Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 17, 2013

Syria: Who Really Wants Assad To Go?

Michael Oren, the outgoing Israeli ambassador to the United States, wants to lift any doubt about who really wants Assad to go:
“The initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted [President] Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,” he said.

This was the case, he said, even if the other “bad guys” were affiliated to al-Qaida.

“We understand that they are pretty bad guys,” he said, adding that this designation did not apply to everyone in the Syrian opposition. “Still, the greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the Assad regime as the keystone in that arc. That is a position we had well before the outbreak of hostilities in Syria. With the outbreak of hostilities we continued to want Assad to go.”

So Israel, according to Oren, would rather have AlQaeda ruling in Syria than the current secular government. Israel is not the only country that has such desire:
On other issues, Oren – who has contact in Washington with some ambassadors from Persian Gulf countries – said that that “in the last 64 years there has probably never been a greater confluence of interest between us and several Gulf States. With these Gulf States we have agreements on Syria, on Egypt, on the Palestinian issue. We certainly have agreements on Iran. This is one of those opportunities presented by the Arab Spring.”
Don't expect to read over any such agreements in the New York Times. The Times does not cover anything that might Israel shine in a bad light.

A week ago the Guardian reported that the National Security Agency "routinely" hands over raw, unfiltered intelligence data it illegally collects on U.S. citizens and others to Israeli agencies. The New York Times did not mention this in any of its own reports. It did not even provide a wire story from one of the news agencies on the issue. Its managing editor, rather incredible, claimed to the NYT's public editor that it was not "a significant or surprising story" and therefore not worth of any coverage.

How much of the NSA data does Israel use for its drive to install AlQaeda in Syria? And how much of does it use to influence the New York Times editorial policies?

Posted by b on September 17, 2013 at 10:09 UTC | Permalink


"Just because sir, Mr Oren wants Assad gone, does not delegitimate the noble, brave Syrian beobles demand of wanting thugman Assad gone and have democracy like in Isreal" - says an spokesmen for the opposition in Tel Aviv.

Posted by: Irshad | Sep 17 2013 11:18 utc | 1

I want to ask, if anyone hear knows (esp. Lysander, Brian, Mina,all the Anonymous, b, et al.) if the late Shaykh Ramadan al-Bouti, who was murdered by the opposition in March of this year, was in favour of the Libyan uprising against Gaddafi or is this another one of the wishful make belive wishes of the opposition? Any help appreciated as I cannot find anything to this.

Posted by: Irshad | Sep 17 2013 11:21 utc | 2

By the way, my favorate MoA is blocked in the UAE. Yes, Israel does have "agreements" with these Gulf states.

Posted by: MikeA | Sep 17 2013 12:05 utc | 3

Israeli President Shimon Peres: Syria Is Punished for Refusing "Peace with Israel"

Al-Manar | September 16, 2013

In significant remarks made by the president of the Zionist entity, Shimon Peres, he stated that what is happening in Syria today is punishment of the Arab state for refusing to compromise with ‘Israel’.

In statements published by the Zionist daily Yediot Ahronoth on Sunday, Peres said that “the 1973 war had brought peace in spite of its brutality.”

“One of the 1973 war outcomes was signing the Peace-Treaty with Egypt, through which (Mohammad) Sadat could bring security and peace to his people, contrary to (Hafez) Assad, who refused to participate in Sadat’s settlement as he participated in his war,” the Zionist president elaborated.

“Today, Syria lives internal war and the Syrian people pay for it over Assad’s refusal to compromise. Today he is punished for his refusal,” he said.

Peres’s remarks came during his participation in the commemoration of Zionist soldiers who had been killed in the 1973 war. The ceremony was also attended by Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other military and security officials.

These statements made it clear that what is happening in Syria is not a revolution but a foreign scheme, analysts and observers say, noting that these statements indicate the beneficiary of the Syrian crisis and its maestro.

But but but Israel doesn't want war.

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 12:17 utc | 4

Lavrov 's most recent statement on "Chapter 7"

Lavrov said Russia opposed proposals by Western powers to swiftly pass a resolution including the use of force under Chapter Seven of the UN charter.

He called for the United States to adhere to the terms of the framework he and US Secretary of State John Kerry drew up in Geneva on Saturday.

Lavrov said that declarations "by some of our partners" that a resolution listing measures under Chapter Seven should be passed in the next few days "show lack of understanding of what we agreed on with John Kerry, and even unwillingness to read this document."

"Chapter Seven was the subject of fierce debates at the US-Russia talks. As a result, it is not in the final text, but our partners want to replay unilaterally what we agreed in Geneva with the Americans," Lavrov said.

Lavrov resolutely sticking to this this "No chapter 7" line is most encouraging

The framework agreement said that the United Nations resolution "should provide for review" of Syria's compliance on a chemical weapons ban.

It says that in the case of non-compliance with the terms of the new international ban on chemical weapons, the Security Council would urgently review the issue and then "could impose measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter" without specifying the use of force.

"That will be an absolutely different resolution," Lavrov said, "and nobody can say as to what its contents would be."

OK, right now I have a little more confidence in Lavrov than previously

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 12:27 utc | 5

from OPEN THREAD 13/19: " I dont understand why this notice is not in MOA:
from Wed 11,

NSA shares raw intelligence including Americans' data with Israel

• Secret deal places no legal limits on use of data by Israelis
• Only official US government communications protected
• Agency insists it complies with rules governing privacy
• Read the NSA and Israel's 'memorandum of understanding'

Glen Greenwald, Laura Poitras, Ewen MacAskill

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 13, 2013 1:06:27 PM | 6"

I dont understand why nobody say anything about this notice.

Posted by: anonymous | Sep 17 2013 12:33 utc | 6

This is a landmark statement by Oren/Israel. Hes not even the israeli ambassador, he is the AMERICAN ambassador to Israel but he talks like he represent Israel?! And most interesting Israel prefer Al Qaeda to rule in Syria!

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 17 2013 13:03 utc | 7

6) Maybe because people are not surprised.
There is no uproar in Germany though our secret services handed data over to to US - without anyone checking what they were doing.
The idea anyone can have privacy is gone.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 17 2013 13:06 utc | 8

anonymous, look up and you will see that the posting above covers precisely the topic you believe should be covered.

hmm, Lavrov's statement according to RT went much further:
"US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Russia is committed to imposing Chapter 7 measures in case of Syria’s non-compliance with its obligation to destroy its chemical weapons. Lavrov explained that the Security Council would be closely monitoring OPCW’s mission in Syria and will take action, if it finds concrete proof that some party is actively undermining the process..."

Clearly all parties in Syria, and not just the government, will be monitored. If as is almost inevitable Bandar's Brutal Boys are found maasaccring villagers or eating corpses the UNSC will be bound to raise the issue with their sponsors and recruiters who include Barak Obandar and the boy idiot Hague.

Posted by: bevin | Sep 17 2013 13:07 utc | 9

The sharing of NSA data with Israel is part of the tribute the US "pays" Israel. All due to the blackmail caused by Israel nukes...

Posted by: Albertde | Sep 17 2013 13:07 utc | 10

I want to remind some here who were worried that the Russians/Putin were playing opossum, or not being forceful enough, that I suggested the Russians have this. They won't lightly give up their Tartus base. They played the long game, and we'd be wise to not challenge the Russians at Chess. Football, Checkers, tiddly-winks, that's our strong suit.

In a sense, all war can be reduced to supply lines, which is a product of proximity and desire. Our meddling is not uniformly supported, on the other side of the globe, and we're not as wedded to removing Assad as the Russians and Iran are committed to retaining Assad. That's 9/10ths of war.

Posted by: scottindallas | Sep 17 2013 13:20 utc | 11


clearly Lavrov and Jackass will soon be at odds over this exact issue

your quote has Jackass saying

US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Russia is committed to imposing Chapter 7 measures in case of Syria’s non-compliance with its obligation to destroy its chemical weapons

whereas Grand Master Lavrov appears to be saying the exact opposite

"Chapter Seven was the subject of fierce debates at the US-Russia talks. As a result, it is not in the final text, but our partners want to replay unilaterally what we agreed in Geneva with the Americans," Lavrov said.

But contrary to what Grand Master Lavrov says, "Chapter 7" IS in the final text - but only in the form of "should" and "could" which is certainly not the same as "must", "shall" or "will".

Granted that "imposing Chapter 7 measures" does not necessarily have to include any sort of Military punishment, but recent history suggests that, should any sort of chapter 7 resolutions be passed in UNSC, they can then be used as a green light for military action.

The "agreement" definitely does mention chapter 7, just not the form

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 13:23 utc | 12

The best place to look for info on that would be the archive of comments on joshua landis' website "syria comment". Just check by date and open anything from December 2010 to March 2011. Maybe someone mentioned Buti's position.

From what I know, people with a little bit of knowledge in politics in Syria knew right from when it started in Tunisia that they would soon be in the eye of the storm. From what I remember of the news during the Libyan blitzkrieg/revo, the Syrian authorities were rather supporting Qaddafi's governement.

Posted by: Mina | Sep 17 2013 13:51 utc | 13

Coz everybody already know it's the 51st state. Are you really surprised? I would add that most EU libraries now share all their data thanks to a "great" Israeli catalogue programme that garbles Arabic and other foreign names even before they get famous. Same for Google. Are you still surprised?

Posted by: Mina | Sep 17 2013 13:54 utc | 14

Thanks, b, great post. It's funny how - gee, shucks - Israel and AlQaeda seemingly end up on the same side of things over and over again.

The propaganda directive in the West - but especially the US - is to always keep all of the sheep's focus on the "Event At Hand" and never, ever spark any activity in the minds of the people in taking a step and back to put all of the pieces together.

Never mention PNAC just show the WTC falling over and over and over again.

In regards to Israel, never mention the Yinon Plan , A Clean Break , Israeli involvement in 9/11 or the "sharing" of US intelligence with Israel.

Just keep repeating to the sheep "unbreakable bond" "our most important ally" etc etc etc but never let slip the words apartheid or genocide when describing Israel.

The Zionist traitors told us told us what they were going to do directly during the Bush years :

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]

The above reason is why NO ONE in any official capacity is allowed to even approach the line of questioning American support for Israel: it's b/c it's based upon lies, lies and more murderous lies.

A house of cards/lies must be defended most fervently lest any one of the cards start to quiver.

Only when people - but especially the American public - begin realize in their hearts and minds that Israel is not an ally or a friend but rather an detestable abomination in regards the continued existence of peace in the modern world will anything begin to change.

The first step is to understand everything you've been told is a purposeful lie communicated by people who think they have the right to subjugate your understanding of the reality around you.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Sep 17 2013 14:17 utc | 15

Israeli-Saudi cooperation is exactly the Bush policy Seymour Hersh reported on back in 2007:

"To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

One contradictory aspect of the new strategy is that, in Iraq, most of the insurgent violence directed at the American military has come from Sunni forces, and not from Shiites. But, from the Administration’s perspective, the most profound—and unintended—strategic consequence of the Iraq war is the empowerment of Iran."

This policy change came in the aftermath of Israel's humiliation at the hands of Hezbollah in 2006 and represents an attempt to restore Israel's previous position--being able to do whatever it damn well pleases in the Middle East.

Posted by: JohnH | Sep 17 2013 14:48 utc | 16

"This is one of those opportunities presented by the Arab Spring."

I also feel that we should stop allowing the successive Western/Zionist-backed destabilization programs that took place over the last few years to be labeled the cutesy "Arab Spring". Like the "Color Revolutions" of the previous decade, the "Arab Spring" should also be viewed in the same light.

Much like how the LAST thing anyone connected with the "War on Terror" wanted was an END to terrorism, the LAST thing anyone connected with the Color Revolutions and Arab Spring - largely the very same people - wanted was for there to be actual democratic governance that represented the true wills of the people in those respective countries. The "Arab Spring" like the "Color Revolutions" like the "War on Terror" are all deliberate marketing constructs rolled out to deflect any true examination of the specific events and their causes by supplying the masses with simplistic narratives - the hate us for our freedoms, all dictators are bad, etc - and making participation in said murderous/illegal activities - especially by those on what used to be the anti-war Left - seem like the "cool" legitimate thing to do.

I hear nails on a blackboard when anyone in any position of power drops the phrase the "Arab Spring".

Posted by: JSorrentine | Sep 17 2013 16:30 utc | 17

Israel wants Assad gone?
I have been shouting it from my place for 2 and 1/2 years
Finally the msm is catching up?
To late to be credible
It was always obvious!

Posted by: Penny | Sep 17 2013 16:48 utc | 18

Lavrov comes out swinging

The foreign minister explained Russia’s position on the future document after meeting his French counterpart Laurent Fabius in Moscow.

The resolution, Lavrov stressed, is meant only to affirm the support of the UNSC to the roadmap for destruction of the chemical weapons stockpile, which will be penned by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). . . . .

. . . . It will also outline measures which fall outside of the OPCW authority, particularly providing security for the organization’s inspectors, who would oversee the process on the ground in Syria. But the resolution would not include any references to Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which grants the Security Council a right to use military force to restore peace, Lavrov stressed.

The resolution of the Security Council, which will approve the decision of the OPCW executive council, will not be over Chapter 7. We said it distinctly in Geneva and the document that we agreed on says no single word about it,” Lavrov said.

Earlier US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Russia is committed to imposing Chapter 7 measures in case of Syria’s non-compliance with its obligation to destroy its chemical weapons. Lavrov explained that the Security Council would be closely monitoring OPCW’s mission in Syria and will take action, if it finds concrete proof that some party is actively undermining the process.

The UNSC would act on such occurrences, which may be Syria drawing away from the deal, some other party hampering the destruction or possibly somebody using chemical weapons again, Lavrov said. But such actions will be considered on a separate basis.

“We may grab on to Chapter 7 every time somebody claims that the regime or the opposition used chemical weapons and encourage playing on emotions, which is unacceptable when taking serious decisions. Or we may rely on professionals, who must evaluate thoroughly, impartially and objectively every piece of such information and report to the Security Council,” he said.

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 16:48 utc | 19

Israel wants Assad gone?
I have been shouting it from my place for 2 and 1/2 years

Lotta older folk here apparently - possible hearing-aid problems?

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 16:49 utc | 20

from my perspective it seemed like israel rolled out a hasbara campaign a month ago announcing they were silent/neutral on syria. this was timed right before obama was supposed to step up and bomb the place (america's war.. not for israel, really). it got lots of coverage (politico headline, israel(or the lobby i can't recall) silent on syria). that lasted only a few days until (allegedly)obama came begging for the lobby's help to get congress to bomb syria. then, like clockwork, en mass they screamed bomb syria. and then repeated they were neutral and this was all the US position. and now they are 'reversing'. but there's no reversal. from the very beginning there was a policy of NO negotiations/diplomacy w/assad for the western backed syria gov replacements. and there's no chance that policy was not supported/empowered (and possibly instigated) by israel. israel always wanted regime change in syria. that's a no brainer.

i think since the US/russia deal, which goes along w/the idea of not ousting assad, israel is jealous. and they are really pissed obama might meet rouhani and do diplomacy w/iran. so they're coming out w/strong messaging re assad and throwing out last months pretense of 'we're benign, really we are..this is all america's choice'.

Posted by: annie | Sep 17 2013 17:57 utc | 21

I appear to have been registering it on my blog since Apr 2008, but in fact prior to this blog I had another one on wordpress (naqniq as opposed to the present niqnaq) which abruptly disappeared in Jan 2008, so it may have been on the previous blog too. Note Ben-Ami specifically mentions Hezbollah's supply lines through Syria. So it is not by any means a recent surprise.

Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli foreign minister, hinted in Oct 2007 that if Syria would not dissociate itself peacefully from Iran, a military solution was inevitable : “Driving a wedge between Syria and Iran, drying up Hezbollah by cutting its lines of arms supply, allowing the vital task of stabilizing Lebanon to succeed, and forestalling what now looks like the most realistic scenario, a triple-front war by Israel against Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah, are the strategic fruits concomitant to a Syrian-Israeli peace.” (Nazemroaya, Apr 18 2008)

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 17 2013 17:58 utc | 22

@#7 This is a landmark statement by Oren/Israel. Hes not even the israeli ambassador, he is the AMERICAN ambassador to Israel but he talks like he represent Israel?

He is NOT American - he had to give up his American passport to become the mouthpiece of InternetYahoo (bibi) in DC as the Israeli Ambassador in Washington. His mandate is over and I wonder what he is going to do next - he is more Israeli than American -having been in the Israeli military

Posted by: Yul | Sep 17 2013 18:12 utc | 23

Always, meant to ask: what's in all this for Turkey?

Posted by: Paul | Sep 17 2013 18:15 utc | 24

@15: You forgot "Coping with Crumbling States".

Posted by: g_h | Sep 17 2013 19:47 utc | 25

If I remember correctly Scheikh M.Ramadan Al Bouti was NOT in favor of the Lybian uprising/War.Furthermore his son Taufik (who lost his father and son in the suicide attack that was aimed at his father)told on tv how he received with his father a very high syrian dignitary at the beginning of 2011 who brought with him a massive dossier in two copies,one for his father and one for him,in which there were many proofs about what unfolded later in the country.Syria and Lybia had good relations at the time and syrians shared with the lybians informations about the so called arab spring .So I would discount any claim about Bouti having approved of lybian events.He was a VERY pious man so it is very hard to imagine him enjoying all the suffering of the lybians.

Posted by: Nobody | Sep 17 2013 20:26 utc | 26

Lotta older folk here apparently - possible hearing-aid problems?

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17, 2013 12:49:53 PM | 20

It isn't the 'hearing' that is the problem.
Ego and rampant political correctness, Instead of just dealing with the obvious facts!

Posted by: Penny | Sep 17 2013 21:44 utc | 27

Oren's comments are exactly why Israel is doomed. Israel can't solve its Palestinian problem with a two state solution anymore and can't have the pals in Jewish state. Whatever happens in Syria, Al Queda is going to be very interested in what the Israeli government proposes which could be problematic for its relations with foreign governments.

Posted by: heath | Sep 17 2013 21:51 utc | 28


Perhaps you were so loud it disturbed the evening distribution of Soma, down at the ol' folks home, and they just threw some 60's hippy-folky crap on the stereo, (nostalgia ain't what it used to be) and consequently missed all the important bits?

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 22:16 utc | 29

annie @21 Supposedly AIPAC, et al., have 'suspended' their lobbying...

Pro-Israel groups suspend lobby for Syria strike

Jewish organizations maintain their support for Congressional authorization of military force despite the pending US-Russia deal

A spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which organized a Capitol Hill blitz last week aimed at persuading Congress to back a strike, confirmed Monday that lobbying has been suspended for now.

The American Jewish Committee and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, which also had been involved in the lobbying, said they would suspend lobbying, too.

“We sent many messages over the last week and a half; we are not formulating new letters to the Hill,” Jason Isaacson, the AJC’s director of international affairs, told JTA. “Our message is out there should it be required.”

Posted by: CTuttle | Sep 17 2013 22:25 utc | 30

on her facebook pageb Cynthia McKinney says she is now in Syria

Posted by: brian | Sep 17 2013 22:34 utc | 31

@ 31

Cynthia McKinney is a great American patriot. Amazing how much of the "Left" seems to have disappeared her and we barely see any mention of her at all. Thanks for the link to her Facebook page.

Posted by: Sean | Sep 17 2013 22:53 utc | 32

Cynthia is proof that there's no such thing as a "Zio-Lobby"!

Posted by: hmm | Sep 17 2013 23:25 utc | 33

@17 - i agree with your assessment...

regarding this thread, i think it is great oren is explaining israels desire regarding syria.. now if someone in the usa gov't can figure out how the usa's desires have nothing to do with israels desires, it will be a step forward for the planet..

Posted by: james | Sep 17 2013 23:28 utc | 34

Israel prefers al-Qaida to Assad? I've no problem believing this. In the short run, Iran is weakened, as is Hezbollah. That's a win.

In the slightly longer term, al-Qaida would eventually give Israel a golden opportunity to invade southern Syria. What then? The Israelis might decide they could get away with an ethnic cleansing - "Only Way To Make Sure", and keep the area for themselves. A glance at water maps of Syria shows this area is definitely worth grabbing. Or they might declare the place the New Homeland for all the Muslims from the West Bank and current citizens of Israel. A new Nakba, if you will. Definitely another win.

Posted by: Zachary Smith | Sep 17 2013 23:49 utc | 35

Bibi's headed to the WH... Obama to host Netanyahu

..."The president will welcome Israeli prime minister Netanyahu to the White House on Monday, Sept. 30," spokesman Jay Carney said.

The US official said the two leaders would discuss progress on final status negotiations with the Palestinians, Iran, Syria and developments in the Middle East.

Earlier, Netanyahu said his talks with Obama would come ahead of the Israeli leader's appearance at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, with Iran's nuclear program high on the agenda.

"In another week-and-a-half or so I will travel to the UN General Assembly," Netanyahu said in a statement from his office.

"I will first meet with US President Barack Obama," a statement from Netanyahu's office quoted him as saying.

"I intend to focus on the issue of stopping Iran's nuclear program," he said.

Posted by: CTuttle | Sep 18 2013 1:13 utc | 36 and counterpunch and dozens of others loudly documented the Israeli neocon PNAC attack against IRAQ and SYRIA back over a decade. what short, sorry memories we have.

Posted by: snip | Sep 18 2013 2:39 utc | 37

So no military strike but no peace either.

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that there will ultimately need to be a political transition in Syria in which President Bashar al-Assad gives up power in the wake of a deal aimed at gaining international control of Syrian chemical weapons. "Keep in mind that it's very hard to imagine that (the Syrian) civil war dying down if in fact Assad is still in power," Obama told the Spanish-language network Telemundo. Obama has drawn some criticism for the deal to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons the United States negotiated with Russia, Syria's ally, because it does not directly punish Assad. Obama said it is still his goal to "transition him out of power" in a way that protects Syria's religious minorities and ensures Islamist extremists are not gaining ground inside the country, where more than 100,000 people have been killed in a 2-1/2-year civil war. "But you know, we're going to take this one step at a time. The first step right now is to make sure we can deal with the chemical weapons issue," said Obama. Afterward, he said, the next step will be to engage all the parties involved in the Syrian crisis and countries that have been supportive of Syria like Russia and say, "We need to bring an end to this."

It will be decided on the ground.

Posted by: someone | Sep 18 2013 4:31 utc | 38


Guardian Story on Israel and N.S.A. Is Not ‘Surprising’ Enough to Cover

Well, if the NYT ain't covering it, that's good enough for me. Must not be much of a story, as their managing editor said above. You know with several of our politicians with dual passports and all... Am I Anti-Semitic or anti-America?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 18 2013 4:54 utc | 39

Actually I am not sure what former Ambassador Oren is trying to say. He certainly comes across as tone deaf and politically stupid. But maybe that is because his remarks were meant to an Israeli audience, not an US audience. It is the fun of globalization that you potentially talk to the world nowadays thinking you talk to local constituents.

Whilst using the past tense in the remarks b. quotes above he also says this:

The chemical weapons were an American red line, it wasn’t an Israel red line,” Oren said. “Our red line was that if Iran and Syria try to convey chemical weapons or game changing weaponry to Hezbollah or other terrorist organizations, that Israel would not remain passive. We were prepared to stand by the red line, and still are.”

Oren, who said he could not verify reports Assad was already moving his arsenal, stressed that “he is not moving them out to Hezbollah.”

All the quotes are from an interview he gave to the Jerusalem Post not to the US press. Basically he is assuring Israelis that all is well and their government in control and know what they are doing. And that the alliance with religiously intolerant Gulf absolute monarchies against Iran is a good idea even if there is still a Jewish community in the latter but not in the Gulf.

There must be some reason to doubt this.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 18 2013 6:31 utc | 40

Implicit in Oren's argument is keeping Assad in power - at least for now - as the best option. Because presumably only Assad can prevent chemical weapons falling into the hands of Hezbollah.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 18 2013 6:36 utc | 41

Actually, the usual suspects are in the process of hyping Iranian Jewish relations as recently as September 2013

And then there's the other reason the tweets got so much attention: It seemed to take some people by surprise that, yes, Iran has Jews, maybe as many as 20,000 or 25,000. There's not a whole lot written about them, but they seem to be much better off than many Americans might assume, given the anti-Semitic rhetoric from not just Ahmadinejad but many hard-line Iranians during the annual Quds Day event in Tehran.

this here is the New York Times from 2009

Accepting, I inquired how he felt about the chants of “Death to Israel” — “Marg bar Esraeel” — that punctuate life in Iran.

“Let them say ‘Death to Israel,’ ” he said. “I’ve been in this store 43 years and never had a problem. I’ve visited my relatives in Israel, but when I see something like the attack on Gaza, I demonstrate, too, as an Iranian.”

The Middle East is an uncomfortable neighborhood for minorities, people whose very existence rebukes warring labels of religious and national identity. Yet perhaps 25,000 Jews live on in Iran, the largest such community, along with Turkey’s, in the Muslim Middle East. There are more than a dozen synagogues in Tehran; here in Esfahan a handful caters to about 1,200 Jews, descendants of an almost 3,000-year-old community.

Over the decades since Israel’s creation in 1948, and the Islamic Revolution of 1979, the number of Iranian Jews has dwindled from about 100,000. But the exodus has been far less complete than from Arab countries, where some 800,000 Jews resided when modern Israel came into being.

In Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Iraq — countries where more than 485,000 Jews lived before 1948 — fewer than 2,000 remain. The Arab Jew has perished. The Persian Jew has fared better.

Of course, Israel’s unfinished cycle of wars has been with Arabs, not Persians, a fact that explains some of the discrepancy.

Still a mystery hovers over Iran’s Jews. It’s important to decide what’s more significant: the annihilationist anti-Israel ranting, the Holocaust denial and other Iranian provocations — or the fact of a Jewish community living, working and worshipping in relative tranquillity.

Perhaps I have a bias toward facts over words, but I say the reality of Iranian civility toward Jews tells us more about Iran — its sophistication and culture — than all the inflammatory rhetoric.

That may be because I’m a Jew and have seldom been treated with such consistent warmth as in Iran. Or perhaps I was impressed that the fury over Gaza, trumpeted on posters and Iranian TV, never spilled over into insults or violence toward Jews. Or perhaps it’s because I’m convinced the “Mad Mullah” caricature of Iran and likening of any compromise with it to Munich 1938 — a position popular in some American Jewish circles — is misleading and dangerous.

I know, if many Jews left Iran, it was for a reason. Hostility exists. The trumped-up charges of spying for Israel against a group of Shiraz Jews in 1999 showed the regime at its worst. Jews elect one representative to Parliament, but can vote for a Muslim if they prefer. A Muslim, however, cannot vote for a Jew.

Among minorities, the Bahai — seven of whom were arrested recently on charges of spying for Israel — have suffered brutally harsh treatment.

I asked Morris Motamed, once the Jewish member of the Majlis, if he felt he was used, an Iranian quisling. “I don’t,” he replied. “In fact I feel deep tolerance here toward Jews.” He said “Death to Israel” chants bother him, but went on to criticize the “double standards” that allow Israel, Pakistan and India to have a nuclear bomb, but not Iran.

Double standards don’t work anymore; the Middle East has become too sophisticated. One way to look at Iran’s scurrilous anti-Israel tirades is as a provocation to focus people on Israel’s bomb, its 41-year occupation of the West Bank, its Hamas denial, its repetitive use of overwhelming force. Iranian language can be vile, but any Middle East peace — and engagement with Tehran — will have to take account of these points.

Green Zoneism — the basing of Middle Eastern policy on the construction of imaginary worlds — has led nowhere.

Realism about Iran should take account of Esfehan’s ecumenical Palestine Square. At the synagogue, Benhur Shemian, 22, told me Gaza showed Israel’s government was “criminal,” but still he hoped for peace. At the Al-Aqsa mosque, Monteza Foroughi, 72, pointed to the synagogue and said: “They have their prophet; we have ours. And that’s fine.”

Seems to me some people are out of sync.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 18 2013 6:47 utc | 42

an analysis of the UN report on GHOUTA

UN Report on Ghouta Gas Incident Points to Evidence Tampering, not Syrian Culpability

Posted in Chemical Weapons, Syria by what's left on September 17, 2013
By Stephen Gowans

The United Nations report on the alleged use of chemical weapons in the Ghouta area of Damascus on August 21 does not, as newspaper headlines have indicated, “point to Assad’s use of gas” [1]; confirm that rockets were loaded with sarin [2]; or “come closer to linking Assad to sarin attack” [3]. Nor, as US officials and some journalists have declared, does it “reinforce the case that Mr. Assad’s forces were responsible” [4]; “confirm Damascus’s responsibility” [5]; or “undercut arguments by President Bashar al-Assad of Syria that rebel forces … had been responsible.” [6]

This isn’t to say that Syrian forces didn’t use chemical weapons, only that the evidence adduced in the UN report doesn’t show, or even suggest, that they did. On the contrary, the report offers stronger evidence that attempts were made to manipulate evidence to attribute blame to the Syrian government.

The report concludes that “chemical weapons have been used in the ongoing conflict between parties in the Syrian Arab Republic, also against civilians, including children, on a relatively large scale.” [7]

The UN inspectors adduced five findings in support of their conclusion.

• “Impacted and exploded surface-to-surface rockets, capable to carry a chemical payload, were found to contain sarin.
• “Close to the rocket impact sites, in the area where patients were affected, the environment was found to be contaminated by sarin.
• “Over fifty interviews given by survivors and health care workers provided ample corroboration of the medical and scientific results.
• “A number of patients/survivors were clearly diagnosed as intoxicated by an organophosophorous compound.
• “Blood and urine samples from the same patients were found positive for sarin and sarin signatures.” [8]

The findings, then:

• Present evidence that the symptoms experienced by people in Ghouta on August 21 were due to sarin exposure.
• Suggest—but do not confirm—a possible route through which the contamination occurred (delivery of the agent by surface-to-surface rockets.)
• Says nothing about who was responsible.

US officials and their allies have cited the discovery by the UN inspectors of rocket fragments containing sarin to attribute blame to Syrian forces. But to make the leap from ‘sarin-contaminated rocket fragments were found’ to ‘Syrian forces carried out a sarin attack’ requires evidence to support two intermediary conclusions:

• The contaminated rocket fragments weren’t planted or manipulated.
• Only Syrian forces could have carried out a chemical weapons attack using rockets.

The report can’t confirm the first conclusion, and indeed, challenges it.

Pages 18 and 22 of the report contain key paragraphs headed by the title “Limitations”.

On page 18:

The time necessary to conduct a detailed survey … as well as take samples was very limited. The sites [had] been well travelled by other individuals both before and during the investigation. Fragments and other possible evidence [had] clearly been handled/moved prior to the arrival of the investigation team. [9]

On page 22:

As with other sites, the locations [had] been well travelled by other individuals prior to the arrival of the Mission. Time spent on the site was … limited. During the time spent at these locations, individuals arrived carrying other suspected munitions indicating that such potential evidence [was] moved and possibly manipulated. [10]

In other words, the inspectors had little time to carefully gather evidence and inspect it in situ; there was plenty of opportunity for the evidence to be manipulated; and the evidence had clearly been handled and moved.

Far from indicting Syrian forces as the culprits, these findings point more strongly to evidence being manipulated, possibly to falsely implicate the Syrian government.

As to the argument that only Syrian forces could have launched a rocket attack, it’s plain that rebel forces could have used rockets supplied by their foreign backers or captured from Syrian forces.

Indeed, as the Associated Press’s Kimberly Dozier and Matt Apuzzo reported on August 29,

U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders. Some have even talked about the possibility that rebels could have carried out the attack in a callous and calculated attempt to draw the West into the war. [11, 12]

In summary, here’s what the UN report says: On August 21, people in Ghouta were exposed to sarin. We don’t know how they were exposed and who was responsible. But we do know that evidence in connection with rocket fragments was possibly manipulated.

Concluding that the UN report adds to the evidence linking Syrian forces to the August 21 incident, as US officials and some US mass media have indicated, is misleading. First, there was no hard evidence of Syrian culpability to which the UN report could be added. An earlier assessment by the US intelligence community was “thick with caveats.” [13] Second, the UN report, like the US intelligence community assessment, offers no evidence linking the Ghouta incident to Syrian forces.

US officials are reading far more into the evidence than the evidence allows, and US mass media are docilely following the officials’ lead. Anti-Syrian forces have adopted a ridiculously lax evidentiary standard to allow themselves to find the target of their hostility guilty of gassing non-combatants on, at best, flimsy evidence. One can only conclude that they’re motivated to discredit the Syrian government to facilitate the project of bringing about regime change in Damascus—a project these parties are overtly committed to.

Consider motives.

• The United States and its allies have a motive to blame the Syrian government for using chemical weapons in order to establish a pretext to step up their intervention in Syria’s internal war. In light of this, it would be expected that they would be inclined to favor very liberal, over-reaching, interpretations of evidence to create a casus belli.

• Once Washington declared that the use of chemical weapons by Syrian forces would trigger an overt intervention by US forces, the rebels had a motive to stage a chemical attack in order to blame it on Syrian forces.

• Syrian forces had a motive to refrain from using chemical weapons to avoid crossing the United States’ red line.

In light of these motives, the most probable scenario is that a sarin attack was carried out by rebel forces to draw the United States more fully into the war and that Washington and its allies have set their evidentiary bar deliberately low to read Syrian culpability into the flimsiest of evidence. The objective is to achieve what US foreign policy has long set as its principal goal: to topple governments that stand in the way of the expansion of economic space for private ownership, market regulation and profit accumulation.

What makes Syria’s government an object of hostility for the big business-dominated US state is its denial of complete freedom for foreign capital to exploit Syrian markets, land, resources and labour. [14] Added to this is Damascus’s refusal to fully cooperate in supporting US geopolitical goals (which are themselves linked ultimately to US profit-making interests.) “Syria,” says the country’s president “is an independent state working for the interests of its people, rather than making the Syrian people work for the interests of the West.” [15]

Syria’s insistence on maintaining its independence, the US government’s long-standing hostility to foreign governments that demand to be allowed to chart their own course, the rebels’ interest in staging a gas attack to blame on Damascus, Washington’s reading far more into the evidence than the evidence allows, and the absence of any hard evidence linking Syrian forces to the Ghouta incident, suggest that the Syrian government is being set up.

The UN report does nothing to challenge this view. If anything, its noting that evidence was moved and possibly manipulated, supports it.

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 7:48 utc | 43

'Bibi's headed to the WH... Obama to host Netanyahu'

he already does: US is infested with the zionist parasites

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 7:50 utc | 44

Posted by: Sean | Sep 17, 2013 6:53:11 PM | 32

most of the 'Left' such as blogger Unrepentent Marxist, Louis Proyect, Socialist Alternative ISO etc are supporters of the FSA and their war on syria. Evem Tariq Ali seems to think Assad is evil

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 7:52 utc | 45

Netanyahu said at a cabinet meeting Tuesday: "In a week and a half, I will go to the UNGA, and before that I will meet with Obama. I intend to focus on stopping the Iranian nuclear program. Really stopping the nuclear program. I shall demand that Iran (1) Halt all uranium enrichment; (2) Remove all enriched uranium; (3) Close the enrichment plant at Fordo, and (4) Close the plutonium plant at Arak." Good old DEBKAfile, which I love for reasons other people do not understand, is running hard with a concoction claiming that POTUS Mr Steppin 'Hopey-Changey' Fetchit has sold the pass: "The US president has come to terms with a nuclear-capable Iran and will be satisfied with Ayatollah Khamenei’s word that Tehran will not take the last step to actually assemble a bomb." It gets better, in true conspiratorial style: "Obama and Khamenei have been exchanging secret messages through Sultan Qabus bin Said al-Said of Oman. Obama's last message was carried to Tehran by Oman’s Defense Minister Sayyid Badr bin Said al-Busaidiat." See, they know everything. This is why people always say DEBKAfile is run by the Mossad, though in fact it is run by army intelligence (AMAN), which is why it is never censored. AMAN control the censorship authority.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 18 2013 8:00 utc | 46

That would explain how Syrian terrorists (with a handful of kids) are being treated in Israeli hospitals. Note: It is extremely hard for Palestinians from Gaza, to get into Israel.

This has been corroborated by a NSBC article, quoting from an Austrian Army officer in the UNDOF prior to their pullout:

"UNDOF Officer confirms Large-Scale Israeli Support and Direct Military Aggression against Syrian Sites. The Austrian military officer, who declines to reveal his name, but who is known to Al-Manaar, told Al-Manaar that the scale of Israel´s support to the armed terrorist groups, which is spread through villages in the Israeli occupied Syrian Golan is very large, and that the support includes all logistic, military and medical fields.

The officer, belonging to the withdrawing Austrian UNDOF battalion made the statement while being in Palestine, waiting for further transport home to Austria. The officer also affirmed the existence of a joint operations room between armed terrorist gangs and Israel. The joint operation room has the function to coordinate the delivery of assistance to the terrorists.

The Austrian UNDOF officer added, that staff at this operations room also coordinated the entry of injured terrorists into Israel, where injured terrorists are admitted to hospitals in the nearby Israeli settlements. The officer explicitly cited the Zeif hospital in Safed.

Al-Manaar quoted the Austrian officer as saying, that this joint operation room is in constant contact with the Israeli military and security to facilitate the weapons transport from Israel to the terrorists. The Austrian officer pointed out, that the UNDF has information about large numbers of terrorists who have been transported to local and field hospitals over the past three months."

Posted by: tom | Sep 18 2013 8:16 utc | 47

Very useful 27pp pdf by Ronen Bergman (author of "Israel & The Bomb") on Israel's CBW history:

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 18 2013 8:29 utc | 48

Not quite off topic...
Xymphora's Sept 17 post is about how pissed off the "Israel" Lobbies are that they're not going to get the Dumbass Yankees to conduct a fake war on Syria.

And, as if to confirm it, the Yanko-centric "international community" is suddenly putting pressure on North Korea over its 'disgraceful' Human Rights record, complete with a long string of hyper-ventilated allegations. Several factors suggest that the NK beat-up is an insincerely obvious trope/deflection:

1. No-one is mentioning that much, if not all, of NK's apparently weird behaviour can be directly attributed to Yankee lies, sanctions and cheap tricks designed to deep-six the NK economy.

2. The long list of NK's sins is short and mild compared to "Israel's" shamefully unique list of Human Rights abuses - none of which appears on the North Korea list.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 18 2013 9:08 utc | 49

"Implicit in Oren's argument is keeping Assad in power - at least for now - as the best option. Because presumably only Assad can prevent chemical weapons falling into the hands of Hezbollah.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 18, 2013 2:36:03 AM | 41"


THAT sort of dishonest crap is what i was referring to when i said that the absolute shit you litter these threads with is not even shit you personally believe.

You really are scum

You just wanted to post some lies about Hezb and chemical weapons, so you did,

you little lying scumbag

Posted by: hmm | Sep 18 2013 10:26 utc | 50

I prefer not to imagine if this had happened in Syria

Posted by: Mina | Sep 18 2013 10:33 utc | 51

50) Assad staying at least till 2014 is obviously part of the no military strike/chemical weapons deal. Oren stated there is no red line forcing Israel to remove Assad. The rest is just cover up. Of course Israel hates Hezbollah more than Jihadis. But getting rid of Assad would not mean getting rid of Hezbollah.

What matters is what happens on the ground. This Israeli General describes a different reality from this BBC map.

I hear the fight for Aleppo is on.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 18 2013 11:02 utc | 52

another Guantanamo inmate now working WITH the US

A video posted in early August shows the funeral of ex-Guantanamo Bay detainee Mohammed al Alami, who was killed in Syria fighting alongside insurgents against the Syrian government.
In the video, Alami, a Moroccan, is eulogized by a rebel leader, Sheik Abu Ahmad al Muhajir, who says Alami was a veteran of jihad in Afghanistan before he “went through hardship for the sake of God in the prison of the Americans in Guantánamo for five years.”
Alami fought US-backed forces in Afghanistan after 9/11, then was captured by the Pakistani Army trying to flee the country. He was brought to Guantánamo from Afghanistan on Feb. 2, 2002, and repatriated Feb. 7, 2006. Records are not clear why Alami was released from Guantanamo, The Miami Herald reported.

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 11:11 utc | 53

It seems the evidence compiled by Mother Agnes before going to Geneva to testify is available here. I have no guts to watch the videos, sorry, so I post it for others who can.

Posted by: Mina | Sep 18 2013 11:12 utc | 54

the usual nonsensical retarded drivel in reply.

Here's a template for your next chock-full-of-lies reply:

[Insert something halfway honest here] Blah blah blah [insert some Zionist-inspired non-sequitur here] therefore [some complete lying bullshit you made up, because you are a lying zionist scumbag]

Posted by: hmm | Sep 18 2013 11:13 utc | 55

zionist outrage at their plans for war on syria stymied

Obama the new Kennedy?

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 11:18 utc | 56

Not sure if these videos have been spotted by Petri

Posted by: Mina | Sep 18 2013 11:25 utc | 57

Holocaust pimp Elie Wiesel, oleaginous "Rabbi" Shmuley Boteach, Jewish billionaire Sheldon Adelson and Birthright Israel Co-founder Michael Steinhardt are teaming up with Rwandan President, and war criminal, Paul Kagame to push for an attack on Syria.

Posted by: hmm | Sep 18 2013 13:16 utc | 58

Fanatic Zionist warmonger Elie Weisel like Obama has received the Nobel "Peace" Prize. How low can they sink.

Posted by: Andoheb | Sep 18 2013 14:04 utc | 59

@hmm #55

He's ignorning you, and rightly so.

Zionist this, Zionist that... "Holocaust pimp". What a load of dross.
Your rabid anti-semitism smears the lot of us.

But maybe that's the point.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Sep 18 2013 14:06 utc | 60

Holocaust Pimp is a perfectly adequate description of Elie Wiesel

Next you'll be telling me that Sheldon Adelson is not a Jewish Billionaire

Posted by: hmm | Sep 18 2013 14:31 utc | 61

While most media coverage makes it look like the war danger has
diminished, Secretary of State John Kerry has made it clear that the
threat of attack will persist -- that it is still the U.S. strategic
plan to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power even if all
Syrian chemical weapons are destroyed. (Business Week, Sept. 16)

That's why a delegation of anti-war and human-rights activists from
the United States entered Syria this week on a fact-finding trip that
is also there to show people-to-people solidarity with Syria and
counter the incessant war propaganda spread in the U.S. and NATO

The delegation, organized by the International Action Center,
includes former U.S. Attorney General and human rights lawyer Ramsey
Clark, former six-term Congressperson from Georgia Cynthia McKinney,
Dedon Kamathi of the All African People's Revolutionary Party and
Pacifica Radio, Johnny Achi of Arab Americans 4 Syria in Los Angeles,
and from the IAC John Parker and Sara Flounders. Some of the
delegation members, including the two IAC organizers, have been key to
organizing anti-war actions within the United States over the past two

They intend to continue this activity on their return by reporting of
their experience to the people in the U.S. "It is vitally important to
bring the truth about the Syrian situation back to the people of the
United States," said the IAC's Flounders.

Flounders said the delegation is in Syria "to bring back reports
after talking with and meeting with some of the more than 4 million
people displaced by the war. This is a war the U.S. government has
funded and provoked. We aim to see some of the enormous damage created
by this war. We also want to see how the Syrian people have mobilized
to resist the war and carry out their everyday life, including
providing health care."

Before entering Syria, the delegation also attended in Beirut,
Lebanon, the Arab International Forum Against US Aggression on Syria
organised by the Arab International Centre for Communication and
Solidarity. The forum was organized to counter the threat of a U.S.
attack against Syria.

Participants at the forum, besides the delegation, included anti-war
leader and MP George Galloway from Britain, ambassadors of Russia,
Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Nicaragua and many leading organizations
from Europe, North Africa and Western Asia. Some of the other
organizations represented from the U.S. were the International
Anti-imperialist Coordinating Committee, the ANSWER Coalition and the
United National Anti-war Coalition.

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 14:33 utc | 62

Open letter to the AFL-CIO leaders — Oppose war on Syria

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 14:50 utc | 63

Posted by: Mina | Sep 18, 2013 7:12:37 AM | 54

its not there Mina

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2013 14:51 utc | 64

Kind of obvious, but still.

We are finally seeing in the light of day, sketchy, confused alliances, but some strong ones (not to mention the long-standing US-isr partnership) between all those who want to rule and dominate thru oppression, violence, by using religion, ethnic divisions, group belonging, jackboots, prison, torture, exclusion, bombing if needed, and slave labor.

That group includes the US, Isr., KSA, Turkey for now, Quatar, the Egyptian Junta, Bahrein, and more. ..etc.

Minor details about who is Al Q or who is terrorist etc. are of no account. Islamist rebels are exploited (most aren’t Islamic anyway, just gangsters playing at piety, mocking it even, they smoke Marlboros and watch porn, rob, racket, rape, torture, behead, shoot, etc. just hopin’ on funding and power plays to exploit and triumph later...) for some destructive purpose.

Domination, destruction, some profit sharing by bandits rule the day. As, right now, in Iraq, Afgh., NIgeria, and elsewhere.

After all the endless hoopla about tracking terrorist groups and their financing (like associations that support schools in Palestine!) or terrorist tagged ppl (like no fly lists etc., and putting tens of thousands of cos., groups, associations, and individuals on terrorist lists, fighting in the UN to get such and such also banned by the Internationals, Obama now rescinds, bang off, the law banning arming of terrorist groups!

Previous, to send a donation or an e-mail to some ‘terror‘ group was already quite dangerous. Now apparently - one could send a suitcase thingie! ;)


Posted by: Noirette | Sep 18 2013 14:52 utc | 65

The Connection Between Zionism & Organized Islamophobia – The Facts
Posted on 08 September 2010

Aubrey Chernick, Major funder of Zionist Orgs & Islamophobic Orgs

Conspiracy Theory?
Much has been said about the disproportionate Zionist presence in the world of organized Islamophobia.

Now we learn that there is more to that claim than unfounded conspiracy theories. It turns out the main funder of anti-Muslim blogger/anti-Park51 organizer Robert Spencer and his hate site JihadWatch are husband and wife duo Aubrey and Joyce Chernick, the same couple are ardent supporters of Zionist causes and major funders of pro-Israel groups across the country.

Aubrey Chernick according to Politico

A onetime trustee of the hawkish Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Aubrey Chernick led the effort to pull together $3.5 million in venture capital to start Pajamas Media, a conservative blog network that made its name partly with hawkish pro-Israel commentary and of late has kept up a steady stream of anti-mosque postings, including one rebutting attacks by CAIR against Spencer — who Pajamas CEO Roger Simon called “one of the ideological point men in the global war on terror.”

Politico lists some of the Zionist propaganda organizations and pro-occupation front organizations that Aubrey and Joyce Chernick have funded over the years:

  • The Zionist Organization of America
  • MEMRI, a group that distributes translations of inflammatory Arabic language material
  • The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), a group that tracks what it depicts as the threat of radical Islam, run by notorious Islamophobe Steven Emerson
  • CAMERA, a group that tracks what it says is anti-Israel bias in the media and that is associated with Daniel Pipes
  • The Central Fund for Israel, a clearinghouse for moneys directed to pro-settler groups
  • A number of conservative think tanks that are aligned with the Likud.

The Chernicks are also major funders of Jewish groups including: The American Jewish Congress, The Jewish Federation Council of Greater Los Angeles, and The Anti-Defamation League.

Lauren Rozen goes into more depth as far as the contributions and think tanks such as the Hudson Institute, Defense of Democracies, Central Fund of Israel, etc. (via. Richard Silverstein), including some well-known anti-Muslim and Islamophobic initiatives (in bold below).

Laura Rozen has discovered that Chernick’s charity-giving is done through the Fairbrook Foundation ($66-million in assets).  According to its 2008 IRS 990 report, among the far-right pro-Israel groups he’s funding are:

  • Ateret Cohanim ($30,000), involved in the Judaization of East Jerusalem through “appropriation” of Arab homes
  • Muslim-basher Bridgette Gabriel’s American Congress for Truth ($50,000)
  • Aish HaTorah, funders of the anti-Muslim films Obsessed and Third Jihad ($14,000)
  • the anti-Palestinian media advocacy group MEMRI ($100,000)
  • American Freedom Alliance, another Muslim-bashing group, founded by Avi Davis, which defends western civilization from the unwashed hordes ($120,000)
  • Gary Bauer’s American Values ($80,000)
  • Horowitz’s Center for the Study of Popular Culture ($160,000)
  • The anti-Arab media advocacy group CAMERA ($25,000)
  • The Council for Democracy and Tolerance, an Arab-bashing group established by a Pakistani neocon ($160,000)
  • Defend the West, yet another Muslim-turncoat group founded by Ibn Warraq ($130,000)
  • Hudson Institute ($50,000); Heritage Foundation ($50,000)
  • The Jewish neo-con security think tank JINSA ($15,000)
  • The anti-Arab media advocacy group Second Draft ($40,000)
  • Stand With Us ($20,000); and Daniel Pipes’ Middle East Forum ($180,000).
  • In 2005, Chernick gave $60,000 to the Central Fund of Israel, one of the largest pro-settler ‘philanthropic’ advocacy groups.

This information is quite disturbing on a number of levels . . . . . . .

Posted by: hmm | Sep 18 2013 15:26 utc | 67

More on where the chemical weapons originated:

The chemical weapons of Ghouta came from the Turkish Army

The TV channel Al-Ikbariya broadcasted, on Sunday the 15th of September 2013, a long interview of a prisoner reporting the way that he had transported chemical weapons from a Turkish military base to Damascus.

According to this report, the Turkish army was aiming to provoke an international intervention against Syria.

This limited bombing would have been accompanied by a vast communication initiative.

This broadcast was followed by a debate between general Ali Maksoud and the political specialist, Thierry Meyssan, regarding the Turkish implication in the conflict and the Russian proposition of Syrian signing of the Convention forbidding the use of chemical weapons.

Alizée Ville

Voltaire Network, 15 September 2013

Posted by: William Bowles | Sep 18 2013 15:36 utc | 68

brian @ 43: Excellent synopsis, thanks.

Posted by: ben | Sep 18 2013 16:11 utc | 69

The pipeline and the energy politics and the renascent Ottoman Empire all have a role in this war. Israel as the hindquarters of the Beast has a role as well. The observation I have is that in the great game of nations machtpolitik always comes first and talking comes if machtpolitk fails. In this instance machtpolitik must include various special operations teams on the ground in Syria as well as forces off the Syrian coast. Russia has an interest in protecting Syria up to a point, but the question has to turn on when their Western counterparts are willing to have a regional war to accomplish their ends. Then the determination is that such a conflict is not in the interest of Russia. Israel and Russia have deep ties, perhaps deeper than those Israel has with France, England and the USA.

Posted by: Publius | Sep 18 2013 16:39 utc | 70

Israel and Russia have deep ties, perhaps deeper than those Israel has with France, England and the USA. Posted by: Publius | Sep 18, 2013 12:39:38 PM | 70
Considering that you yourself earlier in your comment described Israel as "the hindquarters of the beast," thereby already arousing my suspicion, because why the hindquarters rather than the forequarters?, I think you owe us an explanation of this tie between Israel and Russia which is deeper than the tie between Israel and the entire West. And please don't try to fob us off with demographic trivialities. We know that of all the Ashkenazim of eastern Europe, overwhelmingly it was only those who ended up behind Russian lines who survived. But don't tell us that that gives them some affinity with the Russian people. All that it gives them is another opportunity to demonstrate their vile ability as cultural chameleons, pretending to have great affinities with whomever they happen to be parasitising at the time.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Sep 18 2013 18:04 utc | 71


Thanks for that walk down memory lane. More important background to b's summary of the aggression against Syria 2006-present.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Sep 18 2013 18:48 utc | 72

The comments to this entry are closed.