NOG GELDIGE GEDAGTES

Some Thoughts that OCCUPY my Mind: USrael and Iran. The Next Gala Performance of D&D, Death and Destruction

by William Blum

 December 3, 2011

When the Vietnam War became history, and the protest signs and the bullhorns were put away, so too was the serious side of most protestors' alienation and hostility toward the government. They returned, with minimal resistance, to the restless pursuit of success, and the belief that the choice facing the world was either "capitalist democracy" or "communist dictatorship". The war had been an aberration, was the implicit verdict, a blemish on an otherwise humane American record. The fear felt by the powers-that-be that society's fabric was unraveling and that the Republic was hanging by a thread turned out to be little more than media hype; it had been great copy.

I mention this to explain why I've been reluctant to jump with both feet on the Occupy bandwagon. I first thought that if nothing else the approaching winter would do them in; if not, it would be the demands of their lives — they have to make some money at some point, attend classes somewhere, lovers and friends and family they have to cater to somewhere; lately I've been thinking it's the police that will do them in, writing finis to their marvelous movement adventure — if you hold the system up to a mirror the system can go crazy.

But now I don't know. Those young people, and the old ones as well, keep surprising me, with their dedication and energy, their camaraderie and courage, their optimism and innovation, their non-violence and their keen awareness of the danger of being co-opted, their focusing on the economic institutions more than on the politicians or political parties. There is also their splendid signs and slogans, walking from New York to Washington, and not falling apart following the despicable police destruction of the Occupy Wall Street encampment. They've given a million young people other ideas about how to spend the rest of their lives, and commandeered a remarkable amount of media space. The Washington Post on several occasions has devoted full page or near-full page sympathetic coverage. Occupy is being taken increasingly seriously by virtually all media.

Yet, the 1960s and 70s were also a marvelous movement adventure — for me as much as for anyone — but nothing actually changed in US foreign policy as a result of our endless protests, many of which were also innovative. American imperialism has continued to add to its brutal record right up to this very moment. We can't even claim Vietnam as a victory. Most people believe that the US lost the war. But by destroying Vietnam to its core, by poisoning the earth, the water, the air, and the gene pool for generations, Washington in fact achieved its primary purpose: preventing the rise of what might have been a good development option for Asia, an alternative to the capitalist model.

It has greatly helped Occupy's growth and survival that they have seldom mentioned foreign policy. That's much more sensitive ground than corporate abuse. Foreign policy gets into flag-waving, "our brave boys" risking their lives, American exceptionalism, nationalism, patriotism, loyalty, treason, terrorism, "anti-American", "conspiracy theorist" ... all those emotional icons that mainstream America uses to separate a Good American from one who ain't really one of us.

Foreign policy cannot be ignored permanently of course, if for no other reason than that the nation's wealth that's wasted on war could be used to pay for anything Occupy calls for ... or anything anyone calls for.

The education which Occupy has caused to be thrust upon the citizenry — about corporate abuse and criminality, political corruption, inequality, poverty, etc., virtually all unprosecuted — would be highly significant if America were a democracy. But as it is, more and more people can learn more and more about these matters, and get more and more angry, but have nowhere to turn to, to effectuate meaningful change. Money must be removed from the political process. Completely. It is my favorite Latin expression:sine qua non — "without which, nothing".

USrael and Iran

There's no letup, is there? The preparation of the American mind, the world mind, for the next gala performance of D&D — Death and Destruction. The Bunker Buster bombs are now 30,000 pounds each one, six times as heavy as the previous delightful model..

But the Masters of War still want to be loved; they need for you to believe them when they say they have no choice, that Iran is the latest threat to life as we know it, no time to waste.

The preparation of minds was just as fervent before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. And when it turned out that Iraq did not have any kind of arsenal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) ... well, our power elite found other justifications for the invasion, and didn't look back. 

Some berated Iraq: "Why didn't they tell us that? Did they want us to bomb them?"

In actuality, before the US invasion high Iraqi officials had stated clearly on repeated occasions that they had no such weapons. In August 2002, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz told American newscaster Dan Rather on CBS: "We do not possess any nuclear or biological or chemical weapons."¹

In December, Aziz stated to Ted Koppel on ABC: "The fact is that we don't have weapons of mass destruction. We don't have chemical, biological, or nuclear weaponry."²

Hussein himself told Rather in February 2003: "These missiles have been destroyed. There are no missiles that are contrary to the prescription of the United Nations [as to range] in Iraq. They are no longer there."³

Moreover, Gen. Hussein Kamel, former head of Iraq's secret weapons program, and a son-in-law of Saddam Hussein, told the UN in 1995 that Iraq had destroyed its banned missiles and chemical and biological weapons soon after the Persian Gulf War of 1991.⁴

There are yet other examples of Iraqi officials telling the world that the WMD were non-existent.

And if there were still any uncertainty remaining, last year Hans Blix, former chief United Nations weapons inspector, who led a doomed hunt for WMD in Iraq, told a British inquiry into the 2003 invasion that those who were "100 percent certain there were weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq turned out to have "less than zero percent knowledge" of where the purported hidden caches might be. He testified that he had warned British Prime Minister Tony Blair in a February 2003 meeting — as well as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in separate talks — that Hussein might have no weapons of mass destruction.⁵

Those of you who don't already have serious doubts about the American mainstream media's knowledge and understanding of US foreign policy, should consider this: Despite the two revelations on Dan Rather's CBS programs, and the other revelations noted above, in January 2008 we find CBS reporter Scott Pelley interviewing FBI agent George Piro, who had interviewed Saddam Hussein before he was executed:

PELLEY: And what did he tell you about how his weapons of mass destruction had been destroyed?

PIRO: He told me that most of the WMD had been destroyed by the U.N. inspectors in the '90s, and those that hadn't been destroyed by the inspectors were unilaterally destroyed by Iraq.

PELLEY: He had ordered them destroyed?

PIRO: Yes.

PELLEY: So why keep the secret? Why put your nation at risk? Why put your own life at risk to maintain this charade?⁶

The United States and Israel are preparing to attack Iran because of their alleged development of nuclear weapons, which Iran has denied on many occasions. Of the Iraqis who warned the United States that it was mistaken about the WMD — Saddam Hussein was executed, Tariq Aziz is awaiting execution. Which Iranian officials is USrael going to hang after their country is laid to waste?

Would it have mattered if the Bush administration had fully believed Iraq when it said it had no WMD? Probably not. There is ample evidence that Bush knew this to be the case, or at a minimum should have seriously suspected it; the same applies to Tony Blair. Saddam Hussein did not sufficiently appreciate just how psychopathic his two adversaries were. Bush was determined to vanquish Iraq, for the sake of Israel, for control of oil, and for expanding the empire with new bases, though in the end most of this didn't work out as the empire expected; for some odd reason, it seems that the Iraqi people resented being bombed, invaded, occupied, demolished, and tortured.

But if Iran is in fact building nuclear weapons, we have to ask: Is there some international law that says that the US, the UK, Russia, China, Israel, France, Pakistan, and India are entitled to nuclear weapons, but Iran is not? If the United States had known that the Japanese had deliverable atomic bombs, would Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been destroyed? Israeli military historian, Martin van Creveld, has written: "The world has witnessed how the United States attacked Iraq for, as it turned out, no reason at all. Had the Iranians not tried to build nuclear weapons, they would be crazy."⁷

It can not be repeated too often: The secret to understanding US foreign policy is that there is no secret. Principally, one must come to the realization that the United States strives to dominate the world. Once one understands that, much of the apparent confusion, contradiction, and ambiguity surrounding Washington's policies fades away. Examine a map: Iran sits directly between two of the United States' great obsessions — Iraq and Afghanistan ... directly between two of the world's greatest oil regions — the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea areas ... it's part of the encirclement of the two leading potential threats to American world domination — Russia and China ... Tehran will never be a client state or obedient poodle to Washington. How could any good, self-respecting Washington imperialist resist such a target? Bombs Away!

American exceptionalism — A survey

The leaders of imperial powers have traditionally told themselves and their citizens that their country was exceptional and that their subjugation of a particular foreign land should be seen as a "civilizing mission", a "liberation", "God's will", and of course bringing "freedom and democracy" to the benighted and downtrodden. It is difficult to kill large numbers of people without a claim to virtue. I wonder if this sense of exceptionalism has been embedded anywhere more deeply than in the United States, where it is drilled into every cell and ganglion of American consciousness from kindergarten on. If we measure the degree of indoctrination (I'll resist the temptation to use the word "brainwashing") of a population as the gap between what the people believe their government has done in the world and what the actual (very sordid) facts are, the American people are clearly the most indoctrinated people on the planet. The role of the American media is of course indispensable to this process — Try naming a single American daily newspaper or TV network that was unequivocally against the US attacks on Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Panama, Grenada, and Vietnam. Or even against any two of them. How about one? Which of the mainstream media expressed real skepticism of The War on Terror in its early years?

Overloaded with a sense of America's moral superiority, each year the State Department judges the world, issuing reports evaluating the behavior of all other nations, often accompanied by sanctions of one kind or another. There are different reports rating how each lesser nation has performed in the previous year in the areas of religious freedom, human rights, the war on drugs, trafficking in persons, and counterterrorism, as well as maintaining a list of international "terrorist" groups. The criteria used in these reports are mainly political, wherever applicable; Cuba, for example, is always listed as a supporter of terrorism whereas anti-Castro exile groups in Florida, which have committed literally hundreds of terrorist acts, are not listed as terrorist groups.

• "The causes of the malady are not entirely clear but its recurrence is one of the uniformities of history: power tends to confuse itself with virtue and a great nation is peculiarly susceptible to the idea that its power is a sign of God's favor, conferring upon it a special responsibility for other nations — to make them richer and happier and wiser, to remake them, that is, in its own shining image." — Former US Senator William Fulbright, The Arrogance of Power (1966)
• 
  
• "We Americans are the peculiar, chosen people –– the Israel of our time; we bear the ark of the liberties of the world. ... God has predestined, mankind expects, great things from our race; and great things we feel in our souls." — Herman Melville, White-Jacket (1850)
• 
  
• "God appointed America to save the world in any way that suits America. God appointed Israel to be the nexus of America's Middle Eastern policy and anyone who wants to mess with that idea is a) anti-Semitic, b) anti-American, c) with the enemy, and d) a terrorist." — John le Carré, London Times, January 15, 2003
• 
  
• "Neoconservatism ... traded upon the historic American myths of innocence, exceptionalism, triumphalism and Manifest Destiny. It offered a vision of what the United States should do with its unrivaled global power. In its most rhetorically-seductive messianic versions, it conflated the expansion of American power with the dream of universal democracy. In all of this, it proclaimed that the maximal use of American power was good for both America and the world." — Columbia University Professor Gary Dorrien, The Christian Century magazine, January 22, 2007
• 
  
• "To most of its citizens, America is exceptional, and it's only natural that it should take exception to certain international standards." — Michael Ignatieff, Washington Post columnist, Legal Affairs, May-June, 2002
• 
  
• Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters, US Army War College, 1997: "Our country is a force for good without precedent".

Thomas Barnett, US Naval War College: "The US military is a force for global good that ... has no equal." — The Guardian (London), December 27, 2005

• John Bolton, future US ambassador to the United Nations, writing in 2000: Because of its unique status, the United States could not be "legally bound" or constrained in any way by its international treaty obligations. The U.S. needed to "be unashamed, unapologetic, uncompromising American constitutional hegemonists," so that their "senior decision makers" could be free to use force unilaterally.

Condoleezza Rice, future US Secretary of State, writing in 2000, was equally contemptuous of international law. She claimed that in the pursuit of its national security the United States no longer needed to be guided by "notions of international law and norms" or "institutions like the United Nations" because it was "on the right side of history." — Z Magazine, July/August 2004

• "The president [George W. Bush] said he didn't want other countries dictating terms or conditions for the war on terrorism. 'At some point, we may be the only ones left. That's okay with me. We are America'." — Washington Post, January 31, 2002
• 
  
• "Reinhold Niebuhr got it right a half-century ago: What persists — and promises no end of grief — is our conviction that Providence has summoned America to tutor all of humankind on its pilgrimage to perfection." — Andrew Bacevich, professor of international relations, Boston University
• 
  
• In commenting on Woodrow Wilson's moral lecturing of his European colleagues at the Versailles peace table following the First World War, Winston Churchill remarked that he found it hard to believe that the European emigrants, who brought to America the virtues of the lands from which they sprang, had left behind all their vices. —The World Crisis, Vol. V, The Aftermath, 1929
• 
  
• "Behold a republic, gradually but surely becoming the supreme moral factor to the world's progress and the accepted arbiter of the world's disputes." — William Jennings Bryan, US Secretary of State under Woodrow Wilson, In His Image (1922)
• 
  
• Newsweek editor Michael Hirsch: "U.S. allies must accept that some U.S. unilateralism is inevitable, even desirable. This mainly involves accepting the reality of America's supreme might — and truthfully, appreciating how historically lucky they are to be protected by such a relatively benign power." — Foreign Affairs, November, 2002
• 
  
• Colin Powell speaking before the Republican National Convention, August 13, 1996: The United States is "a country that exists by the grace of a divine providence."
• 
  
• "The US media always has an underlying acceptance of the mythology of American exceptionalism, that the US, in everything it does, is the last best hope of humanity." — Rahul Mahajan, author of: The New Crusade: America's War on Terrorism, and Full Spectrum Dominance
• 
  
• "The fundamental problem is that the Americans do not respect anybody except themselves," said Col. Mir Jan, a spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry. "They say, 'We are the God of the world,' and they don't consult us." —Washington Post, August 3, 2002
• 
  
• "If we have to use force, it is because we are America! We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall. We see further into the future." — Madeleine Albright, U.S. Secretary of State, 1998

People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like.

To my dear readers in the United States and around the world — In the spirit of the season, I wish each of you your choice of the following:

• Merry Christmas
• Happy Chanukah
• Joyous Eid
• Festive Kwanza
• Happy New Year
• Gleeful Occupy
• Erotic Pagan Rite
• Internet Virtual Holiday
• Heartwarming Satanic Sacrifice
• Devout Atheist Season's Greetings
• Possessed Laying-on-of-Hands Ceremony
• Really Neat Reincarnation with Auras and Crystals

And may your name never appear on a Homeland Security "No-fly list".

May you not vex a marginally literate high school graduate with a badge, a gun, and a can of pepper spray.

May your abuses at the hands of authority be only cruel, degrading and inhuman, nothing that Mr. Obama or Mr. Cheney would call torture.

May you or your country never experience a NATO or US humanitarian intervention, liberation, or involuntary suicide.

May neither your labor movement nor your elections be supported by the National Endowment for Democracy.

May the depleted uranium, cluster bombs, white phosphorous, and napalm which fall upon your land be as precisely guided and harmless as the State Department says they are.

May you receive for Christmas a copy of "An arsonist's guide to the homes of Pentagon officials."

May you not fall sick in the United States without health insurance, nor desire to go to an American university while being less than wealthy.

May you re-discover what the poor in 18th century France discovered, that rich people's heads can be mechanically separated from their shoulders if they refuse to listen to reason.

May you be given the choice of euthanasia instead of having to watch Republican primary debates.

Notes

1. CBS Evening News, August 20, 2002 ^↩
2. ABC Nightline, December 4, 2002 ^↩
3. 60 Minutes II, February 26, 2003 ^↩
4. Washington Post, March 1, 2003 ^↩
5. Associated Press, July 28, 2010 ^↩
6. 60 Minutes, January 27, 2008. See also: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting [FAIR] Action Alert, February 1, 2008 ^↩
7. New York Times, August 21, 2004^↩

–

...EN DIS OMTRENT DIE ENIGSTE DEUG VAN "DIE KERK"...

MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE! 1

Dit het met hierdie e-pos begin:


From: Petrus Potgieter <potgieter.petrus@gmail.com>
Date: 2011/11/30
Subject: MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE!
To: pearsonarium@googlegroups.com


http://mierleeu.blogspot.com/2011/11/gkiah.html

waarop, onder andere, die volgende reaksies ontvang is:


From: Hennie 
Date: 2011/11/30
Subject: Re: MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE!
To: Petrus Potgieter <potgieter.petrus@gmail.com>

Petrus,

Die oligargiese invloed in die VSA kom van ver. Dit het nou uitgebrei na Italië

OLIGARGIE

Oudgrieks: ολιγος (oligos) = weinig en αρχειν (archein) = heersers) die mag is in die hande van enkeles uit bevoorregte klasse (soos adel, regentedom, priesterkaste, superrykes, multinasionaliste). In ʼn oligargie is die outoriteit van die wette afgelei van die outoriteit van dié klein elite. Dit is een van die drie staatsvorme wat deur Aristoteles beskryf is, hy identifiseer oligargie as die 'slegste' variant van aristokrasie omdat dit uitsluitend die bevoordeling van die einste klasse voor oë het.

Voorbeelde

Die beroemdste oligargies stad was Massalia, wie se staatsinrigting destyds die bewondering van vele geniet het. Ook die stede Sparta en Athene is voorbeelde van oligargieë, ewe eens enkele Nederlandse stede in die 17de en 18de eeu. Ook die Fenisiese handelstad Carthago was ʼn oligargie.

Die term 'oligarg' is dikwels gebesig na die uiteenval van die Sowjet-Unie toe verskillende topmense uit die Russiese sakewêreld nou bande met die politiek onderhou het om so hul invloed te kon aanwend by politieke besluitneming. Maar ook in die Verenigde State van Amerika kan mens praat van ʼn oligargiese invloed van groot multinasionale maatskappye en banke op die politiek.

____________________________________

From: Die Potties 
Date: 2011/11/30
Subject: Re: MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE!
To: Petrus Potgieter <potgieter.petrus@gmail.com>

Ek verstaan nie die probleem waarteen ons gewaarsku word nie?  Waarom moet die luise, wat nie wil werk nie, deur arbeidswetgewing beskerm word om ons ekonomie terug te hou, ter wille wees?  Waarom moet die met 'n geldjie dit gebruik om die klakkelose aanteel van die massas te finansier onder die voorwendsel daarvan dat "dismantling of a half century of public enterprises" negatief sou wees - ten spyte daarvan dat dit oor en oor bewys is dit is groot, lomp, oneffektiewe instelling vol droë hout wat deur die belastingbetaler gedra word (ek het laas week ons telefoon al aangemeld wat nie werk nie...  dink jy dit werk nou al, amper 'n week later?).

Vertel my die probleem - die artikel is te lank om kommentaar op alles te lewer...

Groete,

___________________________________

From: Die Potties 
Date: 2011/11/30
Subject: Re: MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE!
To: Petrus Potgieter <potgieter.petrus@gmail.com>


Na vorige pos gestuur het, daaraan gedink:
Die outjies wat salaris "cuts" moet neem en op die strate betoog bv. in Griekeland, is dit die Onassisse en Niarch*** wat ookal wat vir hulle geld gewerk het, of die klomp kripvreters wat jaarliks om verhogings agiteer het al het hul produktiwiteit in die staatsdiens, wat nie inkomste skep nie, dieselfde was of agteruit gegaan het?

Die ou praat twak.  Dis 'n baie eenvoudige beginsel wat die hele wêreld moet toepas - my pa het ons dit kleintyd geleer deur ons sakgeld te gee en dan te verg ons van ons uitgawes boekhou...  Jy kry net weer sakgeld as jou boeke naastenby klop - en dit is dat jy binne jou vermoëns moet lewe.  En as jy dit nie doen nie, kan jy nie jouself met verdere skuld uit die penarie uit leen nie.  En dit is wat baie van die wêreld probeer doen, eerder as om hulle sosialistiese welsynstaat uitgawes te besnoei.  En dan is daar die gieriges wat onnosel (of te gierig) is om dit in te sien en steeds geld te leen aan sulke gedoemdes...

Groete,

_______________________________

From: Tonie
Date: 2011/11/30
Subject: Re: MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE!
To: pearsonarium@googlegroups.com

Hallo Petrus

Jou “link” – ek het vir S gesê kom lees die want jy sal daarin belangstel- ek het net die eerste reël gelees- het

tot ‘n hewige- “swaar” gesprek gely aan die etenstafel- waarvan ek nie deel was nie- demokrasie(nonsies) en Plato se ander drie vorms van stupidity-

geld nog steeds en ja ons behoort almal gewaarsku te wees maar kan ons enige verskil maak aan die gekke “paradys”- nope. Dalk is ons nog by

Piet Retief- glo alles- totdat dit te laat is- vir wie- ons , ons kinders , die nageslag. Blykbaar was hoenders stil diere totdat hulle oor die Drakensberge

is in fuike onder die ossewaens- waarna die geluide van fok fok fok(sê dit ritmies) ontstaan het- ek behoort stil te word.

_____________________________

From: Tonie 
Date: 2011/11/30
Subject: Fw: THE MOSES PRINCIPLE
To: Pearsonarium <pearsonarium@googlegroups.com>

Hallo Petrus

Is die tydperk dalk te kort

Tonie

From: 

Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 6:34 PM

To: 

Subject: THE MOSES PRINCIPLE

Somebody sent me this interesting theory:
THE MOSES PRINCIPLE
The Moses Principle is an irreverent theory based on the question of why Moses spent 40 years traversing the Sinai desert before leading the Israelites to the “promised land”.
God was powerful enough to send numerous plagues to devastate the Egyptian economy until Pharaoh allowed the Israelites to leave Egypt. Later God caused the Red Sea to part so that the Israelites crossed on a dry sea bed. When the pursuing Egyptian army and their chariots were in the sea bed, the waters crashed back and drowned them.
If God was powerful enough to do all of these things, why not allow the Israelites to go straight to the “promised land”? Why did Moses spend 40 years traversing the barren desert before leading the Israelites to the “promised land”? Here is the irreverent theory. Every Israelite over middle age when they left Egypt probably died during the ensuing 40 years. The younger people were born in the desert or spent their adult lives in the desert. After 40 years the life experience of the survivors consisted of living in the desert. When they finally got to the “promised land” it appeared to be “flowing with milk and honey” when compared to their prior desert existence.
A total generational change had taken place so that the survivors had no knowledge of anything other than the desert. There was nobody who could remember what Egypt was like. The Moses Principle recognizes the fact that over any 40 year period, a generational change takes place.

___________________________

From: Adriaan
Date: 2011/12/1
Subject: RE: MOENIE LATER SÊ JULLE HET NIE GEWEET NIE!
To: pearsonarium@googlegroups.com

Dankie Petrus vir 'n puik artikel. Ek het ook geniet wat Nigel Farage  laasweek in Strassbourg te sê  gehad het.

Ek wonder of die Occupy  beweging die mas gaan opkom ....

Dis dalk al later as wat sommige van ons dink .... meer rede om bid !!

Adriaan.


___________________________________

Dankie vir julle reaksies, wat beide interessant en insiggewend is, komende van daardie "verste uithoek" van die "Donker Kontinent". (Nou draai die arme NP van Wyk Louw seker om in sy graf...)

Tonie, dit wys jou net hoe 'n "puik" artikel dit is dat jy na die lees van net die eerste reël al só sinvol kon reageer.

Verder het jou ritmiese hoeners met die eerste lees daarvan die lag soos projektiele uit my lyf geloods en ook telkens daarna wat ek dit hardop herhaal het!

Jou Mosesbeginsel is 'n eksistensieel waardevolle stukkie inligting, dankie.

Adriaan, wat Nigel Farage betref, is ek bevrees om jou mee te deel dat hy op die vasteland as 'n tipiese, eienaardige, Engelse eilandbewoner beskou word, ofskoon ek self baie graag na sy erg realistiese bydraes luister.

Die probleem is dat die deursnee Europeër met die tegnologie van die 21ste eeu leef, maar hom sosio-polities en mentaal nog in die donkerste Middeleeue bevind en daar is nie 'n manier waarop jy hom daarvan kan oortuig nie - 'n bietjie soos Stephen Fry gisteraand in QI gesê het dat 'n inkompetente mens nie van hom self weet dat hy inkompetent is nie.

Die Afrikaner het al in die eerste helfte van die vorige eeu só 'n verfynde beskawingspeil bereik dat dit waarskynlik nóóit deur enige ander volk in dié heelal geëwenaar sal kan word nie en met daardie kennis en ervaring moet ons nou ons lewens lei/ly...en ons is terug by Moses.

Die lewe is óf werd om voor te sterf,

óf dis nie die moeite werd nie  

BESLUIT SÉLF OOR GELOOFWAARDIGHEID...

The Sabotage of SAA Flight 295, "The Helderberg"

December 1, 2011

by Dave Meckanic 

You may remember the Angolan War. The UN/IMF had surrounded South Africa with hostile Marxist states, some were active in hostilities like Angola and the MLA, others were not. 

Because of the Russian/Cuban intervention in Angola and South West Africa (now Namibia), the US came to the assistance of UNITA with weapons and the SADF with recon and logistical support to concurrently engage the MLA, Cubans, et al. 

The main control gateway in this conflict from the CIA was John Stockwell. The SADF using CI had Colonel Jordaan who was the Chief of Counterintelligence and my CO.

 I was the one who developed (with my team of course) much of the security infrastructure for the country and I was also involved in black budget special weapons programs as either the engineer/designer or project manager.

In 1987 I was approached to build a weapon to take down the Migs in Angola, but to look like pilot error. I did my job and prototypes were made to prove the concept.

But to build the final beast, we needed something that wasn't easily obtained, that being p239. We were under a nuclear audit by the US at the time (part of the deal for CIA support and co-operation) and Palendaba/Velindaba were under constant surveillance and auditor control. 

We had no way to acquire the p239 in country, so CI took the initiative to bring the materials in from offshore. The plutonium came from North Korea via Taiwan. At the same time, two other military contracting companies were developing SAMS fuels as a backup to take down the Migs as an extra method, a kind of insurance. The missile fuel was a mixed ammonium perchlorate also from Asia, but in this case, it is only traceable back to the PRC.

TREASON AND SUBVERSION

In order to topple a country, you need three things; time, distraction and traitors from within. The UN/IMF had been funding and inserting politicians in South Africa since the 60's. we remember Harry Oppenheimer's statement that he was "the engine behind the ANC." So, the UN/IMF had all the ingredients to start the ball rolling. Oppenheimer is a Rothschild and they own deBeers and Anglo-American controlling much of the diamond and gold trade as well as many other interests.

We were winning in Angola, with the exception of the Mig problem, so the destruction of the weapons programs would be a serious blow to our efforts and moral in general. 

Enter the Helderberg, a Boeing 747 combi aircraft (passengers and cargo). On November the 27th, the ammonium perchlorate (APC/AMP fashioned into an incendiary bomb) was loaded onto the Helderberg on main cargo pallet PR1 while the US (out of the PRC) and South African military attaches monitored progress "on the tarmac." 

I don't know which pallet the plutonium was loaded into, but I imagine it was toward the rear of the plane. The Chief of CI, Colonel Jordaan was supposed to be coming back on the Helderberg with his wife but he was warned off boarding the plane. 

T.B. Osler, a known CI/MI asset was on the plane, in addition, one other engineer with known connections to the French/Israeli company that produced the mobile VOR beacon in the Samora Machel assassination was also on the plane with his wife. Dawie Uys, the pilot, had his SAAF officer status re-activated and both he and his family were threatened in order to force the take off and complete the flight. The orders came from Pretoria.

This was far too sweet a target for the UN/IMF to miss taking advantage of fully and it was the first false flag in SA of this nature and size. If they could take the plane down with all the people who were active targets, as well as all of the innocent people plus the weapons materials, the catastrophe would complete a number of objectives.

1. cast doubt on and demonize the government
2. demoralize populations
3. stop the advanced weapons programs so they could be sold to the US
4. stop the SAMS accelerator program
5. demoralize and fragment the military
6. force financial adjustments in the country
7. produce extortion "points" for the UN, IMF and US
8. force a change of status in South West Africa ---> Namibia
9. eventually open the country to massive corruption and resource rape due to the above (which has happened)

This one act of mass murder divided not only parliament, but also the nation, it put doubt into every aspect of SA society because people knew military contraband was involved and the government did it, it was in all the papers as rumours of course but very close to part of the truth.

 Every military department I dealt with was polarized. Consequently, security clearances were altered to try and prevent insiders from knowing what was really going on in the government.

 We (not myself necessarily, military contracting companies I worked for/with) did things that were internationally illegal, like helping the US sell arms to Saddam for the sole purpose of invading Kuwait (why do you think he had to die? he might have told, actually he tried to, the courts shut him up) during the South African arms embargo.

It was not a very nice time but government ministers made good money selling arms and weapons projects, oh, and I quit. I don't mind retiring known terrorists or even unknown ones, but I do have a problem working with people selling weapons to insane megalomaniacs, even if it is a deal brokered by the US government. I forgot to mention, guess who was the judge managing the inquiry into the Helderberg being blown up. If you guessed Cecil Margo, you're right.

UN, IMF, ANC, Mandela and South Africa (1989)

In 1989, the UN came back to the SA government with an ultimatum again and the IMF offered up the muscle. We were already a nation divided with ministers in government and officers in the military working for the UN, IMF and/or ANC. 

The UN demanded that Mandela be released since he was the new "poster boy" for worldview change. The IMF offered to flood the market with Russian diamonds and destroy the South African economy if South Africa didn't comply. 

DeKlerk knew what was going on. He was Oppenheimer's (Rothschilds) bought man, so he did the thing they wanted, bought the diamonds with the country's money and extended the Reserve Bank. But he didn't release Mandela, because the plan was that he needed an excuse to say, "It's the only thing we could do to save the country." 

Hollow words since he knew he would eventually get the Nobel Prize with that other traitor Mandela. DeKlerk knew the plan and it would not be much longer until SA went over the edge, so a couple of weeks after the diamond deal, the IMF came back on schedule while Oppenhiemer pretended innocence and "informed" deKlerk of the next part of the plan for SA. They would flood the market with gold and destroy the economy if Mandela wasn't released.

Conclusion

And there we have it, the unknown history of the capitulation of South Africa, sold to the IMF and the UN by traitors like deKlerk through the pressure of worldview manipulation using Mandela, the poster boy for terror as the poster boy for peace, go figure?

South Africa was a nation built of the blood and sweat of settlers and a land mass that was not really occupied by anyone.

This nation is now usurped by IMF control to the detriment of everyone. The deKlerks, Mandelas, Mbekis, Zumas, all of them are simply meat puppets, not unlike Harper and Obama, that dance to the tune of their master, the IMF (read Rothschilds). 

Corruption, disease and murder run rampant and unchecked while infrastructure collapses and taxpayer money is funneled into political pockets and IMF debt schemes (read ponzi scams).

My CO, Colonel Jordaan, said to me, "Once is happenstance, twice coincidence but three times is enemy action." We are well beyond three times.

The day the Helderberg was destroyed, November 28, 1987, was the last day the people of South Africa had any form of self determination, it was the beginning of the end. Remember the date, not only for the loss of the country but for the loss of the innocent victims that died that fateful night, their families that still search for closure and those who continue to die on the human stage the IMF and UN constructed from greed of Rothschilds and their spawn.

But cheer up, the worst is yet to come.

ÓÚ VOS FIDEL WAS NOG NET BANG VIR KENNEDY-VSA EN BOERTJIES*

Genocidal Cynicism: The Destiny of Humankind in the Hands of Irresponsible Politicians

by Fidel Castro Ruz

 November 14, 2011

PART ONE

No sane person, especially someone who has had access to the elementary knowledge acquired in primary school, would agree that our species, especially those who are children, teenagers or youth, should be deprived of the right to live, today, tomorrow and forever. Never have human beings, throughout their eventful history, as persons endowed with intelligence, ever heard of an experience like that.

I feel the duty to convey to those taking the trouble to read these Reflections the opinion that all of us, with no exception, are obliged to create awareness about the risks that humankind are running in an inexorable manner, towards a final and total catastrophe as the consequence of irresponsible decisions made by politicians whose fate, rather than talent or merit, has placed the destiny of humankind in their hands.

Whether they are citizens of their country or not, whether they are followers of some religious belief or unbelievers, no human being in their right mind would agree that their children or closest kin should perish precipitously or as victims of atrocious and torturous misery.

On the heels of the repugnant crimes that are being increasingly committed by NATO under the aegis of the United States and the wealthiest countries in Europe, the gaze of the world focused on the G-20 meeting where the profound economic crisis affecting every nation today should have been analyzed. International opinion, especially in Europe, was awaiting an answer for the profound economic crisis that, with its serious social and even climatic implications, is threatening every inhabitant on the planet. At that meeting, it was being decided whether the Euro would be able to be kept as the common currency for most of Europe and even whether some of the countries would be able to remain in the community.

There was no answer or solution of any kind for the most serious problems of the world economy despite the efforts of China, Russia, Indonesia, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina and other emerging economies, anxious to cooperate with the rest of the world in the search for solutions for the serious economic problems affecting them.

What was unusual was that just when NATO concluded the Libyan operation – after the air attack that injured the constitutional head of that country, destroyed the vehicle carrying him and leaving him at the mercy of the empire’s mercenaries who murdered him and exhibited his body as a war trophy, violating Muslim customs and traditions – the IAEA, a UN body and an institution that ought to stand for world peace, released the political, money-driven and sectarian report putting the world on the brink of war with the use of nuclear weapons that the Yankee empire, in alliance with Great Britain and Israel, has been meticulously preparing against Iran.

After the veni, vidi, vici of the famous Roman emperor more than two thousand years ago, translated to “I came, I saw and he died” broadcast for public opinion by an important television network as soon as the death of Gaddafi had been learned of, there are more than enough words to describe US policy.

*  Now what is important is the need to create clear awareness in the peoples about the abyss towards which humankind is being led. Twice our Revolution lived through dramatic dangers: in October of 1962, the most critical of all where humankind was on the brink of nuclear holocaust; and in mid-1987 when our forces were facing racist South African troops armed with nuclear weapons that the Israelis had helped them create.

The Shah of Iran also collaborated, along with Israel, with the racist and fascist South African regime.

What is the UN? An organization driven by the United States before the end of World War II. That nation, whose territory was considerably far away from the theatre of war, had incredibly increased its wealth; it accumulated 80% of the world’s gold and under the leadership of Roosevelt, a sincere anti-fascist, it promoted the development of the nuclear weapon that Truman, his successor, a mediocre oligarch, did not hesitate in using against the defenceless cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

The world’s gold monopoly in United States’ power and the prestige of Roosevelt handed the US the Bretton Woods agreement, assigning it the role of issuing the dollar as the only currency to be used for decades in world trade, with no limiting factor other that it’s being backed by the gold metal.

At the end of that war, the US was also the only country possessing the nuclear weapon, a privilege it did not hesitate in transmitting to its allies and members in the Security Council: Great Britain and France, the two most important colonial powers in the world at that time.

Truman had not even informed the USSR one single word about the atomic weapon before using it. China, at that time governed by Nationalist General Chiang Kai-shek, a pro-Yankee oligarch, could not be excluded from that Security Council.

The USSR, seriously stricken by the war, destruction and the loss of more than 20 million of its sons and daughters in the Nazi invasion, dedicated considerable economic, scientific and human resources to bring its nuclear capacity up to par with that of the United States. Four years later, in 1949, it tested its first nuclear weapon: the H-bomb in 1953; and in 1955 its first megaton bomb. France had its first nuclear weapon in 1960.

There were only three countries that had the nuclear bomb in 1957 when the UN, under the aegis of the Yankees, created the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA). Does anybody think that US instrument did anything to warn the world about the terrible dangers to which it would expose human society when Israel, unconditional US and NATO ally, located in the very heartland of the world’s most important oil and gas reserves, would become a dangerous and aggressive nuclear power?

Its forces, cooperating with colonial British and French troops, attacked Port Said when Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, French property; this forced the Soviet premier to send an ultimatum demanding the ceasing of that aggression that the European allies of the US had no alternative other than to attack.

SUID-AFRIKA WAS 'N OEFENLOPIE

George Orwell’s guide to the news

The Seven Step Mainstream Media Country Destruction Guide

1. First, they start by targeting a country ripe for “Regime Change”, and brand it a “rogue state”; then…

2. They arm, train, finance local terrorist groups through CIA, MI6, Mossad, Al-Qaeda (a CIA operation), drug cartels (often CIA operations) and call them “freedom fighters”; then…

3. As mock UN Security Council Resolutions are staged that rain death and destruction upon millions of civilians, they call it “UN sanctions to protect civilians”; then…

4. They spread flagrant lies through their “newsrooms” and paid journalists, and call it "the international community’s concerns expressed by prestigious spokespeople and analysts…” then…

5. They bomb, invade and begin to control the target country and call it “liberation”; then…

6. As the target country falls fully under their control, they impose “the kind of democracy that we want to see” (as Hillary Clinton before visiting Egypt and Tunisia on March 10, 2011), until finally…

7. They steal appetizing oil, mineral and agricultural reserves handing them over to Global Power Elite corporations, and impose unnecessary private banking debt and call it “foreign investment and reconstruction.”

Their keynotes are: Force and Hypocrisy, which they have used time and again to destroy entire countries, always in the name of “freedom”, “democracy”, “peace” and “human rights”. Utmost force and violence is used to achieve their ends and goals.

Adrian Salbuchi for RT