and outside their churches, by leaders in the field of education inside and outside their curricular activities, and by all leaders in business, professions and finance, whose economic security demands that they curry the favor of so-called “Jews” of historic Khazar ancestry. Unsuspecting Christians are subjected to this barrage from sources they have little reason to suspect. Incontestable facts supply the unchallengeable proof of the historic accuracy that so-called “Jews” throughout the world today of eastern European origin are unquestionably the historic descendants of the Khazars, a pagan Turko-Finn ancient Mongoloid nation deep in the heart of Asia, according to history, who battled their way in bloody wars about the 1st century B.C. into eastern Europe where they set up their Khazar kingdom. For some mysterious reason the history of the Khazar kingdom is conspicuous by its absence from history courses in the schools and colleges.

    “The historic existence of the Khazar kingdom of so-called “Jews”, their rise and fall, the permanent disappearance of the Khazar kingdom as a nation from the map of Europe, and how King Bulan and the Khazar nation in about 740 A.D. became so-called “Jews” by conversion, were concealed from American Christians by censorship imposed by so-called “Jews”, of historic Khazar ancestry, upon all U.S.A. media of mass communications directed by them. Then in 1945 this author gave nation-wide publicity to his many years intensive research into the “facts of life” concerning Khazars. The disclosures were sensational and very effective but apparently angered so-called “Jews” who have continued to vent their spleen upon this author since then solely for that reason. Since 1946 they have conducted a vicious smear campaign against him, seeking thus to further conceal these facts, for obvious reasons. What have they to fear from the truth?

    “In an original 1903 edition of the Jewish Encyclopedia in New York’s Public Library, and in the Library of Congress, Volume IV, pages 1 to 5 inclusive, appears a most comprehensive history of the Khazars. Also in the New York Public Library are 327 books by the world’s greatest historians and other sources of reference, in addition to the Jewish Encyclopedia, dealing with Khazar history, and written between the 3rd A.D. and 20th centuries by contemporaries of the Khazars and by modern historians on that subject.”
    Bible,,Revelation 2:9,3:9.

  71. “American Christians little suspect they are being brainwashed twenty-four hours of every day over television and radio, by newspapers and magazines, by motion pictures and plays, by books, by political leaders in office and seeking office, by religious leaders in their pulpits and outside their churches, by leaders in the field of education inside and outside their curricular activities, and by all leaders in business, professions and finance, … ”


    I totally agree. And the brainwashing is clearly the work of the Christians themselves in clinging to a First Century myth despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.

  72. Everybody here seems to be lawyers, or thinking like them;19 people, not 9, were killed in an attack,dead of night,with choppers and military vessels. Forensic evidence shows that shooting started from the choppers, before entering (rather stupidly down a rope one at the time!)the deck.In international waters.This seems to be to demoralise the huge upsurge of volunteers to stop Israeli crimes that now are becoming obvious to all (except lawyers who still think they can get us to focus on what someone said in 1919 , instead of our own judgement of facts)BUT it must be remembered that the REAL culprit is those with the means/mony to make all this horror exist:who has the means?Its the class-fight they said did not exist;and it is allways the poorest,most badly equipped that are targeted.Who has the Means?Anyone knows the list by now:Rotschild,Rockefeller, J.P.Morgan etc.etc.If their “organisation”(Bilderberg,tri-lateral commision,AIPAC etc.etc. ) are not dissolved, all problems will just be worse, as it is a ponerological mentality that drives it: people who think they can keep death at a distance by compiling a lot of goods. Such stupidity should govern us? An=without, archy=leaders, demands that we are ready to agree that it ,at least theoretically, is possible for humans to lead themselves,without slave-owners. IT IS!!!

  73. James M confuses fair with favourable. That’s why Israel doesn’t want an independent investigation, that’s why the US would not welcome an independent investigation into, say, the invasion of Iraq, Abu Ghraib, etc… Both prefer investigations that they know will absolve the status quo and at worst will find a few “rotten apples”.

  74. At this point, given the many examples of fradulent reporting concerning this event forwarded be Israel and it’s supporters, one might be inclined to wonder about the accuracy of currently accepted discriptions of the Holocaust. Not that I am a denier myself, I simply submit that a total loss in credability in one area is likely to drift into others.

  75. Munford Coldwater:

    “At this point, given the many examples of fradulent reporting concerning this event forwarded be Israel and it’s supporters, one might be inclined to wonder about the accuracy of currently accepted discriptions of the Holocaust.”


    Intriguing logic. The credibility of a country not in existence has a direct bearing on the occurrence of a manifest historical fact verified by thousands of sources. My, you must have had mush for breakfast and it went directly to your head. Not that I am saying that you’re a mush brain myself, you see, merely “I simply submit that a total loss in credibility in one area is likely to drift into others.”

  76. Speaking of a ‘disinformation campaigns,’ I’d want to thank posters like ‘James M’ and ‘Bdaman’ for helping make the point. There is no act so dishonourable – up to and including attacking an aid ship in international waters and massacring the aid workers aboard – that these paid shills will not stoop to misrepresent what has happened. Is it any wonder that the same sneaky, manipulative behaviour has resulted in these people being expelled from so many countries throughout history?

  77. Nike:

    “Is it any wonder that the same sneaky, manipulative behaviour has resulted in these people being expelled from so many countries throughout history?”


    I think bdaman and James M deserve great credit for getting the anti-Semites like you so upset that you reveal your true intentions. Bravos all around.

  78. Nike

    ” … Is it any wonder that the same sneaky, manipulative behaviour has resulted in these people being expelled from so many countries throughout history? …”


    Are you f*%kin’ kidding me!? Sick, sick, sick!!!

  79. Mespo727272,
    You stand upon quicksand.
    I do not intend to debate historic accounts, many which are true, some of which are exagerations, and others which are simply fabrications.
    I only point out that the attempts to bury the truth concerning recent events do not speak well for those who would use such tactics.
    For these people, truth is apparently of no importance and some other agenda takes precedence.
    And so I try to decide for myself if this is a recent behavioral development or is it some long standing pathology.
    A response such as yours really supplys no useful information. A predictable programed reactionary response on your part, but not so interesting.

  80. Munford Coldwater

    “… And so I try to decide for myself if this is a recent behavioral development or is it some long standing pathology. …”


    Slightly more subtle …. wrapped nicely … pretty bow … but alas, same old thing.

  81. Below is important information which addresses the legal question of the blockade. As with others here, I decry the anti-Semitic comments above.

    “The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has described Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip as a violation of the Geneva Conventions and called on the Israeli government to lift it.

    The ICRC said goods smuggled through tunnels are often overpriced and of poor quality. (AFP)
    In a statement released on Monday, the organisation called the blockade “collective punishment”, a crime under international law. It described Gaza as a territory plagued by frequent power cuts, a ruined economy, and a collapsed health care system.”


  82. What is antisemitic to you is a way of life for me. You state your case and I’ll state mine. My God knows what I do is right.

  83. Mr. Mespo727272,

    How dare you call one of my people out. You carry the sins of the children of Israel. A plague will follow all that you do, your riches await when you awaken to the way of the right.

  84. Here is a more in depth look at the legal issues surrounding the ICRC statement that the blockade of Gaza is illegal. It is well worth reading:

    “The International Committee of the Red Cross has described Israel’s blockade of Gaza as a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

    That conclusion rests on the Israeli government’ status as an occupying power in Gaza, which assigns it certain obligations to the people of Gaza.

    Those obligations are spelt out in detail by the Fourth Geneva Convention. At their most basic, though, they require Israel to provide for the basic needs of the people, particularly food and medical care.

    To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.

    The convention also requires the occupying power to allow sufficient shipments of aid – food, clothing, medical supplies and other essentials – and to take steps to preserve the health care system in the occupied territory.”


  85. Whitey Knight,

    Just to be clear and as evidenced by your posts, your God is the Trinity of Hatred, Bigotry and Willful Stupidity. That’s pretty funny. Because Jesus’ God was Peace, Love and Understanding.

    I’m pretty sure that’s what Elvis Costello believes in too.

  86. Mr. Laughing,

    So, you must remember the words of Patrick Henry:

    “We are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of Nature has placed in our power… the battle, sir, is not to the strong alone it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.”

    I do think you need to take these words to heart.

  87. No, I remember just fine. Just like I remember it was racist bigots like yourself that killed six million people in an attempt at industrialized genocide.

  88. AWK,

    You need help. Buddha is talking about the Holicaust in reference to Industrial-Suicide.

    Not that China does not have the monopoly currently but in a different form.

    Hey, if other races are bad, did you build your own computer made solely of white made American parts?

    I too think you are a racist.

  89. Its good comedy when the narrow minded come through the door here, spewing that their religion exclusively OWN god.

  90. As a thought experiment, let’s imagine that 1.5 million Jews, many of them refugees, are trapped between a hostile military force and the sea. They have been surrounded for years by barbed wire and gun towers on their landward border. They are not permitted access to the sea, and can do no trade with the outside world. Helicopters and jets flying low over their impoverished homes reinforce their shared sense of helpless confinement and terrorize their children. They are attacked with phosphorus bombs and heavy weaponry, destroying their schools, hospitals, and other civilian infrastructure, and denied the right to import building supplies, food, medicines, or other critically needed material. They are viewed as subhuman by the forces that surround them, and referred to as “dirty Arab dogs,” “two legged beasts,” “vermin,” “cancer,” etc., and all know about graffiti calling for their extermination (“Lets kill them all and let God sort it out”). Any gesture of defiance against the infinitely superior forces arrayed against them are denounced as terrorism. All aspects of their lives are subject to the control of this hostile force.

    A flotilla attempting to deliver humanitarian aid to 1.5 million besieged Jews is violently attacked. Some members of the flotilla try to defend themselves; nine are killed, many are shot, and many more are beaten. The flotilla is commandeered, and the humanitarian supplies seized.

    Under such circumstances, do you think the word “Nazi” might come up? Even in the most polite and restrained conversation?

  91. mespo727272, johneboy has it more correct about the illegality of what Israel did than the professor in the newspaper you cite as authority.

    Here is Craig Murray.
    First, HIS BIO:
    Craig Murray is a former British Ambassador. He is also a former Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He negotiated the UK’s current maritime boundaries with Ireland, Denmark (Faeroes), Belgium and France, and boundaries of the Channel Islands, Turks and Caicos and British Virgin Islands. He was alternate Head of the UK Delegation to the UN Preparatory Commission on the Law of the Sea. He was Head of the FCO Section of the Embargo Surveillance Centre, enforcing sanctions on Iraq, and directly responsible for clearance of Royal Navy boarding operations in the Persian Gulf.

    June 1, 2010
    “A word on the legal position, which is very plain. To attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters is illegal. It is not piracy, as the Israeli vessels carried a military commission. It is rather an act of illegal warfare.

    Because the incident took place on the high seas does not mean however that international law is the only applicable law. The Law of the Sea is quite plain that, when an incident takes place
    on a ship on the high seas (outside anybody’s territorial waters) the applicable law is that of the flag state of the ship on which the incident occurred. In legal terms, the Turkish ship was Turkish territory.

    There are therefore two clear legal possibilities.

    Possibility one is that the Israeli commandos were acting on behalf of the government of Israel in killing the activists on the ships. In that case Israel is in a position of war with Turkey, and the act falls under international jurisdiction as a war crime.

    Possibility two is that, if the killings were not authorised Israeli military action, they were acts of murder under Turkish jurisdiction. If Israel does not consider itself in a position of war with Turkey, then it must hand over the commandos involved for trial in Turkey under Turkish law.

    In brief, if Israel and Turkey are not at war, then it is Turkish law which is applicable to what happened on the ship. It is for Turkey, not Israel, to carry out any inquiry or investigation into events and to initiate any prosecutions. Israel is obliged to hand over indicted personnel for prosecution.”

  92. We often hear the phrase “Israel’s right to exist” and along with it, “Israel’s right to self-defense.” Notwithstanding the faux-legitimacy given these concepts by decades of repetition, there is another, truth-based, ethics-based point of view.

    In 1917, the British imperial executive (the Foreign Office) and the World Zionist Organization colluded in a criminal conspiracy to steal Palestine from the 95% Arab population who had lived there for 70 generations, and to give it to the Jews/Zionists. This “plan” was a crime then, as it is a crime now. A crime is still a crime, despite control and censorship of the media. A crime is still a crime despite 90 years of impunity from prosecution or 90 years of propaganda. NO AMOUNT OF TIME CAN CHANGE A LIE INTO THE TRUTH; NO AMOUNT TIME CAN CONVERT A CRIME INTO A LEGAL ACT.

    The Zionist entity called Israel is nothing less than a geopolitical crime-in-progress. This is reality.

    So when next you hear about Israel’s “right to exist”, consider: no crime has a “right to exist”, no criminal enterprise has a “right to exist”. Correspondingly, no criminal has a “right to self-defense”. No criminal has a right to commit violence in the furtherance of a crime. No criminal has the right to fight back against the lawful authority that arrives to halt the crime and arrest the criminals.

    Israel, the Zionists, their enablers, and their supporters are criminals: thieves and murderers on a global scale. They have no “right to exist” (as criminals) and they have no “right to self-defense” as they commit their crimes.

    But they do have rights. They have the right to surrender to a competent authority. The right to a fair trial. If found guilty, the right to a proportionate penalty. And once the offending parties have “done their time”, the right to rejoin society and resume a peaceful cooperative existence.

  93. So, the weapons were found last year. Does that mean that they can’t be used this year?

    It just shows that there is justification for the blockade–and for searching ships. What new leaf has been turned over?

  94. The blockade has not stopped the flow of weapons into Gaza any more than the “War of Drugs” has stopped the flow of cocaine into the United States. Interdiction only works if close to 100% of the contraband in question is stopped. The blockade has, however, collectively punished the citizens of Gaza for the crimes of the few in violation of international law. No new leaf. Just the same old shit with added suffering to non-combatants.

  95. People are still arguing about the legal question?

    This is from Craig Murray, former British ambassador :

    “A word on the legal position, which is very plain. To attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters is illegal. It is not piracy, as the Israeli vessels carried a military commission. It is rather an act of illegal warfare.

    Because the incident took place on the high seas does not mean however that international law is the only applicable law. The Law of the Sea is quite plain that, when an incident takes place
    on a ship on the high seas (outside anybody’s territorial waters) the applicable law is that of the flag state of the ship on which the incident occurred. In legal terms, the Turkish ship was Turkish territory.

    There are therefore two clear legal possibilities.

    Possibility one is that the Israeli commandos were acting on behalf of the government of Israel in killing the activists on the ships. In that case Israel is in a position of war with Turkey, and the act falls under international jurisdiction as a war crime.

    Possibility two is that, if the killings were not authorised Israeli military action, they were acts of murder under Turkish jurisdiction. If Israel does not consider itself in a position of war with Turkey, then it must hand over the commandos involved for trial in Turkey under Turkish law.

    In brief, if Israel and Turkey are not at war, then it is Turkish law which is applicable to what happened on the ship. It is for Turkey, not Israel, to carry out any inquiry or investigation into events and to initiate any prosecutions. Israel is obliged to hand over indicted personnel for prosecution.”

    He is only wrong on that the ship was actually flagged from Comores, not Turkey

    I’m not sure the San Remo convention even applies, as the CLOSURE is illegal.

    Mr. “White Night” : Those spamming, anti-semitic comments seem to just pop up even here, huh? Where do you guys come from? You are just as bad as the hasbarists – so many words, so little knowledge.

  96. Munford:

    “For these people, truth is apparently of no importance and some other agenda takes precedence.”


    Thanks, Munford. I was wondering how long it would take you to blame “these people” for the problem. I bet some of your best friends are “these people.” You skinheads do us all a favor by making us look more intelligent than we already are by comparison!

  97. CCD,

    I agree with Buddha, that is a very neat video. It should help—but will likely not—remind us measly humans that we are extraneous in the overall Universe schema.

    Ain’t them ‘tubes’ makin’ up this Internet fantastic…

  98. Zionists and westerners are liars, what else is new? Lying is a state policy in the West and in the Zionist entity. The rest of the world already knows.

  99. There is no dispute that the Israeli Navy stopped the ship Francop last November 4th or 5th and found hundreds of tons of weapons on board intended to be delivered to Hezbollah. These included artillery shells, missiles, katyusha rockets, mortar shells, hand grenades and ammo for Kalashnikov rifles. They were found in cargo carriers hidden behind sacks of flour. If there were no blockade, what is to stop Iran from shipping hundreds of tons of heavy weapons to Gaza that will end up raining down on Israeli civilians.

  100. “If there were no blockade, what is to stop Iran from shipping hundreds of tons of heavy weapons to Gaza that will end up raining down on Israeli civilians.”

    The same thing there is now.


  101. Nothing to see here, move along.

    “ARA — All but two of the nine Turks killed in an Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship were shot more than once, and five died from bullet wounds to the head, according to forensic reports.

    The documents, penned this month, were made available to AFP Tuesday by lawyers for the victims’ families, who have petitioned Turkish prosecutors to investigate the May 31 bloodshed on the Turkish Mavi Marmara ferry.

    “The findings make it clear the Israeli forces shot to kill the activists and not to overpower them,” one of the lawyers, Yasin Divrak, told AFP.

    The youngest victim, 19-year-old Furkan Dogan, a dual Turkish-US national, was shot five times, including twice in the head, the report said.”


    A bullet that pierced his face was fired from close range, it said, adding he was hit also in the back of the head….”

  102. hey,
    i know the vid. it was not from the flotilla, right. it was another ship send to the hamas. but i saw the vids, released bye the israeli mfa. they didn’t show these scenes. so if some guys try to irritate you, watch it twice and try to verify your informations/ source.

  103. I’d like to thank you for the efforts you’ve put in writing this website.
    I really hope to view the same high-grade content by you
    later on as well. In truth, your creative writing abilities has encouraged me to get my very own blog now 😉

  104. Its like you read my mind! You seem to know so
    much about this, like you wrote the book in it or something.
    I think that you could do with some pics to drive the message home a little bit, but instead of that, this is wonderful
    blog. A fantastic read. I’ll definitely be back.

  105. Commercial Video Production companies are becoming expert in altering the facts with their creative skills, but this is a bad side of the story that must be discouraged with full power.

Comments are closed.