Archive for January, 2011

“He’s got the Whole World in … .”

Monday, January 31st, 2011

Please stay with me on this scientific analysis of the mechanism which  will cause land masses to arise out of the seabed of the Gulf of Mexico.

The conclusion of my theory:

“Land masses will arise out of the Gulf of Mexico,” was related, three to four years ago, to Mark, my acquaintance who received this information from his geologist friend, working for the United States Geological Survey (USGS).

The resultant tsunamis and methane gas bursts will  annihilate  many  millions of unsuspecting people within miles of the coast,  all  the  way around, from   Mexico to  Florida, to Cuba, Haiti, Hispaniola, and Puerto Rico.

My aim is to WARN you with this analysis to HELP people everywhere. I plead with you to study this analysis and pass it on, in order to spark public action movements to save lives, for these seabed upheavals can occur any day from now.

John Di Nardo

~~ Why Gulf of Mexico Land Masses Must Arise ~~

Gulf of Mexico effluents display a mysterious white substance, yellow sulfur, and red iron, probably from the Earth’s molten iron “outer core,” plus other substances from the “lower mantle,” which is right above the outer core. At the core/mantle boundary (CMB), large avalanches of the quasi-solid mantle edge of the CMB break off.

This is  due to heating, by  electromagnetic induction, of both the molten iron outer core and the solid iron inner core, the latter being Earth’s innermost mass,
residing at the center of the Earth. The heating of the outer core is also intensified by the long period cyclical buildup of thermally insulative mantle magma, solidifying along the edge of the lower mantle, bounding the upper edge of the outer core, this margin being the CMB.

Hence,  this solidifying magma margin acts as a thickening insulative blanket, further heating the molten iron outer core. However, it is important to realize that most of the heating of the outer core is now being generated by the well known phenomenon of “electromagnetic induction,” now generated by plasma-saturated comets which have been observed by scientists over the past five to ten years.

So now, Earth’s CMB has these prolific avalanches of loosened magma, sloughing off from the lower mantle margin into the molten iron outer core, and the obvious effect is that this mantle erosion proceeds like a drill bit, boring tunnels up through the very thick viscous mantle, all the way up until the tunnel eventually reaches a blockage presented by the lithosphere, which is the rigid crust of Earth’s surface, overlaying the less rigid uppermost mantle margin.

Understandably, molten iron from the outer core, plus newly molten magma encircling this hot newly drilled tunnel, flows like a slow oozing fountain, all the way up to the blockage at the lithospheric crust, and eventually the super heated liquified column of magma rock and iron mixture melts the solid lithospheric crust like a gushing hot spring would melt a surface layer of ice.

This rising hot fountain is called a “mantle plume,” or “thermal plume,” one of which also exists at the eastern tip of Indonesia, showing that mantle plumes are prevalent worldwide. A mantle plume is similar to the lava plume that you see within a common household lava lamp, wherein an electric heating element at the base of the lamp heats up a puddle of lava, causing the puddle to rise up toward the surface in a plume of lava.

When this iron/magma column rises as a mantle plume, from the outer core/lower mantle boundary (CMB) to the uppermost edge of the upper mantle, the plume is initially blocked by the thin crustal layer, the “lithosphere,” at the Gulf of Mexico seabed.   Eventually, the molten mantle plume dissolves or liquifies the thin lithospheric crust, effectively punching a hole in the seabed.

This is the hole in the seabed  of the Gulf of Mexico, which British Petroleum deliberately drilled into!

Why deliberately?? I have testified to you that,  THREE  TO  FOUR YEARS    AGO,  a  U.S.  Geological  Survey  informant  relayed to me, through Mark,  that they  expect  land masses to arise out of the Gulf of Mexico.
The reason why they drilled into the volcano was to   TEMPORARILY PREVENT   THE   PEOPLE  FROM   REALIZING  that this is actually a burgeoning catastrophic worldwide oil bursting phenomenon, and the powers-that-be   are   now   in   great  fear  that   inevitable public realization will   awaken   the peoples of the   World  to the  evidence  that exists (if they are willing to examine it)  that this is just one of many types of natural disasters which are now about to break out in a growing drum beat.

The powers-that-be want you to think  that  BP caused  these globally bursting natural  oil  gushers,  with just a puny  seven-inch  drill pipe.
How gullible do they think we are?   The ruling elite would rather have you believe that   man  caused  this  disaster, because when the people find out that they are in a game of   natural disaster   dodgeball, they will break free from their psychological matrix cage of obedience to the tyrannical illegitimate imposters raping them from the power stage of central government.

These ruling rapists are afraid that we may no longer be forcibly obedient to them, and that we may not  pay our taxes, because, when people realize that these are natural  disasters, and   NOT   just one BP  disaster,  the people will then fear a greater master than the ruling elite, the people will then fear the Master in the heavens, because that is the source of the electromagnetic heating of Earth’s core. This electromagnetic source is plasma engulfed comets being drawn into our Solar System by the immense gravitational pull of our incredibly massive Sun.

It is strikingly obvious: the apple fell down from the tree, and hit Sir Isaac Newton on the head, due to the mutual pulling force of gravity, which universally exists between two or more masses. Likewise, comets are being drawn in from deep space by the tremendous pulling force of gravity between these comets and our Sun.

Getting back to the subject of Gulf of Mexico land masses arising, the consequences of a mantle plume punching through the lithosphere, at the Gulf of Mexico seabed and elsewhere, are two-fold:
1) undersea  volcanoes  erupt,  and indeed, oceanographers and volcanologists are now expressing alarm over the drastic increase in undersea volcanic eruptions, all over the World;
2) seabeds begin to bulge upward, due to the  profusion of  gases, such as methane,  into newly formed pockets where the uppermost mantle margin meets the lithospheric crust, both at surfaces of seabeds and at crustal surfaces of land areas.

There are now many reports of methane gas coming out of the ground, in Texas, in Colorado, in  Pennsylvania, etc.  There is a recent report of methane gas shooting out of a home water faucet, being fed from a private well.
These newly formed pockets of rising gases strikingly explain the recent avalanche of reports of seabeds bulging all over the World, as indicated by drastically diminishing footage readings transmitted by ocean buoys, worldwide.
Notice, that the powers-that-be will never tell you what the day-by-day buoy depth readings are in the Gulf of Mexico.  Notice, that Keith Olbermann of MSNBC-TV reported that the Corexit was promptly laid down to mask the depths of the entire Gulf of Mexico. If we were permitted to view that seabed, we would notice bulging and major fissures, from the Texas coast to the Florida coast. Notice that methane gas has been reported to be rising to the surface of the Gulf of Mexico.
This is an ominous sign, since any spark from a boat’s ignition or such will cause the greatest surface fire cloud explosion ever witnessed, as well as a catastrophic coast-gobbling tsunami, if the concentration of methane gas builds to high enough levels.

Such a catastrophic sea surface methane explosion has already occurred in 1998, and has  been reported by Steve Quayle on his web site,

The ruling elite have been as suppressive of the science community as of the mass news media. Hence, the people of the World remain unaware until mega disasters send them suddenly reeling in fearful panic. You and I, therefore, have a humanitarian responsibility to disseminate this analysis and to urge others to examine it, and to promote a growing public study of this and so many other alarming meteorological and geological events, which have transpired from the
unusual to the commonplace over the past six years.

In a forthcoming message, I will email you a photocopy of the actual New York Times newspaper report, from the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, stating that the reason why they launched the Infrared Astronomical Satellite was to detect the infrared light images emitting from this approaching brown dwarf star, this celestial dodge ball
(of a mass estimated to be at least 1,000 Earth masses), which is now in our Solar System, menacing Earth, both electromagnetically and gravitationally.

Finally, please click on the .jpg photo, attached above, displaying my photocopy of the actual Washington Post front page newspaper report, heralding the discovery of this giant brown dwarf star, on a cometary orbit into our Solar System.
John DiNardo

Please read on my site how to prepare for it. Read the News for January

God Bless and Save us,

You Can Change the World, “Bibi”

Wednesday, January 26th, 2011

Dear Prime Minister Netanyahu,

By WJ Anthony

I thank you for your recent reply to the suggestion of the leader of the Palestinians.  He asked for discussions to settle the relationships of Israelis with the Palestinians. I admired you for stating that you are willing to discuss and negotiate with him the problems that need to be resolved to bring peace until “white smoke” appears.  What a unique way to indicate that you are ready to make appropriate changes for Jews and Palestinians.

Your words moved my mind to wonder if this may be the time when God’s promise to Abraham would be fulfilled, as is found in Genesis 26: 4 “… and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.”

Many people throughout the world know that we are at an important, critical point in time.  The weapons of war that now exist pose a grim future for humanity, but if we are fortunate to have leaders that follow the wisdom of peace and cooperation, we might find that true happiness is possible for all people who consent to good Government.

The state of Israel faces an important decision if it is willing to change its attitude and policies, that disrupt the relations of Israeli people and Palestinian people.

The founders of the state of Israel claimed that Jews are descended from the tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes of Israel, and therefore are heirs of God’s promise to Abraham, which would give Abraham’s descendants the lands from “the brook of Egypt” (Nile) to the river Euphrates.  Many Jews hoped to see that in their lifetimes.

That land area of God’s promise to Abraham contains the lands of several countries and has been the homelands of many tribes of peoples.  The area of the promise seems to include the eastern parts of Egypt and Sudan, Eritrea, parts of Ethiopia, all of Somalia, Yemen, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, a part of Syria, and possibly a part of Iran.

The founders of the state of Israel apparently intended to rename Palestine as Israel because they believed, as descendants of Abraham, they had a legitimate claim to live in that “Promised Land” that God had given to Abraham.  Palestine is located within that area and, as an unarmed state, has been the homeland of Palestinians.

Most informed people of other nations saw the state of Israel’s abuse of the Palestinians as a proof not of greatness, but a people, the least trustworthy of all people.  But God does wondrous things, as He did with Jonah and others.

You, Benjamin, might utterly surprise the people of all nations, if, as a Solomon with God’s grace, you were to propose and inspire the heirs of Abraham to form a “Government of the Promised Land” in that area, as God has promised.

What would the heirs of Abraham need, if they want to form a government for the Promised Land?  It would require their patience, trust, respect for differences, hope and the vast and ready sweat energies of the visions of the young.

The people of the world have witnessed God’s gifts to Jews, by which they have shown their enthusiasm to understand and organize the causes that effect solutions to the challenges that affect the lives of people in many dimensions.  Your personal, outgoing talents might lead Jacob’s heirs who live in the state of Israel to bless the heirs of the Promised Land and the peoples of the nations of the earth, as was told by God in the book of Genesis.

A change of vision for the state of Israel, in accord with that of Abraham, Moses and the prophets, could restore trust of the people of the state of Israel.  Israel’s sins are not unique and can be understood as a fault shared by people of many nations, when similar crimes are viewed in human history. The sins committed by the founders of the USA failed the truth, as did the sins by the colonists of Spain, England, France, Holland, and Portugal when they abused, terrified, and murdered Native Americans and stole their lands.  All humans have sinned.  But there is reason for hope.

When you recently spoke your words to the media, the Torah of the Old Testament came to my mind and how it relates to our days on earth.  It seemed to suggest that we the people may now have a blessing, thanks to the heirs of Abraham, who could stop the danger that seems to be impossible for the nations of the world to solve.  People feel powerless to halt the immense forces that could destroy every human being.

The vision of a real Promised Land has been a vision of what many Jews have hoped to see in a society that would fulfill a blessing to the nations of the world.  That hope has remained an expectation that would happen someday; maybe in their lifetime, not likely soon, but someday it would come to pass by the gift of the almighty God, when the hearts and minds of the heirs to the promise would reconcile themselves with God and with each other and with the people of the nations of the world.  And they could live in peace and teach war no more.

In 1946, did the founders of the state of Israel call it by that name because they intended to eventually establish Greater Israel and invite and bring together the descendants of the other heirs of Abraham, as citizens in a shared government, with Jerusalem as its capital?

Have any leaders of the state of Israel ever issued such an invitation to the descendants of Abraham?  Might it now be appropriate for the people of the state of Israel to publicly find the descendants of Abraham and invite them to fulfill God’s promise and form a Government in the land that was described and promised to Abraham’s descendants?

God’s promise of this land to Abraham required Abraham and his male descendants to be circumcised as a sign of the covenant.  That included Ishmael, Isaac, Esau, Jacob, and possibly Abraham’s children, who were born of the concubines that he took as wives after his wife, Sarah, died.

Abraham’s son Isaac was the father of Jacob, who was renamed Israel by an angel.  Israel was the father of Judah, who was the father of those who call themselves Jews, a term derived from the name Judah.

The descendants of the other tribes of Israel exist but are not organized to understand how a government could serve all the heirs of Abraham to be a blessing to themselves and to all the nations of the world.  Young minds, however, flex and adjust to changes and expand on new ideas and use them.

Which brings me to think of your role in what God’s plan might have in mind for you and the Promised Land.  If you were to present such a vision to the world, it might stun the world and open up a worldwide dialogue of interest in favoring your vision.  The tasks that would be necessary could attract volunteers with genius to make it a reality.  The odds of its success might be assured by continuing support from people of every nation.

As its founding father, your name would be held in reverence forever.

When you lived in the United States, perhaps, you read the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence during a social studies class. Your vision would do well to include the vision of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.

The second paragraph inspired the Revolution that threw off the yoke of the British Empire. But thirteen years after the Declaration was created, American aristocrats wrote a Constitution that mentioned not a word to admit that almighty God endowed each person with certain inalienable rights that included Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence has inspired many people to understand how Governments derive their Powers.  Israel’s survival and future will be measured by that paragraph.  So will the United States be measured by that paragraph?  It is profoundly true and ironic, that the men, who fought the British king to claim their independence, refused to quit their slavery and segregation practices, because their wealth and power were derived from the domination of non-European peoples by imposing the unjust practices of European mercantile colonialism

It says: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.  That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.  But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.  Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies, and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.”

Could God’s promise to Abraham be fulfilled in your lifetime? Would it require great leaders with wisdom to serve the people?  It could be that you, Benjamin Netanyahu, by the grace of God, could lead the heirs, who now live in the Promised Land to be a blessing for the peoples of the nations of the world.  The world needs somebody to take up this task.  If you are willing, you could be that man, who will forever be great.

May God almighty bless you.

Benjamin Netanyahu
בנימין נתניהו

“All the news that’s fit to print.” … Really?

Sunday, January 23rd, 2011

An If Americans Knew Report Card

Deadly Distortion

Associated Press Coverage of
Israeli and Palestinian Deaths

Preview Edition for American Society of Newspaper Editors
Released Wednesday April 26, 2006

Download Report
Press Release & FAQ

Study Period:
January 1, 2004 – December 31, 2004

Israeli children’s deaths were covered at a rate 7.5 times greater than Palestinian children’s deaths.


In 2003, If Americans Knew1 began issuing report cards to media across the country on their coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We provide these reports to media outlets with the aim of assisting them in covering this topic accurately. In addition, we make the reports public, to help readers evaluate for themselves the reliability of their sources of information on this issue.

This study of the Associated Press Newswire (AP) covers 2004, a year for which we have completed studies of The New York Times, and the major network television channels: ABC, NBC, and CBS.

We chose to study AP because it is one of the major sources of world news for Americans. AP, according to its website, is the world’s oldest and largest news organization. Many newspapers depend on it for their international news.


We recognize that reporting on Israel/Palestine is a controversial topic. Therefore, while there are many possible ways to measure accuracy, we chose criteria that are relevant, conducive to statistical analysis, and immune to subjective interpretation.

We chose to focus on the reporting of deaths, because this allows meaningful statistical analysis that would be impossible in a qualitative study. This unambiguous measure allows us to determine whether AP demonstrates even-handed reporting, regardless of nationality or religious background. Fortunately, accurate data for both populations is available from the widely respected Israeli human rights organization, B’Tselem2. We only included Israeli deaths directly caused by the actions of Palestinians, and vice-versa.

This study of AP follows the conventions of our previous studies. Our decision to look at only headlines and first paragraphs was motivated by the goal of assessing the average reader’s experience and the prominence given to the coverage. (In addition, past studies indicate that the patterns found in headline- and lead paragraph-coverage tend to hold when the entire article is examined3.)

We used the LexisNexis database to access all AP articles filed from Israel or the occupied territories (the West Bank and Gaza Strip) during 2004 that went out on the U.S. print wire.


I. Coverage of All Deaths

We found a significant correlation between the likelihood of a death receiving coverage and the nationality of the person killed.

In 2004, there were 141 reports in AP headlines or first paragraphs of Israeli deaths. During this time, there had actually been 108 Israelis killed (the discrepancy is due to the fact that a number of Israeli deaths were reported multiple times).

During the same period, 543 Palestinian deaths were reported in headlines or first paragraphs. During this time, 821 Palestinians had actually been killed.4

In other words, 131% of Israeli deaths and 66% of Palestinian deaths were reported in AP headlines or first paragraphs.

That is, AP reported prominently on Israeli deaths at a rate 2.0 times greater than Palestinian deaths.

In reality, 7.6 times more Palestinians were killed than Israelis in 2004.

II. Coverage of Children’s Deaths

9 Israeli children’s deaths were reported in the headlines or first paragraphs of AP articles on the Israel/Palestine conflict in 2004, when 8 had actually occurred. During the same period only 27 out of 179 Palestinian children’s deaths were reported. (Children are defined by international law as those who are 17 and younger.)

Additionally, Palestinian children made up a disproportionately large number of Palestinian deaths in general. Children’s deaths accounted for 21.8% of the Palestinians killed, while children’s deaths accounted for only 7.4% of Israelis killed during this period.

22 times more Palestinian children were killed than Israeli children.

AP reported on 113% of Israeli children’s deaths in headlines or first paragraphs, while reporting on only 15% of Palestinian children’s deaths.

That is, Israeli children’s deaths were reported at a rate 7.5 times greater than Palestinian children’s deaths.

Comparing running totals for actual deaths and reported deaths once again reveals that while AP’s reporting on Israeli children’s deaths closely tracks the reality, the reporting on Palestinian children’s deaths lags far behind the actual number, following a path similar to Israeli children’s deaths. This is in stark contradiction to the reality, in which Palestinian children were being killed at a rate over 22 times greater than Israeli children.

In order to discover the impact of repetitions on the study, we examined AP’s coverage of children’s deaths without counting repetitions. We found that AP repeated two Israeli children’s deaths once, and one Palestinian child’s death three times. Hence, not counting repetitions, AP covered 88% of Israeli children’s deaths – a rate of coverage 6.5 times greater than their coverage of Palestinian children’s deaths (of which AP covered 13%.)

III. “Clashes” – A Case Study of AP’s Diction

Many qualitative observations may be made about bias in news coverage. One interesting aspect is the terminology used by a news source in reporting on this conflict. We examined AP’s usage of the words “clash” and “clashes”. Of all the conflict deaths AP reported in 2004, 47 deaths were stated to have taken place during a clash. Every one of those 47 was a Palestinian death, which suggests a more unilateral violence than the word is commonly understood to convey.

Additional Notes: Context

While gathering the data for this study, our analysts looked at hundreds of articles that AP published on topics relating to the Israel/Palestine issue, and noted a number of additional patterns that merit further examination. (The daily reports from the International Middle East Media Center,, are useful in evaluating AP’s coverage.)

  1. There appeared to be differentiation in the amount and type of contextual information provided regarding the people killed and the circumstances of their deaths. While Israeli deaths were often depicted as innocent victims of Palestinian aggression, Palestinian deaths seemed more often to be portrayed as a necessary result of conflict.
  2. We noticed that several pertinent subject areas had been minimally covered by AP. For example:
    • Palestinian prisoners. Torture in Israeli prisons is listed as a concern in the first paragraph of Amnesty International’s report on Israel covering the year 2004.5 It was first exposed by the London Times in 1977 and is continually noted by the US State Department, numerous human rights organizations and others.6 Over 9,000 Palestinians are currently incarcerated by Israel (over 4,000 have not had a trial),7 with the number of Palestinian political prisoners per capita among the highest in the world.8 Torture of Americans of Palestinian descent was detailed by Foreign Service Journal in 2002.9

Yet, apart from four stories on a prisoner hunger strike, we could find only two stories that described Israeli prison conditions for Palestinians. Only one AP headline from the area mentioned torture – and this one was about Lebanese, not Palestinian, prisoners.

    • Israeli Refusers. During 2004 numerous Israelis refused to serve in the Israeli armed forces in the occupied territories.10 By year’s end there were 1,392 such “refuseniks” and 37 had gone to prison. This movement was a topic of increasing discussion in Israel and the subject of numerous news reports. Yet AP had only one story on this.
    • Nonviolence movement. Palestinian resistance efforts have included numerous nonviolent marches and other activities, many joined by international participants, Israeli citizens, and faith-based groups. This nonviolence movement has been an important topic in the Palestinian territories, with growing numbers of people taking part – in 2004 the Palestinian News Network reported on 79 major demonstrations that were exclusively nonviolent. Yet, we did not find any reports in which AP had described a Palestinian demonstration or other activity as nonviolent or utilizing nonviolence.
  1. We noticed significant stories that, perplexingly, were sent only on the Worldstream wire, disseminated internationally, but that were not sent to U.S. editors. For example, on May 11, an AP story reported: “The Geneva-based Defense for Children International and Save the Children, based in Sweden, said that as of May 2004, 373 Palestinians under 18 were being held in Israeli detention centers and prisons. At least three of the detainees are under 14…The groups charged that the treatment of Palestinian child prisoners by Israeli authorities amounts to a pattern of violence that has gone unchecked for years…” This story was not sent to U.S. newspapers.

It is unclear to us why this story would be considered newsworthy for readers in other parts of the world but not for readers in the U.S., Israel’s primary ally. A study comparing AP reports sent to U.S. papers to AP reports sent to international papers might be of interest.

Previous studies have shown newspaper coverage often to be significantly more distorted than the pattern we have found for AP,11 and we wonder if AP’s system for alerting newspapers to the top stories of the day may play a role in this differential. We urge newspapers and AP itself to examine this system. We hypothesize that such an investigation would reveal increased distortion.


We are concerned about the results of this study. As the primary newswire, newspapers across the country rely on AP. Since most newspapers cannot afford to send their own correspondents abroad, AP is often one of only a few sources of international news. We believe the readers of these papers, as well as all Americans, are entitled to full and accurate reporting on all issues, including the topic of Israel/Palestine.

Given that AP had ample coverage of this issue (over 700 news stories on deaths alone), it is troubling that so much critical information for American readers was omitted. Further, our findings suggest a pattern of distortion in AP coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict inconsistent with normal journalistic standards. Such a pattern of distortion, in which readers were given the impression that the Israeli death rate was greater than it was, and that the Palestinian death rate was considerably smaller than its reality, may serve to misinform readers rather than inform them.

In particular, our study shows immense distortion in the coverage of children’s deaths. By covering such a large proportion of Israeli children’s deaths in headlines or first paragraphs and such a low proportion of Palestinian children’s deaths, AP’s coverage obfuscated the fact that in actuality over 22 times more Palestinian children were killed than Israeli children.

Now that AP has been alerted to the distortions in its Israel/Palestine coverage, we encourage it to undertake whatever changes are necessary to provide accurate news coverage of this vital issue.

It would be valuable to examine AP’s structure of reporting from the region, its editorial direction from the international desk in New York, and the specific mechanisms AP has in place, if any, to ensure that bias does not intrude on its reporting on this issue.

Finally, in the interest of full and accurate reporting, we urge AP to inform its readers of the findings of this study. In addition, we encourage AP to report the strategies it intends to use in remedying the significant flaws this study has discovered in its coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Summary of Data

Israeli Palestinian
Actual Number of Deaths (All Ages) 108 821
Deaths Reported 141 543
Percentage of DeathsReported 130.6% 66.1%
Ratio (Israeli % : Palestinian %) 2.0 : 1

Actual Number of Children’s Deaths 8 179
Children’s Deaths Reported 9 27
Percentage of Children’s Deaths Reported 112.5% 15.1%
Ratio (Israeli % : Palestinian %) 7.5 : 1

End Notes

  1. If Americans Knew is dedicated to providing full and accurate information to the American public on topics of importance that are underreported or misreported in the American media. Our primary area of focus at this time is Israel/Palestine. For more information contact us.
  2. For more information about this organization, visit their website:
  3. See our New York Times report for a sub-study of entire articles.
  4. 4 These numbers do not include Palestinian civilians who died as a result of inability to reach medical care due to Israeli road closures, curfews, etc. The figure for Palestinian deaths is extremely conservative, since it is difficult for B’Tselem to report on deaths in the Palestinian territories. Palestinian medical organizations report a higher number for this period. For example, the Palestine Red Crescent Society (, internationally respected for its statistical rigor, reports that 881 Palestinians were killed during this time.
  5. Amnesty International Report 2004.
  6. London Sunday Times, June 19, 1977; The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel; Israel and the occupied territories, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices – 2004, US State Dept; Human Rights Watch briefing to UN Jan 2004; “Prison Tactics A Longtime Dilemma For Israel, Nation Faced Issues Similar to Abu Ghraib,” By Glenn Frankel; Washington Post Foreign Service Wednesday, June 16, 2004, Page A01.
  7. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, more than 40,000 Palestinians have been arrested since the start of the September 2000 Al-Aqsa intifada. As of April 2006, 9,400 Palestinians remain jailed in 30 prisons throughout Israel.
  8. “The Politics of Prisoners,” Bex Tyrer & Tone Anderson, The Alternative Information Center.
  9. “Arab-Americans In Israel: What ‘Special Relationship’?” by Jerri Bird, Foreign Service Journal, June 2002
  10. Courage to Refuse, “Combatants Letter”.
  11. For example, a six-month study of the San Francisco Chronicle showed a 30:1 differential of Israeli children’s deaths to Palestinian children’s deaths; a six-month study of The Oregonian by AUPHR showed the paper’s headlines had reported Israeli children’s deaths to Palestinians children’s deaths at a rate 44:1.
Share| Distortion%3A Associated Press Coverage of Israeli and Palestinian Deaths&ate=AT-ifamericansknew/-/-/4d3cc7a742b31c14/2&CXNID=2000001.5215456080540439074NXC&tt=0

Who Killed General George … ?

Friday, January 21st, 2011

Did Jews Kill General Patton?

Did Jews Kill General Patton?, History Articles

B/C 400

By Brother Nathanael Kapner, Copyright 2011

Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship of Br Nathanael Kapner
& Link To Real Jew News (SM)

Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation! HERE

GENERAL GEORGE PATTON’S MURDER on 21 December 1945 is one of the most concealed events in military history.

Although Patton’s military file at the National Archives in St Louis has over 1300 pages of documents, only a handful of pages are devoted to the car crash. Strangely, the 5 on-the-scene military reports of the incident disappeared shortly after archived. Why?

Patton’s end began on 9 December 1945 when after setting out on a pheasant hunting trip near Mannheim, Germany, a two-ton US Army truck collided into his Cadillac staff car.

Patton suffered neck injuries either from a bullet or less likely from impact but was not seriously hurt. Yet his driver, Horace Woodring and his chief of staff, General Hap Gay, walked away with barely a scratch.

On the way to the hospital, Patton’s rescue vehicle was struck again by another two-ton Army truck. This time he was injured more severely, but still clung to his life.

Neither of the truck drivers were arrested nor had their names disclosed although Patton’s driver stated that the first truck was waiting for them on the side of the road as they’d started up from a railroad track stop.

It was later reported by former intelligence agent Ladislas Farago, that the driver of the first truck, Robert L Thompson, (who was whisked away to London before he could be questioned), was not authorized to drive the vehicle and had two mysterious passengers with him “in violation of rules.”

Ladislas also pointed out that although the crash occurred on a remote road on a quiet, no-work Sunday morning, a large crowd of mostly military personnel quickly descended on the scene.

Once at the hospital, Patton was able to contact his wife in America urging her to remove him from the hospital because, “They’re going to kill me here.” And that they did.

On 21 December 1945, Patton was pronounced dead due to an “embolism,” that is, a bubble of blood which is fatal when it reaches a vital organ. It can be introduced into the bloodstream with a syringe by anyone with brief medical training.

Not only did the US army make no investigation into the “accident” – but no questions were raised about his “embolism.” The remains of this American hero were never brought to the United States and no autopsy was ever performed.


WHEN PATTON ASSUMED COMMAND of occupied Germany in October 1945, he came to a new understanding of the European conflagration.

The war hero expressed grave misgivings regarding the harsh treatment of Germans by the Allies and urged creating a strong Germany to counter the advance of Soviet Russia into Eastern Europe.

The more Patton saw of the Soviets, the stronger his conviction grew that the right course of action was to stifle communism while the opportunity was ripe.

But Patton was thwarted by Roosevelt’s Jewish advisers, Henry Morgenthau and Bernard Baruch, who pursued a post-war bond with Jewish-Soviets.

The conflict between Jewry and Patton grew when he refused to remove German civilians from their homes so as to house “Displaced Persons.” Most of these were Jews who were never “displaced” but rather had swarmed into Germany from Poland and Russia.

Patton’s diary entry for 17 September 1945 reads:

“The virus started by Morgenthau and Baruch against all Germans is semitic revenge. Now I’m being ordered to remove German civilians from their homes for the purpose of housing Displaced Persons.

It appears that this order is to punish the German race and not individual Germans. It’s against my Anglo-Saxon conscience to remove a person from his house without due process of the law.

Those issuing these orders believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not. This applies particularly to the Jews, who are lost to all decency, relieving themselves on the floors, showing themselves to be lower than animals.” View Entire Story Here.

When Patton later linked Communists with Jews, his fate was sealed. The Jewish-owned press in America began a smear campaign describing Patton as “soft on Nazis.”

General Patton had always carried with him a special notebook. It disappeared from his pocket upon his arrival at the hospital after the collisions.

“I have a little black book in my pocket,” Patton once said, “and when I get back home I’m going to blow the hell out of everything.” But Jewry made sure Patton would never see America again.


IN HIS BOOK, “Target Patton,” author Robert Wilcox describes his interviews with WWII sharpshooter, Douglas Bazata, a Lebanese Jew, who died in 1999.

Based on these interviews, (Bazata, with declining health, was tormented by qualms of conscience), Wilcox details how the marksman staged the car crash by getting a troop truck to plough into Patton’s Cadillac.

He then arranged for the General to be shot with a low-velocity projectile which entered Patton’s neck while his fellow passengers escaped without a scratch. (The impact theory is less likely since the vehicles were advancing at only 20 miles per hour, both being hardly damaged.)

Bazata said that the order “to silence Patton” was given by the head of the OSS, (forerunner to the CIA), General “Wild Bill” Donovan, who was pursuing close ties with Communist intelligence officers.

Donovan told Bazata, “We’ve got a terrible situation with this great patriot, he’s out of control and we must save him from himself and from ruining everything the allies have done.”

The marksman gave similar testimony to a group of 450 ex-members of the OSS at the Hilton Hotel in Washington on 25 September 1979.

Bazata said, “Many high-ranking military persons hated Patton. I know who killed him because I was hired to set up the accident by General William Donovan for $10,000. But since Patton didn’t die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital where he was killed with an injection.”

General Bill Donovan is alleged to have been a crypto Jew, as his mother, Anna Letitia Donovan, was likely a Jewess. Her name, “Anna Letitia,” is typically Jewish but uncommon as an Irish name.

Donovan’s rise as a Wall Street lawyer, his intimacy with FDR’s Jewish inner circle, and his role as adjunct to Jewish Judge Samuel Rosenman at the Nuremberg trials, strengthens the premise of Donovan’s Jewish identity, or at least, his Jewish sympathies.

And those “sympathies” felled a great American hero through the intrigues of the dark forces of international Jewry now pervasive in our post WWII world.


Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, PO Box 1242, Frisco CO 80443
For More See: Harry Truman’s Corruption By Jews Click Here

And: Jews Blackmailed Wilson Into WW I Click Here

And: Hitler’s Early Views On The Jews – A Critique Click Here
CLICK: Brother Nathanael! Street Evangelist!

Support Brother Nathanael! HERE

Or Send Your Contribution To:
Brother Nathanael Kapner; PO Box 1242; Frisco CO 80443

You were so right, Mr. President!

Thursday, January 13th, 2011

By WJ Anthony

As we move into our future day by day, we are faced with problems and the prospect of trouble and dangers that our public leaders seem to be unable to solve.  The grim expectations of recession and war were suddenly surpassed by the startling assassination attempt of the Arizona Congress Woman and the deaths of innocent victims in Tucson.

Some of the media coverage of the murder aftermath in Tucson began to irresponsibly blame the right wing and the left wing of state and federal party politics and cause the mushrooming magnitude of emotion to become fierce with possible retaliation or political consequences at next year’s elections.

Revenge might have been anticipated during the memorial that was scheduled at the university in Tucson.  Among various speakers, President Barack Obama was scheduled to express his words of grief in behalf of all Americans.  The situation was unusual; it was attended by thousands of people from all walks of life, assembled in a university basketball stadium, while the critically injured Congresswoman was struggling for life.  The tragedy had further divided the country.  America waited for Obama’s remarks, but expected nothing significant from him to touch the circumstance.

The poise of President Obama was different.  Gone was the wide smile.  His eyes and expression were different, stalwart and focused with attention to the tragedy.  Television viewers saw a serious concerned poise, seeking to perceive the depth of concern.  The twenty thousand people who gathered in the stadium, as the voice of the people, started to respond to the president as he approached the podium.  The applause and cheers began to grow as at a sport event, but Obama immediately realized the dilemma, and began to shape the audience by the tone of his words and draw from them a respectful attention to honor the victims of the tragedy and applaud the courage of the survivors and their families.  He singularly noted the heroism of those who died and those who protected the survivors.

He identified the need to understand and correct the process that enabled or caused the assassin to choose murder as his expression of disagreement.  It was a lesson for all of us.  We need to teach every child the importance of respecting that right in every person.  Obama also said we need to help our children to achieve their expectations.

Whether he knew it or not, he displayed his instinct of trusting the people after the speech was over.  As he departed the arena, he greeted, shook hands with or hugged almost everyone nearby, as he passed numerous people who were waiting on the floor.  As he moved, he showed that he was not in a hurry to leave the people behind.  He will be long remembered by everyone that saw and heard him speak.  It was as if the young and old alike were thinking and saying in their breast, ‘I knew he could, I knew he would!’ … and he made us proud that he is our President.

Is it now … OUR reign of terror ?

Saturday, January 8th, 2011

Obama’s reign of terror in Afghanistan

Posted on 04. Jan, 2011 by Raja Mujtaba in War On Terror


By James Cogan

2010 was the bloodiest year of the now nine-year conflict in Afghanistan and the tribal border regions of Pakistan. Under the command of General David Petraeus, a massively expanded US and NATO force is waging a campaign of extermination against various ethnic Pashtun and Taliban-linked insurgent movements that have not accepted the foreign invasion of their country.

Still justified with threadbare rhetoric about fighting terrorism, the occupation is in fact a neo-colonial and criminal enterprise. Its motive is to crush resistance and transform Afghanistan into a US client state in the oil and gas-rich Central Asian region. It is part of a geo-political struggle for dominance over territory and lucrative resources, both in Afghanistan itself and in surrounding states, against US rivals such as China, Russia and Iran.

Obama had made the so-called “Af-Pak War” a cornerstone of his administration’s foreign policy. Since he took office in January 2009, American troop numbers in Afghanistan have been doubled to close to 100,000. Thousands of additional troops have also been sent by various NATO states, pushing the overall US-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to more than 150,000. By contrast, the Soviet force that occupied the country in the 1980s never exceeded 110,000.

The escalation of the war led to unprecedented violence and brutality in 2010. Thousands of US marines were sent into major offensives against Taliban strongholds in southern Afghanistan. In areas of Kandahar province, entire villages were razed to the ground, ostensibly to remove insurgent booby-traps. Kandahar itself, a city of 500,000, was turned into a maze of concrete blast walls and checkpoints. Residents are subjected to constant intimidation, searches and biometric eye scans.

Supplementing the offensives, there was a major intensification in US air strikes. In October, over 1,000 missions were flown, compared with 640 the year before. Every several days, ISAF is issuing a new press release hailing the slaughter from the air of another group of alleged insurgents.

Special forces death squads, tasked with assassinating or detaining alleged insurgents, have increased their operations by 600 percent under Obama. The US military claimed that between mid-September and mid-December alone, such squads carried out 1,785 raids, killed or captured 880 “insurgent leaders”, killed a further 384 rank-and-file fighters and captured another 2,361 alleged insurgents.

The statistics only convey something of the reign of terror that such a scale of special forces’ operations represents. Villagers across insurgent-held areas of Afghanistan live in daily fear that their family will be the next targeted. Homes are smashed into in the dead of night, women and children bailed up with guns and the men blindfolded, bound and dragged away. If any resistance is shown, deadly force is used.

Captured men are subjected to intense interrogation and generally handed over by American personnel to be detained in the puppet Afghan government’s squalid and overcrowded prisons. The National Directorate of Security (NDS), which operates the prisons, is widely accused of abusing and torturing detainees.

Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific director, Sam Zarifi, told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation last month that the American system of handing detainees over to the NDS “is essentially a violation of international law”.

Despite the repression against the Afghan people, insurgent attacks against ISAF and Afghan government targets increased by 66 percent last year. Resistance broadened geographically as well, with the number of districts registering insurgent activity increasing.

American and NATO troops paid for Obama’s escalation with the highest number of casualties of the war. A total of 711 lost their lives—499 Americans, 103 British and 109 from other countries contributing troops to the occupation—compared with 521 in 2009 and 295 in 2008. As many as 3,000 were wounded, including dozens who suffered horrific injuries in roadside bombings.

The United Nations estimates that the number of Afghan civilian deaths soared in the first 10 months of 2010 by 20 percent to close to 5,500. A large number lost their lives as a result of detonating insurgent roadside bombs rigged to target ISAF or Afghan government forces.

The coming years are shaping up to be no less bloody than 2010. The Obama White House has repudiated any talk of withdrawing a substantial number of American troops by mid-2011. Instead, the end of 2014 has been adopted by NATO as the date when the pro-occupation Afghan army and police will be sufficiently trained to take over all security in the country. Even if such a perspective was realised, it is the intention of the US military to leave a substantial residual force in Afghanistan indefinitely.

The prospect of a direct US ground intervention into North West Pakistan is also becoming more likely. Under Obama, the CIA and military have dramatically stepped-up its covert and illegal campaign against tribal militants in the country’s tribal agencies. A year-end report issued by the Conflict Management Centre found that there were at least 134 missile strikes launched by unmanned Predator drones last year in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, more than double the number in 2009. The report stated that 2,043 people, most of them civilians, have been killed in the last five years by US drone attacks, including 929 victims in 2010 alone, by far the bloodiest year. The report described the strikes as an “assassination campaign turning out to be revenge campaign.”

A series of three drone strikes killed at least 19 people in the North Waziristan area on New Year’s Day, an indication that 2011 will see an even worse death toll.

The hatred of US imperialism resulting from the mass killings is without doubt one factor in insurgent groups still being able to use tribal agencies as a safe haven for re-supply and recruitment. The vast majority of the people killed or maimed by Predator attacks are not fighters, but civilians. Pakistani sources estimate that the Obama administration has presided over the massacre of at least 1,300 men, women and children in North West Pakistan.

Among the numerous other crimes being committed in the Afghan war, extrajudicial assassinations and the targeting of civilian housing and vehicles are illegal under the Geneva Convention.

The Obama administration feels able to proceed with impunity, however. The European powers and Australia are complicit in the war, contributing troops and participating in US imperialist crimes. The United Nations is equally complicit, sanctioning the occupation with resolutions and recognising the legitimacy of the utterly corrupt Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai. All the while, as governments impose unprecedented austerity budget cuts, lurid warnings of terrorist threats are being used to tear apart democratic rights and build-up the forces of state repression.

The mass media internationally plays a venal role, echoing the justifications for the war and obscuring its criminality. Even the publication in July by WikiLeaks of tens of thousands of US military documents revealing the murderous character of the death squad and assassination operations taking place in Afghanistan and Pakistan was passed over in a matter of days.

Every opinion poll verifies that there is overwhelming popular opposition to the war in Afghanistan in the US, Europe and internationally. It finds next to no political expression, however. The liberal and pseudo-left parties and organisations who promoted Barack Obama as the “antiwar” candidate in the 2008 US elections either openly support the occupation or are silent in the face of Obama continuing the imperialist agenda launched by the Bush White House.

The social force that must be mobilised against the war in Afghanistan is the working class in the United States, Europe and other countries taking part in the occupation. Against the perspective of years more carnage, workers and students should demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all US and other foreign troops from Afghanistan and for those responsible for war crimes to be held accountable.

Courtesy WSWS

We need Truth … NOT … Fiction.

Saturday, January 8th, 2011

The Seduction of the Knowledge-Based Society

Posted on 08. Jan, 2011 by Raja Mujtaba in Opinion


By Jeff Gates

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

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

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

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

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

Just consider the costs when knowledge is corrupted….

How Zionists Corrupt Knowledge

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mindset Manipulation

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

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

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

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

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

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

Freedom from Deceit

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Vietnam veteran,   is a widely acclaimed author, attorney, investment banker, educator and consultant to government, corporate and union leaders worldwide. He served for seven years as counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance. He is widely published in the trade, popular and academic press. His latest book is Guilt by Association: How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War. His previous books include Democracy at Risk: Rescuing Main Street From Wall Street and The Ownership Solution: Toward a Shared Capitalism for the 21st Century. Topical commentaries appear on the Criminal State website. Jeff is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker.

Devil’s Island is . . . ?

Saturday, January 1st, 2011

The Anti-Empire Report

January 1st, 2011
by William Blum

Wikileaks, the United States, Sweden, and Devil’s Island

December 16 … I’m standing in the snow in front of the White House … Standing with Veterans for Peace … I’m only a veteran of standing in front of the White House; the first time was February 1965, handing out flyers against the war in Vietnam. I was working for the State Department at the time and my biggest fear was that someone from that noble institution would pass by and recognize me.

Five years later I was still protesting Vietnam, although long gone from the State Department. Then came Cambodia. And Laos. Soon, Nicaragua and El Salvador. Then Panama was the new great threat to America, to freedom and democracy and all things holy and decent, so it had to be bombed without mercy. Followed by the first war against the people of Iraq, and the 78-day bombing of Yugoslavia. Then the land of Afghanistan had rained down upon it depleted uranium, napalm, phosphorous bombs, and other witches’ brews and weapons of the chemical dust; then Iraq again. And I’ve skipped a few. I think I hold the record for most times picketing the White House by a right-handed batter.

And through it all, the good, hard-working, righteous people of America have believed mightily that their country always means well; some even believe to this day that we never started a war, certainly nothing deserving of the appellation “war of aggression”.

On that same snowy day last month Julian Assange of Wikileaks was freed from prison in London and told reporters that he was more concerned that the United States might try to extradite him than he was about being extradited to Sweden, where he presumably faces “sexual” charges. 1

That’s a fear many political and drug prisoners in various countries have expressed in recent years. The United States is the new Devil’s Island of the Western world. From the mid-19th century to the mid-20th, political prisoners were shipped to that god-forsaken strip of French land off the eastern coast of South America. One of the current residents of the new Devil’s Island is Bradley Manning, the former US intelligence analyst suspected of leaking diplomatic cables to Wikileaks. Manning has been imprisoned for seven months, first in Kuwait, then at a military base in Virginia, and faces virtual life in prison if found guilty, of something. Without being tried or convicted of anything, he is allowed only very minimal contact with the outside world; or with people, daylight, or news; among the things he is denied are a pillow, sheets, and exercise; his sleep is restricted and frequently interrupted. See Glenn Greenwald’s discussion of how Manning’s treatment constitutes torture. 2

A friend of the young soldier says that many people are reluctant to talk about Manning’s deteriorating physical and mental condition because of government harassment, including surveillance, seizure of their computer without a warrant, and even attempted bribes. “This has had such an intimidating effect that many are afraid to speak out on his behalf.” 3 A developer of the transparency software used by Wikileaks was detained for several hours last summer by federal agents at a Newark, New Jersey airport, where he was questioned about his connection to Wikileaks and Assange as well as his opinions about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. 4

This is but a tiny incident from the near-century buildup of the American police state, from the Red Scare of the 1920s to the McCarthyism of the 1950s to the crackdown against Central American protesters in the 1980s … elevated by the War on Drugs … now multiplied by the War on Terror. It’s not the worst police state in history; not even the worst police state in the world today; but nonetheless a police state, and certainly the most pervasive police state ever — a Washington Post study has just revealed that there are 4,058 separate federal, state and local “counterterrorism” organizations spread across the United States, each with its own responsibilities and jurisdictions. 5 The police of America, of many types, generally get what and who they want. If the United States gets its hands on Julian Assange, under any legal pretext, fear for him; it might be the end of his life as a free person; the actual facts of what he’s done or the actual wording of US laws will not matter; hell hath no fury like an empire scorned.

John Burns, chief foreign correspondent for The New York Times, after interviewing Assange, stated: “He is profoundly of the conviction that the United States is a force for evil in the world, that it’s destructive of democracy.” 6 Can anyone who believes that be entitled to a full measure of human rights on Devil’s Island?

The Wikileaks documents may not produce any world-changing revelations, but every day they are adding to the steady, gradual erosion of people’s belief in the US government’s good intentions, which is necessary to overcome a lifetime of indoctrination. Many more individuals over the years would have been standing in front of the White House if they had had access to the plethora of information that floods people today; which is not to say that we would have succeeded in stopping any of the wars; that’s a question of to what extent the United States is a democracy.

One further consequence of the release of the documents may be to put an end to the widespread belief that Sweden, or the Swedish government, is peaceful, progressive, neutral and independent. Stockholm’s behavior in this matter and others has been as American-poodle-like as London’s, as it lined itself up with an Assange-accuser who has been associated with right-wing anti-Castro Cubans, who are of course US-government-supported. This is the same Sweden that for some time in recent years was working with the CIA on its torture-rendition flights and has about 500 soldiers in Afghanistan. Sweden is the world’s largest per capita arms exporter, and for years has taken part in US/NATO military exercises, some within its own territory. The left should get themselves a new hero-nation. Try Cuba.

There’s also the old stereotype held by Americans of Scandinavians practicing a sophisticated and tolerant attitude toward sex, an image that was initiated, or enhanced, by the celebrated 1967 Swedish film I Am Curious (Yellow), which had been banned for awhile in the United States. And now what do we have? Sweden sending Interpol on an international hunt for a man who apparently upset two women, perhaps for no more than sleeping with them both in the same week.

And while they’re at it, American progressives should also lose their quaint belief that the BBC is somehow a liberal broadcaster. Americans are such suckers for British accents. The BBC’s Today presenter, John Humphrys, asked Assange: “Are you a sexual predator?” Assange said the suggestion was “ridiculous”, adding: “Of course not”. Humphrys then asked Assange how many woman he had slept with. 7 Would even Fox News have descended to that level? I wish Assange had been raised in the streets of Brooklyn, as I was. He would then have known precisely how to reply to such a question: “You mean including your mother?”

Another group of people who should learn a lesson from all this are the knee-reflex conspiracists. Several of them have already written me snide letters informing me of my naiveté in not realizing that Israel is actually behind the release of the Wikileaks documents; which is why, they inform me, that nothing about Israel is mentioned. I had to inform them that I had already seen a few documents putting Israel in a bad light. I’ve since seen others, and Assange, in an interview with Al Jazeera on December 23, stated that only a meager number of files related to Israel had been published so far because the publications in the West that were given exclusive rights to publish the secret documents were reluctant to publish much sensitive information about Israel. (Imagine the flak Germany’s Der Spiegel would get hit with.) “There are 3,700 files related to Israel and the source of 2,700 files is Israel,” said Assange. “In the next six months we intend to publish more files.” 8

Naturally, several other individuals have informed me that it’s the CIA that is actually behind the document release.

The right to secrecy

Many of us are pretty tired of supporters of Israel labeling as “anti-Semitic” most any criticism of Israeli policies, which is virtually never an appropriate accusation. Consider the Webster Dictionary definition: “Anti-Semite. One who discriminates against or is hostile to or prejudiced against Jews.” Notice that the state of Israel is not mentioned, or in any way implied.

Here’s what real anti-Semitism looks like. Listen to former president Richard Nixon: “The Jews are just a very aggressive and abrasive and obnoxious personality. … most of our Jewish friends … they are all basically people who have a sense of inferiority and have got to compensate.” This is from a tape of a conversation at the White House, February 13, 1973, recently released. 9 These tapes, and there are a large number of them, are the Wikileaks of an earlier age.

Yet, as the prominent conservative Michael Medved pointed out after the release of Nixon’s remarks: “Ironically, though, no American did more to rescue the Jewish people when it counted most: after the 1973 Egyptian-Syrian surprise attack destroyed a third of Israel’s air force and killed the American equivalent of 200,000 Israelis, Nixon overruled his own Pentagon and ordered immediate re-supply. To this day, Israelis feel gratitude for this decisiveness that enabled the Jewish state to turn the tide of war.” 10 So, was Richard Nixon anti-Semitic? And should his remarks be kept secret?

In another of his recent interviews, Julian Assange was asked whether he thought that “a state has a right to have any secrets at all.” He conceded that there are circumstances when institutions have such a need, “but that is not to say that all others must obey that need. The media has an obligation to the public to get out information that the public needs to know.” 11

I would add that the American people — more than any other people — have a need to know what their government is up to around the world because their government engages in aggressive actions more than any other government, continuously bombing and sending young men and women to kill and die. Americans need to know what their psychopathic leaders are really saying to each other and to foreign leaders about all this shedding of blood. Any piece of such information might be used as a weapon to prevent yet another Washington War. Michael Moore has recently written:

We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a Wikileaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.

And, dear comrades, let us not forget: Our glorious leaders spy on us all the time; no communication of ours, from phone call to email, is secret from them; nothing in our bank accounts or our bedrooms is guaranteed any kind of privacy if they wish to know about it. Recently, the FBI raided the midwest homes of a number of persons active in solidarity work with Palestinians, Colombians, and others. The agents spent many hours going through each shelf and drawer, carting away dozens of boxes of personal belongings. So what kind of privacy and secrecy should the State Department be entitled to?

Preparing for the propaganda onslaught

February 6 will mark the centenary of the birth of Ronald Reagan, president of the United States from 1981 to 1989. The conservatives have wasted no time in starting the show. On New Years Day a 55-foot long, 26-foot high float honoring Reagan was part of the annual Rose Parade in Pasadena, California. To help you cope with, hopefully even counter, the misinformation and the omissions that are going to swamp the media for the next few months, here is some basic information about the great man’s splendid achievements, first in foreign policy:

  • NicaraguaFor eight terribly long years the people of Nicaragua were under attack by Ronald Reagan’s proxy army, the Contras. It was all-out war from Washington, aiming to destroy the progressive social and economic programs of the Sandinista government — burning down schools and medical clinics, mining harbors, bombing and strafing, raping and torturing. These Contras were the charming gentlemen Reagan called “freedom fighters” and the “moral equivalent of our founding fathers”.
  • El SalvadorSalvador’s dissidents tried to work within the system. But with US support, the government made that impossible, using repeated electoral fraud and murdering hundreds of protestors and strikers. When the dissidents took to the gun and civil war, the Carter administration and then even more so, the Reagan administration, responded with unlimited money, military aid, and training in support of the government and its death squads and torture, the latter with the help of CIA torture manuals. US military and CIA personnel played an active role on a continuous basis. The result was 75,000 civilian deaths; meaningful social change thwarted; a handful of the wealthy still owned the country; the poor remained as ever; dissidents still had to fear right-wing death squads; there was to be no profound social change in El Salvador while Ronnie sat in the White House with Nancy.
  • GuatemalaIn 1954, a CIA-organized coup overthrew the democratically-elected and progressive government of Jacobo Arbenz, initiating 40 years of military-government death squads, torture, disappearances, mass executions, and unimaginable cruelty, totaling more than 200,000 victims — indisputably one of the most inhumane chapters of the 20th century. For eight of those years the Reagan administration played a major role.Perhaps the worst of the military dictators was General Efraín Ríos Montt, who carried out a near-holocaust against the indians and peasants, for which he was widely condemned in the world. In December 1982, Reagan went to visit the Guatemalan dictator. At a press conference of the two men, Ríos Montt was asked about the Guatemalan policy of scorched earth. He replied “We do not have a policy of scorched earth. We have a policy of scorched communists.” After the meeting, referring to the allegations of extensive human-rights abuses, Reagan declared that Ríos Montt was getting “a bad deal” from the media.
  • GrenadaReagan invaded this tiny country in October 1983, an invasion totally illegal and immoral, and surrounded by lies (such as “endangered” American medical students). The invasion put into power individuals more beholden to US foreign policy objectives.
  • AfghanistanAfter the Carter administration provoked a Soviet invasion, Reagan came to power to support the Islamic fundamentalists in their war to eject the Soviets and the secular government, which honored women’s rights. In the end, the United States and the fundamentalists “won”, women’s rights and the rest of Afghanistan lost. More than a million dead, three million disabled, five million refugees; in total about half the population. And many thousands of anti-American Islamic fundamentalists, trained and armed by the US, on the loose to terrorize the world, to this day.”To watch the courageous Afghan freedom fighters battle modern arsenals with simple hand-held weapons is an inspiration to those who love freedom,” declared Reagan. “Their courage teaches us a great lesson — that there are things in this world worth defending. To the Afghan people, I say on behalf of all Americans that we admire your heroism, your devotion to freedom, and your relentless struggle against your oppressors.” 12
  • The Cold WarAs to Reagan’s alleged role in ending the Cold War … pure fiction. He prolonged it. Read the story in one of my books. 13

Some other examples of the remarkable amorality of Ronald Wilson Reagan and the feel-good heartlessness of his administration:

Reagan, in his famous 1964 speech, “A Time for Choosing”, which lifted him to national political status: “We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet.”

“Undermining health, safety and environmental regulation. Reagan decreed such rules must be subjected to regulatory impact analysis — corporate-biased cost-benefit analyses, carried out by the Office of Management and Budget. The result: countless positive regulations discarded or revised based on pseudo-scientific conclusions that the cost to corporations would be greater than the public benefit.”

“Kick-starting the era of structural adjustment. It was under Reagan administration influence that the International Monetary Fund and World Bank began widely imposing the policy package known as structural adjustment — featuring deregulation, privatization, emphasis on exports, cuts in social spending — that has plunged country after country in the developing world into economic destitution. The IMF chief at the time was honest about what was to come, saying in 1981 that, for low-income countries, ‘adjustment is particularly costly in human terms’.”

“Silence on the AIDS epidemic. Reagan didn’t mention AIDS publicly until 1987, by which point AIDS had killed 19,000 in the United States.”

– Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman 14

“Reagan’s election changed the political reality. His agenda was rolling back the welfare state, and his budgets included a wide range of cuts for social programs. He was also very strategic about the process. One of his first targets was Legal Aid. This program, which provides legal services for low-income people, was staffed largely by progressive lawyers, many of whom used it as a base to win precedent-setting legal disputes against the government. Reagan drastically cut back the program’s funding. He also explicitly prohibited the agency from taking on class-action suits against the government — law suits that had been used with considerable success to expand the rights of low- and moderate-income families.”

“The Reagan administration also made weakening the power of unions a top priority. The people he appointed to the National Labor Relations Board were qualitatively more pro-management than appointees by prior Democratic or Republican presidents. This allowed companies to ignore workers’ rights with impunity. Reagan also made the firing of strikers an acceptable business practice when he fired striking air traffic controllers in 1981. Many large corporations quickly embraced the practice. … The net effect of these policies was that union membership plummeted, going from nearly 20 percent of the private sector workforce in 1980 to just over 7 percent in 2006. ”

– Dean Baker 15

Reaganomics: a tax policy based on a notion of incentives which says that “the rich aren’t working because they have too little money, while the poor aren’t working because they have too much.”

– John Kenneth Galbraith

“According to the nostrums of Reagan Age America, the current Chinese system — in equal measure capitalist and authoritarian — cannot actually exist. Capitalism spread democracy, we were told ad nauseam by a steady stream of conservative hacks, free-trade apologists, government officials and American companies doing business in China. Given enough Starbuckses and McDonald’s, provided with sufficient consumer choice, China would surely become a democracy.”

– Harold Meyerson 16

Throughout the early and mid-1980s, the Reagan administration declared that the Russians were spraying toxic chemicals over Laos, Cambodia and Afghanistan — the so-called “yellow rain” — and had caused more than ten thousand deaths by 1982 alone, (including, in Afghanistan, 3,042 deaths attributed to 47 separate incidents between the summer of 1979 and the summer of 1981, so precise was the information). President Reagan himself denounced the Soviet Union thusly more than 15 times in documents and speeches. The “yellow rain”, it turned out, was pollen-laden feces dropped by huge swarms of honeybees flying far overhead. 17

Reagan’s long-drawn-out statements re: Contragate (the scandal involving the covert sale of weapons to Iran to enable Reaganites to continue financing the Contras in the war against the Nicaraguan government after the US Congress cut off funding for the Contras) can be summarized as follows:

  • I didn’t know what was happening.
  • If I did know, I didn’t know enough.
  • If I knew enough, I didn’t know it in time.
  • If I knew it in time, it wasn’t illegal.
  • If it was illegal, the law didn’t apply to me.
  • If the law applied to me, I didn’t know what was happening.


  1. Sunday Telegraph (Australia), December 19, 2010
  2., December 15, 2010, “The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning’s detention“. See also his attorney’s account of Manning’s typical day; and Washington Post, December 16, 2010
  3. The Guardian (London), December 17, 2010
  4. New York Times, December 19, 2010
  5. Washington Post, December 20, 2010
  6. Diane Rehm show, National Public Radio, Dec. 9, 2010
  7. The Guardian (London), December 21, 2010
  8. Information Clearing House, December 23 2010, “WikiLeaks to Release Israel Documents in Six Months
  9. Washington Post, December 12, 2010
  10. From Medved’s radio show, December 14, 2010; “Nixon: The Anti-Semitic Savior of Israel
  11. Al Jazeera, December 22 2010, Frost Over the World: Julian Assange interview
  12. March 21, 1983, in the White House
  13. “Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II”, p.17-18. Also for the five countries listed above, see the respective chapters in this book.
  14. June, 2004; Mokhiber is editor of Corporate Crime Reporter; Weissman, editor of the Multinational Monitor, both in Washington, D.C.
  15. April, 2007; Baker is Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Washington, DC
  16. Washington Post columnist, June 3, 2009
  17. “Killing Hope”, p.349

William Blum is the author of:

  • Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
  • Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower
  • West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
  • Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire

Portions of the books can be read, and signed copies purchased, at

Previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website.

To add yourself to this mailing list simply send an email to bblum6 [at] with “add” in the subject line. I’d like your name and city in the message, but that’s optional. I ask for your city only in case I’ll be speaking in your area.

(Or put “remove” in the subject line to do the opposite.)

Any part of this report may be disseminated without permission. I’d appreciate it if the website were mentioned.