Exclusive: National Security Agency to spy on Boston for 2024 Olympics in National Special Security Event SIGINT Spectacular, Snowden leak shows


Most people have no idea that the National Security Agency gets involved in big events like national political conventions and the Olympics: National Special Security Events (NSSEs) with security led by the Secret Service, which is now a part of the Department of Homeland Security.

This was apparently overlooked until now: the National Security Agency lists one of its top level "strategic missions" as getting involved with NSSEs such as the Olympics, according to a file published by the NY Times in Nov 2013 and attributed to Edward Snowden. See also: Olympics in Boston would require an unprecedented security effort - Boston Globe (Jan 15)

Many ideas taken for granted - including the separation of military and civilian life within the US - evaporate in NSSEs. Many, many federal agencies send little teams, including advanced military intelligence.

Header_Logo.pngI had only recently rejoiced that the 2016 Democratic National Convention wouldn't land in Minneapolis. The new crowd running Minneapolis actually saw the light there. These giant spectacles are a huge diversion of focus, don't help cities achieve their goals, at a vastly inflated expense, while compromising the rights of city residents. Many opponents are acting including No Boston Olympics and NoBoston2024 | Independent voices of Boston area residents opposed to the Boston 2024 Olympic bid.

This is apparently the first time that it has been really noted the NSA's director in 2007 officially stated that NSSE's are strategic missions. This in turn means that the NSA must have had *some* role at the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minneapolis. (see our RNC documentary Terrorizing Dissent here & RNC08Report for docs) More background below the doc fulltext.

It's hard to overstate the nasty, elitist, disruptive effects of the Olympics. As a new resident of Boston, the unfortunate news that the 2024 Olympics now has this city in its crosshairs is disappointing & fear inducing. After all I ran into (at least) four FBI informants because of the 2008 RNC, gassed & shot at by the authorities.


2008 RNC memories - Photo Creative commons by Nigel Parry @flyingmonkeyair - src

I am publishing almost the whole document here except for the short page 2, as it is annoyingly difficult to locate online anyway. There are a lot of typos in the Optical Character Recognition, oh well.. See a little earlier coverage: Top Level Telecommunications: NSA's Strategic Mission List and Report: S. Korea key intelligence target for US eavesdropping - Zoom in Korea | Zoom in Korea (Nov 2013).



United States SIGINT System January 2007 Strategic Mission List

Introduction - Director’s Intent

(S//SI) The SIGINT Strategic Mission List represents the intent of the Director, National Security Agency in regard to mission priorities and risks for the United States S1G1NT System (USSS) over the next 12-18 months The list is derived from review of the Intelligence Community National Intelligence Priorities Framework, DC1/DNI Guidance, the Strategic Warning List, National SIGINT Requirements Process (NSRP) and other strategic planning documents The missions included on the list are in relative priority order and represent the most urgent tasks for the USSS The list is not intended to be all encompassing, but is intended to set forth guidance on the highest priorities.

Topical Missions and Enduring Targets

(S//S1) The SIGINT Strategic Mission List is divided into two parts. It includes 16 critical topical missions in Part I of the list, which represent missions discerned to be areas of highest priority for the USSS, where SIGINT can make key contributions. In addition to the 16 critical topical missions, Part U of the SIGINT Strategic Mission List includes 6 enduring targets that are included due to the need to work these targets holistically because o f their strategic importance. In addition to their long-term strategic importance, the enduring targets can potentially "trump" the highest priority topical missions on the list at any time, based upon evolving world events. Elements o f these targets are also represented throughout the topical target sets. For each of the 16 topical missions and each of the 6 enduring targets the Strategic Mission List includes:

1) Focus Areas - critically important targets against which the SIGINT enterprise is placing emphasis. DIRNSA designation of a target as a focus area constitutes his guidance to the SIGINT System that it is a "must do” target for that mission
2) Accepted Risks strategically significant targets against which the USSS is not placing emphasis and for which SIGINT should not be relied upon as a primary source. DIRNSA's reasons for accepting these risks include high difficulty and lack of resources or as an “Economy of Force Measure,” in order to achieve focus on the most critical targets

A Strategic Investment Tool for SIGINT Resources

(S//S1) Given a finite level of resources available in all mission areas, the Strategic Mission List provides high-level strategic direction to the global SIGINT system to focus resources on the most important/highest priority areas. “Risks” identify targets that cannot be resourced to the level of a Focus Area, thereby acknowledging that shortfalls will exist. As world circumstances change, these or other targets can be added to the list as needed, targets no longer of critical importance can also be removed from the Focus Area category. In addition, other targets, not listed as focus or risk areas, can also be wrorked by the USSS to a lesser degree to meet other customer requirements. The Strategic Mission List will be reviewed bi- annually by the USSS Signals Intelligence leadership Team Missions. Focus areas, and Accepted Risks will be adjusted as a means of providing high-level steerage to the Nation’s agile SIGINT System.


United States SIGINT System Strategic Mission L ist- January 2007

(U) I. Strategic Mission List - Topical Missions

(S//S1) A. MISSION: Terrorism: Winning the Global War on Terrorism. Focus Areas:

a. All Interagency Intelligence Committee on Terrorism (I1CT) Tier 0 and 1 terrorist groups with capabilities and intentions to attack the US, its interests or allies, or groups actively planning or carrying out a terrorist attack against U.S. persons, facilities, or interests

b. Key individuals and Terrorist Support Entities (TSE) involved in the facilitation, financing, and recruitmentorradicalizationofallIICT Tier0and 1terroristgroupnetworksglobally.

Accepted Risks: All IICT Tier 2,3, and 4 terrorist groups, and TSEs.

(S//S1) B. MISSION: Homeland Security: Protecting the U.S. Homeland from terrorist attack and other transnational threats to safeguard U.S. persons, freedoms, critical information, infrastructure, property and economy.
Focus Areas:

a Border Security (land, air, sea).
b. Direct defense against terrorist attack.
c. Diseases, epidemics, and pandemics.
d. Executive Protection/U.S.-Based NSSEs
e. Illicit Facilitation as it relates to special interest aliens and CBRN materials and technology

Accepted Risks:

a Accepted risks as stated in the “Terrorism” mission.
b. Global coverage o f all illicit activities of potential concern to the Homeland.

(S//SI//REL USA, AUS, CAN, GBR) C. MISSION: W M P and CBRN Programs and Proliferation: Combating the Threat of Development and Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, CBRN, and Delivery Methods (particularly ballistic and nuclear-capable cruise missiles).
Focus Areas:

a. Development, Acquisition, or Use of CBRN.
b.State W'MD and ballistic and cruise missile programs of:

China (biological, chemical, nuclear, ballistic and cruise missiles) India (nuclear, ballistic missiles)
Iran (biological, chemical, nuclear, and ballistic missiles)
North Korea (biological, chemical, nuclear, ballistic missiles) Pakistan (nuclear, ballistic missiles)

Russia (biological, chemical, nuclear, ballistic and cruise missiles)

Syria (chemical, nuclear, ballistic missiles).
c.W MD and missile proliferation activities by states:

China (nuclear, ballistic missiles), Israel (cruise missiles) North Korea (nuclear, ballistic missiles)

Pakistan (nuclear, ballistic missiles)

Russia (ballistic missile).
d.W.MD and missile acquisition activities by states:

China (cruise missiles)
India (cruise missiles)
Iran (nuclear, ballistic missiles)
Pakistan (cruise missiles)
Saudi Arabia (nuclear, ballistic missiles).

e.Safety and Security ofWMD: Pakistan (nuclear)
Russia (nuclear).

Accepted Risks:
State WMD and ballistic and cruise missile programs of: Egypt (ballistic missiles)
Libya (ballistic missiles)
Taiwan (ballistic missiles).

(S//S1) D. MISSION: U.S. Forces at Risk (Military Support): Protecting U.S. Military Forces Deployed Overseas and Enabling their Operations.
Focus Areas:

a. U.S. forces deployed in: Iraq. Afghanistan. Mideast Region. Korea, and Philippines.
b. Support to military planning and operations: Support to OPLAN 5027 (Korea).
c. Intentions of foreign and indigenous anti-coalition forces, command and control. OOB, and

operational support in Iraq and Afghanistan.
d. Support to U.S. forces in identification of HVTs in Afghanistan/ Pakistan and Iraq

Accepted Risks:

a Protection of U S forces deployed in: Balkans (Kosovo),
b South Korea leadership intentions in OPLAN 5027.
c Routine military support to U.S. forces deployed in non-combat situations.

(S//S1) E. MISSION: State/Political Stability: Providing Warning of Impending State Instability. Focus Areas:

a. Internal political activities that could threaten the survivability of leadership in countries where US has interest in regime continuity Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.

b. Internal political activities that could result in crisis in. North Korea, Sudan/Dafur humanitarian crisis. Cuba, Kosovo, Turkey, Nigeria, Lebanon, Venezuela, Syria, Bolivia, Latin American Bolivarian Developments, and Palestinian Authority.

Accepted Risks: Internal political stability of: Egypt, Zimbabwe, Cote d'Ivoire, Liberia, DROC, Bangladesh, Georgia, Jordan, and Haiti.

(S//SI) F. MISSION: Warning of Strategic Nuclear Missile Threats: Providing Warning of a Strategic Nuclear Missile Attack on the territory of the 50 United States.
Focus Areas: Areas covered under a peacetime SIGINT strategy maintaining full capabilities with reasonably sufficient coverage for the provision of warning include: Russia's Nuclear C3, Mobile

ICBMs, strategic navy missiles, and Bombers; China's Nuclear C3, Mobile ICBMs, and SSBNs; and North Korea's Nuclear C3 and potential ICBM (TD-2) Threat.
Accepted Risks: Strategic Targets where SIGINT is not a primary intelligence source in providing warning: Russia's Silo-based ICBMs; China's Silo-based ICBMs.

(S//SI) G. MISSION: Regional Conflict and Crisis/Flashpoints to War: Monitoring Regional Tensions that Could Escalate to Conflict/Crisis.
Focus Areas:
Regional flashpoints that could pose a significant threat to U.S. strategic interests: Arab,Iran-Israel conflict, Korean Peninsula, China-Taiwan, India-Pakistan, Venezuela (impact on surrounding region), and Russia/Georgia.

Accepted Risks: Regional flashpoints in: Ethiopia-Eritrea and Africa Great Lakes Region

(S//REL USA. AUS. CAN, GBR. NZL) H. MISSION: Information Operations: Mastering Cyberspace and Preventing an Attack on U.S. Critical Information Systems.
Focus Areas:

a (S//SI) Enabling Computer Network Defense (CND): Provide cyber threat warning, detection, characterization, and mitigation services for U.S. and allied computer network operators: Named Intrusion Sets (Including, but not limited to Gadget Hiss. Seed Sphere/Byzantine Trace. Makers Mark. Byzantine Candor), New intrusions.

b. (S//REL USA, AUS, CAN. GBR, NZL) Enabling Computer Network Attack (CNA): Deliver intelligence, access, and dual-use capabilities in support of U.S. computer network attack objectives. c. (S//SI) Foreign Intelligence Serv ices' Cyber Threat Activities: Deliver intelligence on the capabilities.

vulnerabilities, plans and intentions o f foreign actors to conduct CNO against USG networks and those of interest to the USG. Identify what Foreign Intel Services know about USG capabilities, vulnerabilities, plans and intentions to conduct CNO: China, Russia, Iran, and al-Qa'ida

d (S//SI) Enabling Electronic Warfare (EW): Provide cognizance ofthe EM environment, signal detection/geolocation, and characterization through intelligence (ELINT. COMINT, Tech SIGINT) and other technical means to U.S. EW planners and operators: China. Russia, Iran, Iraq/Afghanistan (IED's) and North Korea.

e. (S//SI) Enabling Influence Operations: Support U.S. military deception (MILDEC) and psychological operations (PSYOP), and inter-agency Strategic Communication objectives to influence target behavior and activities: Terrorist groups. China. North Korea. Iran, and Venezuela.

Accepted Risks:

a. Enabling CND: Isolated malicious activity that could pose a serious threat.
b. Enabling CNA.
c. FIS Cyber Threat: France, Israel, Cuba, India, and North Korea.
d. Enabling EW: (producers.'’prolifcrators): Sweden, Japan. Germany, Israel, and France, e Enabling Influence Operations: Pakistan and Russia.

(S//SI) I. MISSION: Military Modernization: Providing Early Detection ofCritical Developments in Foreign Military Programs.
Focus Areas:

b. Activities of state and non-state actors (gray arms dealers) in supplying advanced conventional weapons.

c. Threats posed by foreign space and counter-space systems: China and Russia Accepted Risks:

a Weapons and force developments in: Saudi Arabia, and India
b Threats posed by foreign space and counter-space systems India and France

(S//SI) J. MISSION: Emerging Strategic Technologies: Preventing Technological Surprise.
Focus Areas:
Critical technologies that could provide a strategic military, economic, or political advantage: high energy lasers, low energy lasers, advances in computing and information technology, directed energy weapons, stealth and counter-stealth, electronic warfare technologies, space and remote sensing, electro-optics, nanotechnologies, energetic materials The emerging strategic technology threat is expected to come mainly from Russia. China. India, Japan. Germany, France. Korea. Israel, Singapore, and Sweden.

Accepted Risks: Technological advances and/or basic S&T development on a global basis elsewhere.

(S//S1) K. MISSION: Foreign Policy ((includes Intention of Nations and Multinational Orgs)): Ensuring Diplomatic Advantage for the US.
Focus Areas:
Positions, objectives, programs, and actions on the part of governments or multilateral organizations that could significantly impact U.S. national security interests: China, Russia, France, Germany, Japan. Iran. Israel. Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Afghanistan. Iraq. UN, Venezuela, Syria. Turkey, Mexico, South Korea, India and Pakistan.

Accepted Risks: Positions, objectives, programs, and actions on the part of governments or multilateral organizations that could impact U.S. foreign policy or security interests: Taiwran.

(S//SI) l~ MISSION: Energy Security: Ensuring a Steady and Reliable Energy Supply for the US. Focus Areas: Threats to the production and global distribution/transportation of energy supplies of: Iraq, Saudi Arabia, V enezuela, Iran, Russia and Nigeria. Accepted Risks: Global impact o f the state o f energy industries in: Mexico and China.

(S//SI) M. MISSION: Foreign Intelligence, Counterintelligence; Denial & Deception Activities: Countering Foreign Intelligence Threats.
Focus Areas:
Espionage/intelligence collection operations and manipulation/influence operations conducted by foreign intelligence services directed against U.S. government, military', science & technology and Intelligence Community from: China, Russia, Cuba, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea. France. Venezuela, and South Korea

Accepted Risks: Espionage'intelligence collection operations against U.S. government, military, science & technology and Intelligence Community from: Taiwan and Saudi Arabia

(S//S1) N. MISSION: Narcotics and Transnational Criminal Syndicates and Networks: Mitigating the impact on U.S. national interests from drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) and transnational criminal syndicates and networks (TCSNs).
Focus Areas:

a. DTOs and associated enabling activities in Afghanistan, Mexico and Colombia that threaten U.S.interests.

b.TCSNs based in (or originating in) Russia that threaten U.S. or allied interests.

c. Money laundering that benefits TCSNs within, into, and out of Colombia and Mexico.

d. Criminal facilitators acting as a nexus between crime/narcotics and terrorism.

e. State-sponsored money laundering by Iran and North Korea. Accepted Risks:

a Drug production/trafficking within the Golden Triangle, China, and North Korea b. TCSNs operating in Central Asia, former Eastern Europe, and Asia,
c Criminal associated money laundering in Afghanistan, and Iraq.

State-sponsored money laundering by Syria.

(S//S1) O. MISSION: Economic Stability/Influence: Ensuring U.S. Economic Advantage and Policy Strategies.
Focus Areas:
Economic stability, financial vulnerability, and economic influence of states of strategic interest to the US: China, Japan, Iraq, and Brazil.

Accepted Risks: Economic stability, financial vulnerability, and economic influence of states of strategic interest to the US: Turkey and India.

(S//S1) P. Mission: Global Signals Cognizance: The core communications infrastructure and global network information needed to achieve and maintain baseline knowledge. Capture knowledge of location, characterization, use, and status of military and civil communications infrastructure, including command, control, communications and computer networks: intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting systems; and associated structures incidental to pursuing Strategic Mission List priorities. Focus of mission is creating knowledge databases that enable SIGINT efforts against future unanticipated threats and allow continuity on economy of force targets not currently included on the Strategic Mission List. Focus Areas:

Global Environment knowledge Signals knowledge.

Network knowledge.

Target knowledge.
Accepted Risks: Degree of maturity may greatly vary by target

(U) II. Strategic Mission List - Enduring Targets

(S//S1) A. MISSION: China: Enabling U.S. policy and avoiding strategic surprise. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective oftrends and developments in China, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions, and capabilities that impact U.S. interests. Such analysis must consider China’s strategic foreign and economic policy trends that impact U S. interests or degrade U.S. influence, the pace, scope, doctrine, and economic sustainability of China’s military modernization, the proliferation of PRC weapons and technology; the prospects for regional conflict or strategic nuclear attack; domestic economic transformation and its consequences for economic, political, and social stability'; subversive threats to U.S. institutions through hostile intelligence and information operations, and the interdependencies among these developments Accepted Risks: Certain domestic problem sets, such as demographic issues; lower-level political institutional growth; civil society' issues such as crime and human rights; environmental problems and planning; and agricultural production and food security'. Also, issues that transcend national boundaries, such as Chinese involvement in international organized crime; energy demand, production, and acquisition; and infectious disease and health.

(S//S1) B. MISSION: North Korea: Enabling the US to counteract North Korea’s development/use/proliferation of WMD, deter its aggression, and shape its behavior while maintaining U.S. readiness for collapse/war. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision-makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of trends and developments in North Korea, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions, and capabilities that impact U S interests and provide warning o f strategic threat. Such analysis must consider the stability of the North Korean regime and how it employs domestic and foreign policies to maintain its grip on power; the relationship between regime stability/behavior and its access to income from illicit activities and weapons proliferation; how Chinese and South Korean “carrots and sticks” enable or constrain North Korean behavior; the impact of the decaying North Korean economy on military' readiness; and how the interplay between U S policy initiatives toward North Korea and all of the above elements affect North Korea’s strategic calculus, the material disposition of its nuclear weapons, and the status of its military Accepted Risks: For domestic issues, risks include non-defense oriented industrial production, demographic issues, and environmental problems. Regarding issues that transcend borders, risks include non-counterintelligence associated ties between North Korean state- sponsored illicit activities and international organized crime institutions and individuals; North Korean agent activity in South Korea and Japan; non-state sponsored corruption and illicit behavior; and North Korean economic refugee flows into China

(S//S1) C. MISSION: Iraq: Enabling Coalition efforts to assist Iraq in establishing a secure, unified, democratic, and sovereign state. Focus Areas: Provide U S decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of trends and developments, assessing Iraq’s progress toward establishing a viable, stable government; securing public order, suppressing insurgent opposition, ensuring reliable access to basic services and commodities; safeguarding strategic resources; and restoring a more sound economic footing. Provide intelligence on relevant factors, forces, leaders, and regional actors to facilitate U.S. Governmentpolicy or actions in support of the Iraqi process and to seize the strategic communications initiative.

Accepted Risks: none

(S//S1) D. MISSION: Iran: Enabling policymakers in preventing Iran from achieving its regional dominance objectives and pursuing policies that impact U.S. global interests. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of regional trends and developments, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions and capabilities that impact U.S. interests. Assess Iran's foreign policy trends and leadership intentions that impact U.S. interests or degrade U.S. influence. Provide warning of Iran's capability to produce a nuclear weapon or its plans to use terrorist surrogates to attack Israel or U.S. forces and interests Assess the regime's progress in initiatives that enhance its pursuit of regional power objectives in the political, economic, energy, and religious or ideological arenas

Provide indicators of regime stability and/or susceptibility to democratic reform initiatives Accepted Risks: Efforts to ascertain the scope of Iran's narcotics'organized crime elements and economic stability/influence.

(S//S1) E. MISSION: Russia: Assuring diplomatic and strategic advantage and avoiding critical surprise. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. policy and decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of developments and trends in Russia, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions, and capabilities that impact U S. interests Such analysis must consider Russia's strategic foreign policy and economic intentions and actions as they pertain to U S interests and influence in the region and globally; the strength of Russia's economy and its impact on Russian power projection capability and strategic positioning; Russia's efforts to regain military strength and stimulate economic growth through the development and sale ofadvanced technology and weaponry', and the role ofWMD, organized crime and counterintelligence in enabling Russian strategic initiatives. Accepted Risks: Certain domestic issues such as demographics, regional politics, development of civil society in the country, and monitoring of low-level military' training activities. Also, issues that transcend national boundaries such as Russia’s plans, intentions and capabilities regarding influence on the former Soviet space

(S//S1) F. MISSION: Venezuela: Enabling policymakers in preventing Venezuela from achieving its regional leadership objectives and pursuing policies that negatively impact U.S. global interests. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of regional trends and developments, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions and capabilities that impact U S interests Assess Venezuela's foreign policy trends and leadership intentions that impact U S

interests or degrade U S. influence Assess Chavez’ progress in his initiatives to pursue regional power objectives in the political, economic, energy, and ideological arenas. Provide indicators of regime stability, particularly in the energy sector. Assess the depth and breadth of Venezuela's relations with countries of strategic concern to the United States, particularly Iran, Cuba, China, and Russia. Accepted R i s k s : E f f o r t s t o a s c e r t a i n t h e s c o p e o f V e n e z u e l a ’s n a r c o t i c s / o r g a n i z e d c r i m e e l e m e n t s a n d e c o n o m i c stability/influence.

Nice to have a record of all this so it's easier to find later. I might write some more stories about lesser known NSSE features that apply to this impending nightmare if I can find the time. For now...


Quick notes: Lesser-known agencies such as the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency and US Northern Command also get very busy in the domestic battlespace indeed. NSSEs are part of their annual activity cycle of exercises and practice operations.

See previously: Nov 2010: USNORTHCOM: Secret 'Trigger' & blueprint for emergency domestic military crackdown plan revealed | - CONPLAN3502 is another story altogether - but it makes you wonder what the NSA connection to NORTHCOM's 'civil disturbance operations' would be.

Feb 2009: Targeting the RNC Welcoming Committee: A Case Study in Political Paranoia | Dissident Voice

Having declared the RNC a National Security Special Event (NSSE), one that derived its “authorization” to target activists and journalists from the top secret 2006 National Security Presidential Directive-46/Homeland Security Presidential Directive-15 (NSPD-46/HSPD-15), local, state and federal law enforcement entities, the U.S. military, intelligence agencies such as the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and corporate partners in the telecommunications industry and elsewhere, preemptively disrupted legal political dissent by a score of protest groups.

Revealing RNC document leaked: RNC '08 Report: Text: Revealing RNC document leaked (ACLU Nov 21 2008)

RNC '08 Report: Police & Security Documents: Powerpoint presentation: National Special Security Events (NSSE) - background involving March 2008.

Digging around - the NGA pulled its old Pathfinder issues. You'll have to look in - January/February Pathfinder 2009

Boston skyline source Creative Commons:

Upper right logo by Dan McCall - -

Cyberpunk art:


Delicious pro-carbon calories for Minnesota politicians could be yours: FREE FOOD from North Dakota coal flacks March 4th

The "Coalition for a Secure Energy Future", a front group for North Dakota government sponsored coal interests, is peddling free food to Minnesota politicians, so if you are feeling hungry on March 4th just head down to McGovern's Pub on West 7th and pretend to sell out your constituents!


Feel free to pass along this image wherever you like, originally from If you want to do something socially useful with the dirty coal food, just bring it up the street to Dorothy Day.

Plenty more info is available here: Bluestem Prairie: Will scheduling woes keep lawmakers away from Coalition for a Secure Energy Future's free food?

I am compiling a bunch more information about the players in this network on, hoping to get that done pretty soon. For network info see: Horse hockey: who's pushing the puck for new Coalition for a Secure Energy Future TV ad?

Barrett Brown Bonus Points; Listening for the Panaudicon; "Highlands Group" Pentagon incubator network for Intelligence kickstarts Google; Four Rogue Lords & UK Snoopers Charter

Roundup post. Barrett Now on the Hook for Stratfor My Post Cyberpunk Indentured Servitude - The Daily Beast [DailyBeast dropped the "you lost some rights" headline apparently as well]. Imprisoned journalist Barrett Brown gets his Declaration of Independence Back, but the +5 snark chainmail didn't do any good:

Federal sentencing agreements add and subtract points based on mysterious, occult rules derived from RolePlayingGames deep in the sweaty basement of the Federalist Society on the Yale campus.


As you can see, both dexterity and Photoshop skilz qualify as "deadly skull" level 63 month sentence:

Wait maybe this is actually the real one.


Yes "Unauthorized Access Devices" is hyperlinks.

via ( Clever: D&D Character Sheet Styled Resume | Geekologie & )

Quinn Norton: We Should All Step Back from Security Journalism — The Message — Medium.


Intelligence community incubated Google: A few pretty large chunks turned up with new work from Nafeez Ahmed via crowdfunding, focused on period around the time Google was developed at Stanford. One of the computer scientists involved disputes part of Ahmed's story (and prepended his PDF source at that URL w a new statement), but the overall scope of the Highlands Forum / Group, along with the CIA's In-Q-Tel venture capital development/incubator operations, reconfigures our understanding of intersecting tech and intelligence worlds.


Highlands Group Overview The Highlands Group is an international consulting network that has been interestingly termed an "intellectual capital venture firm" with extensive experience assisting corporations, organizations, and government leaders frame issues and consider alternatives in the achievement of their objectives. The Highlands Group is a leader in helping clients to explore the edges for new ideas and approaches, create new networks, manage creativity, and succeed. The Highlands Group provides clients with a wide range of services, including: strategic planning, scenario creation and gaming for expanding global markets, and special events planning and assistance. The Highlands Group assists clients in identifying new technologies, ideas, and opportunities. Highlands draws on a network of subject matter experts and facilitates cross-disciplinary gatherings of creative thinkers, working with clients to build strategies for execution. We are a small and agile firm, supported by the strengths of a global network of experts, and provide our clients with personal involvement and dedication. The Highlands Group is headquartered in Washington, D.C. and Carmel Highlands, California, and is supported by a network of companies and independent researchers. It is truly a collaborative effort with great contributions from our sponsors; our Highlands Forum partners for the past ten years at SAIC; and the vast Highlands network of participants in the Highlands Forum, Singaporean Island Forum, the St. Michaels Forum, and the Information Engagement Forum.

Highlands Forum also has Thomas Barnett who provided crucial early post-9/11 backing for "core and gap" geopolitical dichotomy and 'rule setting' military hegemony quests within Pentagon circles. I read his book ages ago Thomas P.M. Barnett's Globlogization - The Pentagon's New Map: War & Peace in the 21st C. - it is important for understanding what framework got installed - as Ahmed digs up this was a transmission belt for Barnett and many others.

This gives earlier knowledge than the more wellknown roots of Google Earth as CIA's In-Q-Tel supported Keyhole -- they bought it partially from In-Q-Tel and turned in to Google Earth Enterprise as a platform for geospatial intelligence (GEO INT).

The powers that be have a strong interest in having one big Google (and Walmart, and foreign militant groups etc) - so it's no surprise that support among key figures - along with funding and special privileges, eventually contracts - to keep the tech scene consolidated.

INSURGE INTELLIGENCE, a new crowd-funded investigative journalism project, breaks the exclusive story of how the United States intelligence community funded, nurtured and incubated Google as part of a drive to dominate the world through control of information. Seed-funded by the NSA and CIA, Google was merely the first among a plethora of private sector start-ups co-opted by US intelligence to retain ‘information superiority.’

The origins of this ingenious strategy trace back to a secret Pentagon-sponsored group, that for the last two decades has functioned as a bridge between the US government and elites across the business, industry, finance, corporate, and media sectors. The group has allowed some of the most powerful special interests in corporate America to systematically circumvent democratic accountability and the rule of law to influence government policies, as well as public opinion in the US and around the world. The results have been catastrophic: NSA mass surveillance, a permanent state of global

PART 1: How the CIA made Google — Medium

PART 2: Why Google made the NSA — Medium

There is plenty to go over here and many links - it is a lot of material to get through, but worth your time. See Clifton - CV - Technical Reports . The Anatomy of a Search Engine.


Ubiquity of web enabled microphones: very much worth reading. If you don't know how the zeroday market works now especially. via - Jan 23 2015

Cross posted at On the Ubiquity of Web-enabled Microphones

Bruce Schneier (computer security expert, now also with the EFF) has remarked: "It's bad civic hygiene to build technologies that could someday be used to facilitate a police state. No matter what the eavesdroppers and censors say, these systems put us all at greater risk."

There are two elements of this emerging technology that prompt me to regard this as bad civic hygiene: the omnipresence of these microphones, and the increasing lack of technological constraint allowing their compromise by state and other actors.

When I say "increasing lack of technological constraint", I am referring to several things: the descriptions of actions by agencies such as NSA, GCHQ, and the FBI who are specifically targeting smartphones (e.g. Tailored Access Operations of NSA and Remote Operations Unit of FBI), the exploding grey market for zero-day vulnerabilities dominated by state actors (especially the United States), and the emerging market for contractors who are developing exploits and software tools which enable to these vulnerabilities to be efficiently utilized. (Vupen in France, Hacking Team in Italy, Endgame Systems in U.S., FinFisher in the U.K., etc.)

Zero-day vulnerabilities are essentially unintentional backdoors that are discovered in various software applications every year by hackers. There are hundreds of these things discovered every year, and they are an unavoidable by-product of the software development cycle. They are a special kind of software bug that can permit a third-party who knows about them to take over a person's device. Sort of like skeleton keys which allow entry into anyone's device that happens to use the operating system or application in which the vulnerability is discovered, and they permit various degrees of power over a person's device. Programmers create exploits known as "zero-day exploits" to make use of these vulnerabilities. A market has emerged whereby these exploits are sold to the highest bidders, which, unsurprisingly, happen to be state actors. An exploit for the iPhone's iOS was sold for $500,000 at one point to an unknown buyer -- the NSA perhaps, but every intelligence agency on the planet is willing to pay top dollar for these things. Parties are willing to pay much more if it seems the exploit is likely to go undetected for some time and if it provides a lot of power over the device (laptop, smartphone, or tablet). However, when a vulnerability is discovered "in the wild" and reported to the software company (as should be the case), the value drops to near zero very quickly as the software company develops a "patch" and sends out security updates to consumers. In any event, the result of these activities over just the past decade is that sophisticated intelligence agencies, and certainly the FBI and NSA, now possess a revolving set of skeleton keys that allow them to reach inside virtually anyone's device on the planet. They don't need a warrant to do this, and they don't need permission from the telecoms or software companies. They don't have to notify any third parties that this is happening. This is a HUGE amount of power for any state actor to have.

Federal law enforcement agencies like the FBI have been clamoring for mandatory backdoors into all these new web-based technologies, but there are fundamental technical issues with integrating a CALEA-type system with the internet (CALEA = Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994). Security experts are suggesting that the feds (including domestic agencies like the FBI) develop teams of hackers to perform wiretaps in the future. They are essentially recommending that the FBI develop their own Tailored Access Operations (an NSA hacking division). Installing a CALEA-type system will fundamentally weaken the security of the internet for everyone, they claim, and it's also not very practical because new technologies develop so rapidly. It will hinder innovation. (From later note: we now know the FBI has already developed their own hacking team with the Remote Operations Unit. Chris Soghoian, principal technologist with the ACLU, discovered the Remote Operations Unit through former contractors' CVs on LinkedIn and put the pieces together.)

See this paper for background:

"Going Bright: Wiretapping without Weakening Communications Infrastructure" | Steven M. Bellovin, Matt Blaze, Sandy Clark, Susan Landau | IEEE Security & Privacy 11:1, Jan/Feb 2013

My comments on the authors' analysis in this paper: OK, fine, mandatory backdoors are unacceptable. But if the feds' teams of hackers develop the power to enact wiretaps and bugs without having to ask for third-party permission, that will facilitate intelligence laundering on a wide scale. Sure, the information/evidence can't be presented in court. But they are more than happy to find other ways to use the information. Numerous examples of this have cropped up in the past year in the press (e.g. Special Operations Division -- a joint operation between DEA, FBI, and NSA -- slides were released a few months after Snowden to the press in a leak, but they were not part of the Snowden dump. Agents are specifically instructed to "recreate" the trail of an investigation to hide the original sources. They are effectively removing any poisonous taint from illegal surveillance by fabricating an independent source and never revealing the original surveillance. I believe they are generally handling narcotics cases, and the ACLU and EFF filed an Amicus brief late last year in a case in SF court as a result of the slides, because they suspected illegal surveillance might be taking place and intelligence was being laundered -- see United States of America v. Diaz-Rivera -- a very recent case, not sure what the outcome was at the suppression hearing. Google: Special Operations Division) ….

The "recreated trails" are also known as "parallel construction." Also here a good solution for analog switch on the mics for cell phones & also antenna & GPS seems a very constructive idea. Good deal. SEE DEA and NSA Team Up to Share Intelligence, Leading to Secret Use of Surveillance in Ordinary Investigations | Electronic Frontier Foundation August 2013.


Besides the NYC Homeland Security grant madness, there is naturally a Rainbow Family in Montana Homeland Security money story now too: Police Seek DHS Grant to Deal With "Extremist" Hippy Group Which Stresses 'Non-violence, Peace and Love' - via Paul Joseph Watson.


Four Rogue Lords & UK Snoopers Charter: Shameless: rogue Lords sneak Snooper's Charter back in AGAIN - Boing Boing && Shameless: rogue Lords sneak Snooper's Charter back in AGAIN - Boing Boing

Barrett Brown's sentencing under shadow of federal falsehoods signals doom for Internet journalism, but at least information == drugs now!

In principle, American Internet Journalism just died horribly.

Fuck it dude, let's go bowling (and keep posting without prior restraint till they drag us all away).


Unfortunately, a confused federal judge in Texas decided to disregard the Supreme Court's round rejection of prior restraint and enhanced Barrett Brown's sentence because copying and pasting a link to a zip file — a file whose contents he only had a loose notion of at the time, and was posted in the context of corporate research — is now apparently a forbidden form of speech.

As best conveyed by Texas mag Dallas Frontburner here, the whole court hearing was surreal and full of strange and new concepts. Quinn Norton is quitting working on information security journalism because of this situation, and she was a defense witness for Brown, explaining the stupidity around credit card numbers to a court that never understood.

It's interesting – indeed horrifying – because almost no one actually looks at the full content of any link they post, ever. If Time Magazine were to post a link to some story that has credit card numbers attached in an invisible Javascript, they'd be fully liable under this new rationale. More likely they'd throw the book at a smaller target than Time.

I don't get if DOJ has a helpdesk for these things or what. Like are you supposed to call the division dedicated to killing modern journalism and check with them how prior restraint works next week? Does it count for giant zip files, invisible javascripts, Pastebins or what?

We are all targets now. If we are to take the DOJ at their word, internet journalism has more or less been made impossible. Responsibility got shifted from publishers (or 'leakers') to observers, researchers and aggregators. Will corporate weasel lawyers forbid high level journalists from linking to things? The chilling effects are open-ended and basically endless, as well as impossible to ascertain without skimming the HTML source code of every page you link to and every autoloading script attached therein.

Even after reviewing the HTML, it will still become more chilling if the proposed White House CFAA revision goes in because of some weird notion about trafficking that they were able to get to stick at Barrett's sentencing.

See: Barrett Brown Obama's War on Hackers | Al Jazeera America Jan 23 2015: What no one in government seems to understand about cases such as Brown’s is that this is simply the way journalism is done today.

Obama's cybersecurity plan: Share a password, click a link, go to prison as a hacker | Computerworld Jan 21 2015: you could be considered a hacker for innocent behavior like sharing your Netflix password with family members or clicking a link that contains unauthorized content.


So this speech would effectively be nuked, for example:


...could make either retweeting or clicking on the above (fictional) link illegal. The new laws make it a felony to intentionally access unauthorized information even if it's been posted to a public website. The new laws make it a felony to traffic in information like passwords, where "trafficking" includes posting a link.

Via the link above ErrataRob Graham explains that security research will be rendered impossible, thereby making it a felony to correctly develop software with any defense:

Obama proposes upgrading hacking to a “racketeering” offense, means you can be guilty of being a hacker by simply acting like a hacker (without otherwise committing a specific crime). Hanging out in an IRC chat room giving advice to people now makes you a member of a “criminal enterprise,” allowing the FBI to sweep in and confiscate all your assets without charging you with a crime.

What Obama Gets Wrong About Cybersecurity Gizmodo last Tuesday.

Also Jan 16 2015: Obama's Computer Security Solution is a Mishmash of Old, Outdated Policy Solutions | Electronic Frontier Foundation

In this ludicrous security panic post-CharlieHebdo, they are also going back to Clipper Chip Redux demanding to be able to backdoor and intercept all encrypted communications, both the White House and Downing Street. This isn't the 1990s, they will have to ban Github and destroy General Purpose Computing soon enough.


On the upside, after the child porn argument fell apart, the government had to claim that information is the same kind of thing as drugs in order to cram the situation into a statutory conspiracy. So well done there, Barrett, you forced them to make speech into drugs. Drugs = Speech. The Supreme Court previously said that Speech = Money, so therefore Drugs = Money. Party on, robed ones.


Barrett Brown Sentenced to 5 Years in Prison in Connection to Stratfor Hack | WIRED

The ruling, in Texas, brings to a close an unusual saga that had the feds initially charging Brown with 12 counts of aggravated identity theft and trafficking in stolen data for simply posting a link in a chat room. That link pointed to a file containing data stolen by members of the hacktivist group Anonymous from the intelligence firm Stratfor, or Strategic Forecasting. The data included company emails as well as credit card numbers belonging to subscribers of Stratfor’s service. The charges against Brown caused a stir when they were first revealed, because Brown hadn’t stolen the data himself, but had simply copied the hyperlink from one public chatroom and posted it to another.



Oh well: Living in America will literally drive you insane. Indeed it is hard to attempt to contort one's mind to whatever the government's reasoning is in Barrett's case. We live under a ruthless system with little regard for logic and nothing but fear and loathing for hyperlinks. Federal prosecutors can blatantly lie in court and face no punishment - indeed they earn merit instead.

Blah. Keep plugging on lolcats. As the radicals know it's a good idea to live as if you are already free; the "prefigurative" application of traditional (and previously protected) legal principles of speech might eventually be respected in America again, but only if masses of writers don't flee from these terrible people after losing this ugly battle on terrible grounds.

There is plenty more that could be said but I will crosspost Barrett's daring allocution statement. I would bet it got him a couple more months from that judge but at least it's honest, and certainly the appropriate spot to bring up prosecutorial misconduct.

Good afternoon, Your Honor.

The allocution I give today is going to be a bit different from the sort that usually concludes a sentencing hearing, because this is an unusual case touching upon unusual issues. It is also a very public case, not only in the sense that it has been followed closely by the public, but also in the sense that it has implications for the public, and even in the sense that the public has played a major role, because, of course, the great majority of the funds for my legal defense was donated by the public. And so now I have three duties that I must carry out. I must express my regret, but I must also express my gratitude. And I also have to take this opportunity to ensure that the public understands what has been at stake in this case, and why it has proceeded in the way that it has. Because, of course, the public didn’t simply pay for my defense through its donations, they also paid for my prosecution through its tax dollars. And the public has a right to know what it is paying for. And Your Honor has a need to know what he is ruling on.

First I will speak of regret. Like nearly all federal defendants, I hope to convince Your Honor that I sincerely regret some of the things that I have done. I don’t think anyone doubts that I regret quite a bit about my life including some of the things that brought me here today. Your Honor has the Acceptance of Responsibility document that my counsel submitted to you. Every word of it was sincere. The videos were idiotic, and although I made them in a manic state brought on by sudden withdrawal from Paxil and Suboxone, and while distraught over the threats to prosecute my mother, that’s still me in those YouTube clips talking nonsense about how the FBI would never take me alive. Likewise, I didn’t have the right to hide my files from the FBI during a lawful investigation, and I would’ve had a better chance of protecting my contacts in foreign countries if I had pursued the matter in the courts after the raid, rather than stupidly trying to hide those laptops in the kitchen cabinet as my mother and I did that morning. And with regard to the accessory after the fact charge relating to my efforts to redact sensitive emails after the Stratfor hack, I’ve explained to Your Honor that I do not want to be a hypocrite. If I criticize the government for breaking the law but then break the law myself in an effort to reveal their wrongdoing, I should expect to be punished just as I’ve called for the criminals at government-linked firms, like HBGary and Palantir, to be punished. When we start fighting crime by any means necessary, we become guilty of the same hypocrisy as law enforcement agencies throughout history that break the rules to get the villains, and so become villains themselves.

I’m going to say a few more words about my regrets in a moment, but now I’m going to get to the unusual part of the allocution. I’m going to make some criticisms of the manner in which the government has pursued this case. Normally this sort of thing is left to one’s lawyers rather than the defendant, because to do otherwise runs the risk of making the defendant seem combative rather than contrite. But I think Your Honor can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. I think Your Honor understands that one can regret the unjust things one has done, while also being concerned about the unjust things that have been done to him. And based on certain statements that Your Honor has made, as well as one particular ruling, I have cause to believe that Your Honor will understand and perhaps even sympathize with the unusual responsibility I have which makes it necessary that I point out some things very briefly.

I do so with respect to Your Honor. I also do it for selfish reasons, because I want to make absolutely certain that Your Honor is made aware that the picture the government has presented to you is a false one. But it is also my duty to make this clear as this case does not just affect me. Even aside from the several First Amendment issues that have already been widely discussed as a result of this case, there is also the matter of the dozens of people around the world who have contributed to my distributed think tank, Project PM, by writing for our public website, Incredibly, the government has declared these contributors—some of them journalists—to be criminals and participants in a criminal conspiracy. As such, the government sought from this court a subpoena by which to obtain the identities of all of our contributors. Your Honor denied that motion and I am very grateful to Your Honor for having done so. Unfortunately the government thereafter went around Your Honor and sought to obtain these records by other means. So now the dozens of people who have given their time and expertise to what has been hailed by journalists and advocacy groups as a crucial journalistic enterprise are now at risk of being indicted under the same sort of spurious charges that I was facing not long ago, when the government exposed me to decades of prison time for copying and pasting a link to a publicly available file that other journalists were also linking to without being prosecuted. The fact that the government has still asked you to punish me for that link is proof, if any more were needed, that those of us who advocate against secrecy are to be pursued without regard for the rule of law, or even common decency.

Your Honor, I understand that this is my sentencing hearing and not an inquiry into the government’s conduct. This is not the place to go into the dozens of demonstrable errors and contradictions to be found in the government’s documentation and the testimony by the government. But it would be hypocritical of me to protest the government’s conduct and not provide Your Honor with an example. I will do so very briefly. At the September 13th bond hearing, held in Judge Stickney’s court the day after my arrest, Special Agent Allen Lynn took the stand and claimed under oath that in reviewing my laptops he had found discussions in which I admit having engaged in, quote, “SWATting”, unquote, which he referred to as, quote, “violent activity”, unquote. Your Honor may not be familiar with the term SWATting; as Mr. Lynn described it at the hearing it is, quote, “where they try to place a false 911 call to the residence of an individual in order to endanger that individual.” He went on at elaborate length about this, presenting it as a key reason why I should not receive bond. Your Honor will have noted that this has never come up again. This is because Mr. Lynn’s claims were entirely untrue. But that did not stop him from making that claim, any more than it stopped him from claiming that I have lived in the Middle East, a region I have never actually had the pleasure of visiting.

Your Honor, this is just one example from a single hearing. But if Your Honor can extrapolate from that, Your Honor can probably get a sense of how much value can be placed on the rest of the government’s testimony in this case. Likewise, Your Honor can probably understand the concerns I have about what my contributors might be subjected to by the government if this sort of behavior proves effective today. Naturally I hope Your Honor will keep this in mind, and I hope that other judges in this district will as well, because, again, there remains great concern that my associates will be the next to be indicted.

I’ve tried to protect my contributors, Your Honor, and I’ve also tried to protect the public’s right to link to source materials without being subject to misuse of the statutes. Last year, when the government offered me a plea bargain whereby I would plead to just one of the eleven fraud charges related to the linking, and told me it was final, I turned it down. To have accepted that plea, with a two-year sentence, would have been convenient—Your Honor will note that I actually did eventually plead to an accessory charge carrying potentially more prison time—but it would have been wrong. Even aside from the obvious fact that I did not commit fraud, and thus couldn’t sign to any such thing, to do so would have also constituted a dangerous precedent, and it would have endangered my colleagues, each of whom could now have been depicted as a former associate of a convicted fraudster. And it would have given the government, and particularly the FBI, one more tool by which to persecute journalists and activists whose views they find to be dangerous or undesirable.

Journalists are especially vulnerable right now, Your Honor, and they become more so when the FBI feels comfortable making false claims about me. And in response to our motion to dismiss the charges of obstruction of justice based on the hiding of my laptops, the government claimed that those laptops contained evidence of a plot I orchestrated to attack the Kingdom of Bahrain on the orders of Amber Lyon. Your Honor, Amber Lyon is a journalist and former CNN reporter, who I do know and respect, but I can assure Your Honor that I am not in the habit of attacking Gulf state monarchies on her behalf. But I think it’s unjust of them to use this court to throw out that sort of claim about Miss Lyon in a public filing as they did if they’re not prepared to back it up. And they’re not prepared to back it up. But that won’t stop the Kingdom of Bahrain from repeating this groundless assertion and perhaps even using it to keep Miss Lyon out of the country. Because she has indeed reported on the Bahraini monarchy’s violent crackdowns on pro-democracy protests in that country, and she has done so from that country. And if she ever returns to that country to continue that important work, she’ll now be subject to arrest on the grounds that the United States Department of Justice itself has explicitly accused her of orchestrating an attack on that country’s government.

Your Honor, this is extraordinary. Miss Lyon isn’t the only journalist that’s been made legally less secure by this prosecution. Every journalist in the United States is put at risk by the novel, and sometimes even radical, claims that the government has introduced in the course of the sentencing process. The government asserts that I am not a journalist and thus unable to claim the First Amendment protections guaranteed to those engaged in information-gathering activities. Your Honor, I’ve been employed as a journalist for much of my adult life, I’ve written for dozens of magazines and newspapers, and I’m the author of two published and critically-acclaimed books of expository non-fiction. Your Honor has received letters from editors who have published my journalistic work, as well as from award-winning journalists such as Glenn Greenwald, who note that they have used that work in their own articles. If I am not a journalist, then there are many, many people out there who are also not journalists, without being aware of it, and who are thus as much at risk as I am.

Your Honor, it would be one thing if the government were putting forth some sort of standard by which journalists could be defined. They have not put forth such a standard. Their assertion rests on the fact that despite having referred to myself as a journalist hundreds of times, I at one point rejected that term, much in the same way that someone running for office might reject the term “politician.” Now, if the government is introducing a new standard whereby anyone who once denies being a particular thing is no longer that thing in any legal sense, that would be at least a firm and knowable criteria. But that’s not what the government is doing in this case. Consider, for instance, that I have denied being a spokesperson for Anonymous hundreds of times, both in public and private, ever since the press began calling me that in the beginning of 2011. So on a couple of occasions when I contacted executives of contracting firms like Booz Allen Hamilton in the wake of revelations that they’d been spying on my associates and I, for reasons that we were naturally rather anxious to determine, I did indeed pretend to be such an actual official spokesman for Anonymous, because I wanted to encourage these people to talk to me. Which they did.

Of course, I have explained this many, many times, and the government itself knows this, even if they’ve since claimed otherwise. In the September 13th criminal complaint filed against me, the FBI itself acknowledges that I do not claim any official role within Anonymous. Likewise, in last month's hearing, the prosecutor accidentally slipped and referred to me as a journalist, even after having previously found it necessary to deny me that title. But, there you have it. Deny being a spokesperson for Anonymous hundreds of times, and you’re still a spokesperson for Anonymous. Deny being a journalist once or twice, and you’re not a journalist. What conclusion can one draw from this sort of reasoning other than that you are whatever the FBI finds it convenient for you to be at any given moment. This is not the rule of law, Your Honor, it is the rule of Law Enforcement, and it is very dangerous.

Your Honor, I am asking you to give me a time-served sentence of thirty months today because to do otherwise will have the effect of rewarding this sort of reckless conduct on the part of the government. I am also asking for that particular sentence because, as my lawyer Marlo Cadeddu, an acknowledged expert on the guidelines, has pointed out, that’s what the actual facts of the case would seem to warrant. And the public, to the extent that it has made its voice heard through letters and donations and even op-eds, also believes that the circumstances of this case warrant that I be released today. I would even argue that the government itself believes that the facts warrant my release today, because look at all the lies they decided they would have to tell to keep me in prison.

I thank you for your indulgence, Your Honor, and I want to conclude by thanking everyone who supported me over the last few years. I need to single out one person in particular, Kevin Gallagher, who contributed to my Project PM group, who stepped up immediately after my arrest to build up a citizens' initiative by which to raise money for my defense, and to spread the word about what was at stake in this case. For the two and a half years of my incarceration, Kevin has literally spent the bulk of his free time in working to give me my life back. He is one of the extraordinary people who have given of themselves to make possible this great and beautiful movement of ours. A movement to protect activists and journalists from secretive and extra-legal retaliation by powerful corporate actors with ties to the state. Your Honor, Kevin Gallagher is not a relative of mine, or a childhood friend. This is only the third time I’ve been in the same room with him. Nonetheless, he has dedicated two years of his life to ensure that I had the best possible lawyers on this case, and to ensure that the press understood what was at stake here. Your Honor, he set up something on whereby I could ask for books on a particular subject and supporters could buy them and have them sent to me. And he spoke to my mother several times a week. During that early period when I was facing over a hundred years worth of charges, and it wasn’t clear whether or not I would be coming home, he would reassure her.

A few weeks ago, he got a job at Freedom of The Press Foundation, one of the world’s most justifiably respected advocacy organizations. And, according to the government, he is also a member of a criminal organization, because, like dozens of journalists and activists across the world, he has been a contributor to Project PM, and the government has declared Project PM to be a criminal enterprise. I think that the government is wrong about Kevin, Your Honor, but that is not why I’ve brought him up. And although I am very glad for the opportunity to express my gratitude to him in a public setting, there are some gifts for which conventional gratitude is an insufficient payment. One can only respond to such gifts by working to become the sort of person that actually deserves to receive them. A thank you will not suffice, and so I am not bringing him up here merely to thank him. Instead, I am using him in my defense. Your Honor, this very noble person, this truly exemplary citizen of the republic who takes his citizenship seriously rather than taking it for granted, knows pretty much everything there is to know about me—my life, my past, my work, the things I’ve done and the things I’ve left undone, to the things I should not have done to begin with—and he has given himself over to the cause of freeing me today. He is the exact sort of person I tried to recruit for the crucial work we do at Project PM. I am so proud to have someone like him doing so much for me.

Your Honor, the last thing I will say in my own defense is that so many people like Kevin Gallagher have worked so hard on my behalf. And having now said all those things that I felt the need to say, I happily accept Your Honor’s decision.

For further updates see /


All the news isn't horrible. Robert MacLean won his TSA / Air Marshal whistleblower case at the Supreme Court, which took many years to achieve. With luck Barrett or the next sacrificial lamb will win in that venue as well.

EXCLUSIVE: Such Critical Infrastructures: FBI feeds Anonymous IRC channels to CIA, Pentagon intel, NSA, NORTHCOM in 2012 Intel memo

An FBI "IIR" intelligence report, dated April 12 2012 entitled "Identification of Internet Relay Chat (IRC) Channels Used by Anonymous Members, as of 12 April 2012" surfaces a dicey realm between US military & intelligence and electronic activists. The full report is at // (Mobile) /// UPDATE: Upvote this post on Reddit & Thanks to YAN for amplifying!

FBI FOIA IRC Chat Channels used by Anonymous by Smiley Hill

A tiny peek into a huge deal: the potential fracas between assorted would-be American military cyberwar commandoes and international (and domestic!) computer activists. This lower-level report (Unclassified//For Official Use Only) (U//FOUO) perhaps is more interesting for its "metadata" rather than thoroughly censored content. Below I also included some other domestic military operations documents below to draw a wider context than just this "cyberwar" stuff, as Ferguson has prompted Gov. Nixon in Missouri to activate the state militia, it's good to read up on what federal legal doctrine for "civil disturbances" is.


Such recipients: In order, it says it is from "DIRECTOR FBI" to:

All FBI field offices

INFO AFOSI DET 331 Andrews AFB Maryland, Headquarters Air Force Office of Special Investigations (also cited in this case )

CDR USSTRATCOM Offutt AFB Nebraska, Strategic Command commander

CDR USTRANSCOM Scott AFB Illinois, United States Transportation Command commander

CDR1STIO Ft Belvoir Virginia, First Information Operations Command commander - (wat? "CDR1STIO" pops in a bunch of other FOIA'd IIRs as well if you googlize it)

CIA WASHINGTON DC - always down for a good time

DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC - yes, this hot info wasn't stovepiped away from rivals

DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON DC - fetching banhammer


DIA WASHINGTON DC - Defense Intelligence Agency which is huge and low profile -


DNI WASHINGTON DC - Director of National Intelligence. (Clapper at the time)

HQ AFOSI Andrews AFB Maryland - Air Force Office of Special Investigations. Tip, if you have some message for them, use their unencrypted contact form to let them know about fraud or etc. What could possibly go wrong? >

HQ NORAD USNORTHCOM INTEL PETERSON AFB - US Northern Command located near Colorado Springs was created as Dept of Homeland Security's military counterpart for "Homeland Defense", an elastic concept extending Pentagon involvement with "critical infrastructure," namely the machinery of major corporations. They also revised "GARDEN PLOT" into CONPLAN 3502 Civil Disturbance Operations," relevant in a Ferguson type context under federal mobilization. (see 2010 story) They were also written into Superman's plot.

JOINT STAFF Washington DC - J2 - Director for Intelligence (J2) on the Joint Chiefs of Staff (now this guy)

JWAC DAHLGREN Virginia - Joint Warfare Analysis Center a "premier science and engineering institution" under Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM), which also hosts Cyber Command. see

NGA HQ Bethesda Maryland. The National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, like DIA, is up to a lot of things off the radar. They have domestic satellite spying (GEO INT) responsibilities at National Special Security Events which require a special domestic military intel privacy waiver. . Big spenders.

NSA FT GEORGE G MEADE Maryland - National Security Agency at the oddly spelled out Ft Meade. I wonder how many land in this inbox - and how many times "George G" is stored in their databases.


USCYBERCOM FT GEORGE G MEADE Maryland - Cyber Command in ur router, sniffin ur packets


BT . … I am fairly sure this is a closing list tag like </UL>


Serial IIR 4 213 4003 12, "WARNING (U): This is an information report, not finally evaluated intelligence. It is being shared for informational purposes but has not been fully evaluated, integrated with other information, interpreted or analyzed. Receiving agencies are requested not to take action based on this raw reporting without prior coordination with the FBI. Unless a conviction in a criminal proceeding occurs, a presumption of innocence exists for any person being reported on in this IIR." Declassification date appears 20370607, as this hot stuff needs to lay low for a couple more decades.

What is an IIR? It is pretty low level stuff for the FBI. For a bit of info see FBI Intelligence Information Report Handbook | Electronic Frontier Foundation. That document interestingly, at the very end includes a statutory info pipeline from Grand Jury operations to various feds. Patriot Act Section 203(a)(1)( C )(i)(V) certainly makes for an industrious star chamber circuit, but they don't want grand jury info going out in IIRs without asking the HQ attorney.

This document was obtained by Smiley Hill via FOIA. Please follow for more smileable FOIAs on a regular basis.


The use of the military - and these contractors in the game now - to police corporate systems labeled as Critical Infrastructure is significant. After all, Missouri Gov Nixon just activated the state militia because of Ferguson.

ferguson-crop2.png ferguson-crop1.png

In the recent FBI writeup freeking out about Ferguson protesters, I took the "critical infrastructure" references to allude to authorizing military activity around corporate electronic assets that might get poked at by angry activists.

“The announcement of the grand jury’s decision … will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure,” the FBI says in an intelligence bulletin issued in recent days. “This also poses a threat to those civilians engaged in lawful or otherwise constitutionally protected activities.”



Background on Executive Order 13636:

See NSA's cybersecurity program to protect critical infrastructure revealed - Military & Aerospace Electronics

Feb 2013: Executive Order -- Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity | The White House

CRS analysis on Executive Order:

Feb 2013: Pentagon will require security standards for critical infrastructure networks -

This is actually a word? Cyberinfrastructure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nov 2012: Cyber Order Puts DHS In Charge Of Oversight, Sets Deadlines « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

USA TODAY: Feb 2013: Cybersecurity executive order fosters information sharing for greater good

As for the legal ramifications of domestic military operations and targeting electronic activists with tools like STRATCOM / CYBERCOM retain for battling Al Qaeda servers or whatever, most people say "But, Posse Comitatus!" In reality a vast area of domestic military operations has been expanded and operated by JAGs. See :

This Domestic Operational Law Cyber Realm has a Handbook, People!


The domestic version of this JAG manual is extremely recommended reading for everyone. See Domestic Operational Law Handbook for Judge Advocates 2011 | Public Intelligence.

Also the newer 248 page Domestic Operational Law Handbook for Judge Advocates 2013 | Public Intelligence is available. You will definitely know moar about WTF is up with weird meshes of civilian/military authority in the US by skimming over this.

PI highlighted a bunch of good 2011 stuff, since we are talking Ferguson anyway, it's worth noting again:

G. The Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plans

Formerly, DoD’s Civil Disturbance Operations (CDO) plan was known as “GARDEN PLOT.” Since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and USNORTHCOM however, DoD has delegated to geographic combatant commanders responsibility for developing CDO Contingency Plans (CONPLANs). These geographic commanders’ CONPLANs provide guidance and direction for planning, coordinating, and executing military operations during domestic civil disturbances.

1. Civil Disturbance Operations Mission

Broadly stated, the CDO mission assists civil authorities in restoring law and order in the United States and its territories.58 This mission statement, while not duplicating the language in the Insurrection Act allowing for the use of federal forces to “suppress” insurrection, provides wide latitude to the President to use federal forces to assist civil law enforcement in “restoring” law and order.

The restoration of law and order must be distinguished from the preservation of law and order. CDO mission statements do not allow the joint civil disturbance task force commander to undertake preservation missions. It is generally agreed that missions to restore law and order include dispersing unauthorized assemblages, patrolling disturbed areas, maintaining essential transportation and communications systems, setting up roadblocks, and cordoning off areas. Care should be taken before a military commander accepts missions that are routine maintenance of civil order.

2. Combatant Commanders’ CONPLANs

The CONPLANs provide the basis for all preparation, deployment, employment, and redeployment of Department of Defense component forces, including National Guard forces called to active federal service, for use in domestic civil disturbance operations, in support of civil authorities as directed by the President. The concept of a civil disturbance operation is multi-phased: Phase 0, Shape; Phase I, Anticipate; Phase II, Respond (deployment can occur in either Phase I or Phase II); Phase III, Operate; Phase IV, Stabilize; and Phase V, Transition (redeployment). Prior to deployment, military forces maintain five preparedness postures, called Civil Disturbance Conditions (CIDCONS) in order to alert and react to potential civil disturbance operations. Changes in the CIDCON level are directed by the JDOMS.

3. The Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. Forces

Civil disturbance operations are conducted in accordance with Appendix L of the Standing Rules of Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. Forces (SRUF). Guidance on how and when forces can use force in a CDO mission are detailed in that annex. Although the CJCSI is classified, Annex L is not and can be shared with our mission partners.

a. Custody and Detention

All apprehensions should be made by the civil police force unless they are not available or require assistance. Military forces have the authority to detain rioters, looters, or other civilians committing criminal offenses. Civilians taken into custody should be transferred to civilian law enforcement authorities as soon as possible.

All members of the force must remember that state and federal criminal law and procedure govern apprehension. Apprehension is justified only on the basis of probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the person to be apprehended committed the offense. Soldiers should not question detainees beyond basic pedigree such as name and address. If formal questioning of an offender is necessary, civilian police should conduct the interview. If civilian police are not available, CID agents or military police may conduct interviews only if the interview is essential to the civil disturbance mission. Actions taken by Soldiers that do not conform to criminal law constitutional standards could jeopardize future prosecution and subject Soldiers and their Commanders to criminal and/or civil liability.

b. Search and Seizure

CDO CONPLANs anticipate that military forces will generally not be involved in searches unless there is “an immediate danger of violence, destruction of evidence, or escape of violent persons unless the search is conducted without delay.” In all other cases, local authorities should conduct searches. When required to perform searches, federal armed forces may conduct warrantless searches under the same constitutional parameters imposed upon law enforcement officials. Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force forces conducting a warrantless search will fully document the reasons for the search as soon as is reasonably convenient.69 Generally these searches are limited to the following incidents.

(1) Stop and Frisk

If there is a reasonable suspicion based upon articulable facts that a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime, that person may be temporarily stopped and questioned about his activities. The stop must be limited in duration to that which is reasonably necessary to investigate the suspicion. If there is a reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts that a person is armed or is carrying instruments of violence and that the individual presents an immediate risk of harm, members of the armed force may conduct a “frisk” (an external “patdown” of the clothing) for weapons. Any weapons found during a frisk may be removed from the individual and seized.

(2) Search Incident to Lawful Apprehension

A person lawfully detained may be searched for weapons or destructible evidence. A search for weapons or destructible evidence may also be conducted in the area where the detained person could reach with a sudden movement to obtain a weapon or destroy evidence.

(3) Exigent circumstances

Military forces assisting law enforcement may make a search without a warrant when they have reason to believe (probable cause) that weapons, objects related to criminal activity, or persons believed to have committed an offense, are in the place to be searched; and they have reason to believe that the delay necessary to obtain a search warrant would result in removal of the weapons or destruction of the objects related to criminal activity. For example, Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force forces may stop and search an automobile without a warrant when there is reason to believe that the automobile contains weapons or instruments of violence and/or contains an individual reasonably believed to have committed violence.

(4) Emergency

Military forces in a civil disturbance operation may make an immediate entry into a building when there is reason to believe that entry is necessary to prevent injury to persons, serious damage to property, loss of evidence, to protect public safety, or to render aid to someone who is in danger.

(5) Hot pursuit

Military forces pursuing a person who they have reason to believe has just committed a serious crime, may enter a vehicle or building believed to be entered by the suspect and search the building or vehicle for the person or any weapons that might be used to further his escape.

(6) Plain View

During the course of otherwise lawful activity, military forces may seize any unlawful weapons or objects related to criminal activity which they observe in plain view. When conducting warrantless searches that require a probable cause determination, military forces can obtain advice from a judge advocate; however, the probable cause determination must be made personally by the individual desiring to conduct the search.

If a search warrant is required, local civil authorities should obtain judicially issued search warrants. If local civilian authorities are not available, judge advocates need to be prepared to provide advice on probable cause to military authorities before they approach a local judge or magistrate for a search warrant.

When feasible, all searches conducted by military personnel will be conducted by two personnel with the actual search performed by someone of the same sex.76 A hand receipt or some similar document should be prepared when items of personal property are seized from an individual.

c. Confinement Facilities

The Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force should not operate a detention facility. Any person apprehended should be turned over to the police for detention. Military correctional facilities cannot be used to detain civilians. If available civilian detention facilities cannot accommodate the number of detained persons who are awaiting arraignment, the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force commander must seek the approval of the SCRAG and Combatant Commander to set up a temporary detention facility.

Should the Task Force be required to operate a detention facility, the detention facility standards and operations should conform, to the maximum extent possible, to current DoD confinement facility operations and will be under the professional supervision and control of Military Police personnel. The establishment and operation of military detention facilities is a temporary expedient and is authorized only until such time as the custody of detained persons can be transferred to civil authorities.

d. Riot Control Agents

Normally, for CDO the deployment and use of riot control agents is allowed as a matter of U.S. policy. However, initial approval authority for its deployment and use may be retained at a level higher than the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force Commander and may require a specific request.

This is not the same as a state-level activation, but it is the doctrine that is crafted at the federal level these days so I think it's pretty relevant to Ferguson.


The federal government hasn't taken kindly to people that expose these types of relationships. Barrett Brown's sentencing just got delayed again - but at least the Barrett Brown Review of Arts and Letters and Jail is awesome. For more info

Return of the Eschatological Scheme: In Islamic State / ISIS geopolitical void, former Egyptian Jihadi Chief Sheikh Nabeel Naiem cites "Clean Break" strategy as overall US/Israeli game plan for Middle East


"This is the Fourth-Generation Warfare, agents instead of soldiers…"

Lending unexpected credence to a hunch, a jihadi legend, Sheikh Nabeel Naiem, claimed on Lebanese television that the "Islamic State" (ISIS/ISIL) situation was congruent with a "Clean Break" document attributed to Cheney, neoconservatives associated with Netanyahu, & the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) crowd.


The overall plan to "balkanize" the Middle East goes back before World War I & in British plans to try to get Greater Turks to rebel against Imperial Russia - today, the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Iran & others play dangerous games in supporting different militant movements. As in 1996, when the Clean Break plan was published, the Netanyahu crowd calls the shots in Tel Aviv. (That was the year he first took office)


The jihadi veteran (who led Egyptian Islamic Jihad from 1988 to 1992, jailed by Mubarak from 1991 until the regime collapse in 2011) helps point out the ISIS overall scheme. He explains how Saudi intelligence configured his financing for terror camps & Afghanistan operations in the 1980s, giving his incredulous jihadi veteran high-level manager perspective to how ISIS started at well-funded camps in Jordan with US (CIA) support. "It wasn't a loose charity" back in his day!


He concludes overall that the plan is to get Sunnis & Shiites fighting each other under the general rubric of a Clean Break-like super-beef among Middle Eastern peoples, therefore a plan must be put up to get people to think clearly and avoid space cadet takfiri thinking, offering alternatives. The whole video is worth watching:

See previously: Jordanian prince discerns suppressed American/Israeli extremist plan to shatter Arab nationalism into statelets: Re-Ottomanization & Oded Yinon revisited | [April 2007]. On March 17 2003 I wrote a post on about 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm' which I think still holds up quite well today including the emphasis on consequences for Syria. I also interviewed Prof. Rashid Khalidi that year touching on 're-ottomanization' & the Clean Break approach - excerpted below. It is weird to peg something like this so long ago and have it continue to roll along 11 years later...

It's hard to judge this guy's credibility - purportedly a high-level coordinator between intelligence agencies and Islamist field rebels, living with Zawahiri & playing a key role assassinating Anwar Sadat.

I have not seen any video illustrating the conflict at this level & over the 40 minutes -- the host tries to draw him to more practical concerns and he later brings it back to explain how Clean Break style tactics are the intent of the West at this time. We can sense this is a priority he wants attention put to. Also he has some laughs about oblivious western journalists reporting individual contributions, missing larger developments completely:


Unfortunately there are many other illustrative videos & materials caught behind the language barrier, fortunately this got translated. I couldn't sort out the orientation of the parent YouTube channel but it seems anti-Salafist.

The full transcript provided by is posted after the Clean Break & Yinon Plan. The TV network is also interesting:  Wiki: "Al Mayadeen (Arabic: الميادين‎; English: Public Squares) is a pan-Arabist satellite television channel launched on 11 June 2012 in Lebanon." According to Wiki the program director is a former head of Al Jazeera Beirut & Iran divisions, and most of the staff are former AJ people, Some see it as more aligned with Iran. Kurt Nimmo did a decent writeup on this in PrisonPlanet as well.

Be sure to also read a 2013 interview with him: Egyptian jihadist leader: Bin Laden blew himself up to avoid capture |

Sitting in a poor apartment beside the archaic Roman Catholic Patriarch in Al Zaher, one of the oldest neighbourhoods in Cairo, Abdul Fattah recalls his history as a leader of Egypt’s Al Jihad organisation, which assassinated the late president Anwar Sadat in 1981, waged a terrorist war in the 1990s and helped give birth to Al Qaida. He was once “the right arm” of Ayman Al Zawahiri, the former Al Jihad leader who now heads Al Qaida. “I am the one who sent Mohammad Atta to Afghanistan,” Abdul Fattah says proudly of the lead pilot of the September 11, 2001, attacks.

Abdul Fattah was released from prison in March 2011, just weeks after the fall of Hosni Mubarak, who had kept him locked up for 20 years. Al Jihad abandoned violence in Egypt years ago. “We were exhausted,” he says, and at 57, he looks it. The former jihadist concedes that Egypt is headed toward Western-style democracy: “It’s the only available option.”


The Clean Break document written in June 1996 was only one in a track of strategic thinking in Israel associated with Vladimir Jabotinsky's Revisionist Zionist movement which led to the Likud Party & Ariel Sharon's movement to expand West Bank, Gaza & Sinai settlements. Another similar proposal, the "Yinon Plan", was publicized in 1982 by sometimes controversial Holocaust survivor, lecturer & writer Israel Shahak. The Yinon Plan touches on conflict in Libya & Sudan -- areas now in upheaval, part of a broader destabilization triggered by NATO's intervention taking out Khaddafi.

A full copy of Clean Break & the June 2013 version of the Yinon plan by Michel Chossudovksy are attached below.


A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm - - By HongPong - Published Mon Mar 17 2003

"...A report about how Israel could transcend the problems with the Palestinians by changing the "balance of power" in the Middle East, and by replacing Saddam. The hawks saw their big chance after 9/11, but they feared that it would be hard to sell a eschatological scheme to stomp out Islamic terrorism by recreating the Arab world. So they found Saddam guilty of a crime he could commit later: helping Osama unleash hell on us." --Maureen Dowd, Bush Ex Machina, NY Times, Mar. 2, 2003.1
"They could not have known that four years later that the working paper they prepared, including plans for Israel to help restore the Hashemite throne in Iraq, would shed light on the current policies of the only superpower in the world." --Akiva Eldar, Perles of Wisdom for the Feithful, Ha'aretz, Oct. 1, 2002.2

This increasingly interesting document was developed like much democratic government policy today, within the machinations of various think tanks. The 'study' was written for Israel's incoming Netanyahu administration in 1996, by a group of 'prominent opinion makers' for the Israeli-American Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies.

What is surely most important about the document is its authorship. The group leader was Richard Perle, a Jewish neoconservative who hand-delivered the report to Netanyahu himself. Today Perle, nicknamed 'The Prince of Darkness,' sits as the chairman of the Defense Policy Board in the Pentagon. He is a director of the increasingly conservative Jerusalem Post and an architect of foreign policy at the American Enterprise Institute. Perle, certainly, is one of the key government advocates of today's war against Iraq. Other authors have become very important in the Bush circle of advisors as well. Douglas Feith is now Undersecretary of Policy at the Pentagon, a top Rumsfeld adviser. Feith is regarded as a strong believer in Jewish settlement of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), and a longtime opponent of Arab-Israeli peace agreements in general.3, 4, 5 David Wurmser is now the director of Middle East studies at the powerful American Enterprise Institute. 6 Meyrav Wurmser now heads up the Center for Middle East Policy at the Hudson Institute. Robert Loewenberg also participated in the study in his position as president of the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies.

These are powerful people in and around the government today. They unquestionably have the president's ear on matters of Middle East policy. Bush's recent Mideast policy speech at the American Enterprise Institute confirmed this.7, 8

The study was written in June 1996, and many political factors have changed around Israel since then. Much of the study involves Syrian 'aggression' and 'challenge' in Lebanon. This situation is different now that Israel has left Lebanon, but the basic hostile arguments towards local regimes remain. Clearly, this document contains advanced strategy about inter-Arab relations, which are conspicuously lacking from the Bush presidency's proclamations towards Iraq and other Middle Eastern issues. The study asserts an understanding of Arab political behavior, and an Israeli right to act with pre-emption to alter the threat from Arab states, regardless of consequences to the United States and the world at large. I am suspicious of the contrast between the Machiavellian strategizing here and the broad generalities about 'democracy' and such waved around by the Bush Administration today.

The basic thrust of the study claims that Israel can 'transcend' its conflict with the Palestinians and Arab world by taking control of its 'strategic environment.' This involves destabilizing various regimes supporting 'terror' and 'challenging' Syria. Overthrowing Saddam Hussein is a "an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right - as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions."

It goes on to outline different ideas towards the goal of a "proud, wealthy, solid, and strong" Israel which will escape the conflict, apparently by rearranging the Arab power structure around Israel, finally rendering the Arabs quiescent to Israeli strategic goals. Perle et al. make unusual arguments over 'claim to the land,' in an argument which today is usually invoked to justify the Jewish settlement of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The settlements are obliquely referred to, as the authors refute the general Oslo principle of 'land for peace,' which usually is taken to mean returning the occupied territories to Arab control.

The study supports a hegemonic view of the military occupation in south Lebanon, let alone the West Bank and Gaza. Relations with the Palestinians are important here, but the references to 'Palestinian controlled areas' or 'Palestinian areas' doesn't reinforce the notion of the West Bank or Gaza as one territorial unit, as the United Nations has demanded. I think this document expresses a normalized view, widespread in 1996 Israel, that the Occupation had been 'solved' and economic growth via settlement expansion was a natural part of the Zionist project. There has been very little public evidence from Perle and his neocon associates to contradict this acceptance of Israeli settlement policy. In the study's remarks on a new spirit for the Zionist project, it is difficult to see that the settlement issue is at all divided from Israeli national interest in any way whatsoever. Ariel Sharon, the undisputed master of settlement construction, finds refuge in this presidency for many reasons.

This document raises some questions.

  • If, in 1996, these neoconservatives believed in Israel "transcending" its conflict, prior to the outbreak of the second Intifada, what do they believe now?
  • As part of the top dozen or so civilian military overseers in the most powerful military in history, what sort of position are they in to make this happen?
  • What impact would a strategy like this have on places like Iran and in particular Syria? What will these men advise be done against 'terrorist' Hezbollah? How will Iran and Syria respond?
  • What understanding of the nation-state are they looking at? Fundamentally, what are these strategists wishing for? Peace?
  • What is the order of things that this document calls for?
In all, it is a fine example of the grand strategic junction we are now finding between Likud interests and Republican interests. Or "Israeli and American interests," as Perle's Jerusalem Post recently put it. Moral "clarity" and the application of military force, oodles of it. I've tried to make some entertaining and enlightening pipelinks which help lead to other information. It's coo like dat.

A Clean Break:
A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies' "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

Israel has a large problem. Labor Zionism, which for 70 years has dominated the Zionist movement, has generated a stalled and shackled economy. Efforts to salvage Israel's socialist institutions-which include pursuing supranational over national sovereignty and pursuing a peace process that embraces the slogan, "New Middle East"--undermine the legitimacy of the nation and lead Israel into strategic paralysis and the previous government's "peace process." That peace process obscured the evidence of eroding national critical mass- including a palpable sense of national exhaustion-and forfeited strategic initiative. The loss of national critical mass was illustrated best by Israel's efforts to draw in the United States to sell unpopular policies domestically, to agree to negotiate sovereignty over its capital, and to respond with resignation to a spate of terror so intense and tragic that it deterred Israelis from engaging in normal daily functions, such as commuting to work in buses.

Benjamin Netanyahu's government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism, the starting point of which must be economic reform. To secure the nation's streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can:

This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT, that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make. The body of the report is the commentary explaining the purpose and laying out the strategic context of the passages.

A New Approach to Peace

Early adoption of a bold, new perspective on peace and security is imperative for the new prime minister. While the previous government, and many abroad, may emphasize "land for peace"- which placed Israel in the position of cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat - the new government can promote Western values and traditions. Such an approach, which will be well received in the United States, includes "peace for peace," "peace through strength" and self reliance: the balance of power.

A new strategy to seize the initiative can be introduced:


We have for four years pursued peace based on a New Middle East. We in Israel cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent. Peace depends on the character and behavior of our foes. We live in a dangerous neighborhood, with fragile states and bitter rivalries. Displaying moral ambivalence between the effort to build a Jewish state and the desire to annihilate it by trading "land for peace" will not secure "peace now." Our claim to the land -to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years--is legitimate and noble. It is not within our own power, no matter how much we concede, to make peace unilaterally. Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, "peace for peace," is a solid basis for the future.

Israel's quest for peace emerges from, and does not replace, the pursuit of its ideals. The Jewish people's hunger for human rights - burned into their identity by a 2000-year old dream to live free in their own land - informs the concept of peace and reflects continuity of values with Western and Jewish tradition. Israel can now embrace negotiations, but as means, not ends, to pursue those ideals and demonstrate national steadfastness. It can challenge police states; enforce compliance of agreements; and insist on minimal standards of accountability.

Securing the Northern Border

Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by:

Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a "Brotherhood Agreement" in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama.

Under Syrian tutelage, the Lebanese drug trade, for which local Syrian military officers receive protection payments, flourishes. Syria's regime supports the terrorist groups operationally and financially in Lebanon and on its soil. Indeed, the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley in Lebanon has become for terror what the Silicon Valley has become for computers. The Bekaa Valley has become one of the main distribution sources, if not production points, of the "supernote" - counterfeit US currency so well done that it is impossible to detect.


Negotiations with repressive regimes like Syria's require cautious realism. One cannot sensibly assume the other side's good faith. It is dangerous for Israel to deal naively with a regime murderous of its own people, openly aggressive toward its neighbors, criminally involved with international drug traffickers and counterfeiters, and supportive of the most deadly terrorist organizations.

Given the nature of the regime in Damascus, it is both natural and moral that Israel abandon the slogan "comprehensive peace" and move to contain Syria, drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction program, and rejecting "land for peace" deals on the Golan Heights.

Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy

We must distinguish soberly and clearly friend from foe. We must make sure that our friends across the Middle East never doubt the solidity or value of our friendship.

Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq - an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right - as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam.

But Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with the threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the 'natural axis' with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other, and Jordan, in the center would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula. For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria's territorial integrity.

Since Iraq's future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq, including such measures as: visiting Jordan as the first official state visit, even before a visit to the United States, of the new Netanyahu government; supporting King Hussein by providing him with some tangible security measures to protect his regime against Syrian subversion; encouraging - through influence in the U.S. business community - investment in Jordan to structurally shift Jordan's economy away from dependence on Iraq; and diverting Syria's attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon.

Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey's and Jordan's actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.

King Hussein may have ideas for Israel in bringing its Lebanon problem under control. The predominantly Shia population of southern Lebanon has been tied for centuries to the Shia leadership in Najf, Iraq rather than Iran. Were the Hashemites to control Iraq, they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Shia retain strong ties to the Hashemites: the Shia venerate foremost the Prophet's family, the direct descendants of which - and in whose veins the blood of the Prophet flows - is King Hussein.

Changing the Nature of Relations with the Palestinians

Israel has a chance to forge a new relationship between itself and the Palestinians. First and foremost, Israel's efforts to secure its streets may require hot pursuit into Palestinian-controlled areas, a justifiable practice with which Americans can sympathize.

A key element of peace is compliance with agreements already signed. Therefore, Israel has the right to insist on compliance, including closing Orient House and disbanding Jibril Rujoub's operatives in Jerusalem. Moreover, Israel and the United States can establish a Joint Compliance Monitoring Committee to study periodically whether the PLO meets minimum standards of compliance, authority and responsibility, human rights, and judicial and fiduciary accountability.


We believe that the Palestinian Authority must be held to the same minimal standards of accountability as other recipients of U.S. foreign aid. A firm peace cannot tolerate repression and injustice. A regime that cannot fulfill the most rudimentary obligations to its own people cannot be counted upon to fulfill its obligations to its neighbors.

Israel has no obligations under the Oslo agreements if the PLO does not fulfill its obligations. If the PLO cannot comply with these minimal standards, then it can be neither a hope for the future nor a proper interlocutor for present. To prepare for this, Israel may want to cultivate alternatives to Arafat's base of power. Jordan has ideas on this.

To emphasize the point that Israel regards the actions of the PLO problematic, but not the Arab people, Israel might want to consider making a special effort to reward friends and advance human rights among Arabs. Many Arabs are willing to work with Israel; identifying and helping them are important. Israel may also find that many of her neighbors, such as Jordan, have problems with Arafat and may want to cooperate. Israel may also want to better integrate its own Arabs.

Forging A New U.S.-Israeli Relationship

In recent years, Israel invited active U.S. intervention in Israel's domestic and foreign policy for two reasons: to overcome domestic opposition to "land for peace" concessions the Israeli public could not digest, and to lure Arabs - through money, forgiveness of past sins, and access to U.S. weapons - to negotiate. This strategy, which required funneling American money to repressive and aggressive regimes, was risky, expensive, and very costly for both the U.S. and Israel, and placed the United States in roles it should neither have nor want.

Israel can make a clean break from the past and establish a new vision for the U.S.-Israeli partnership based on self-reliance, maturity and mutuality - not one focused narrowly on territorial disputes. Israel's new strategy - based on a shared philosophy of peace through strength - reflects continuity with Western values by stressing that Israel is self-reliant, does not need U.S. troops in any capacity to defend it, including on the Golan Heights, and can manage its own affairs. Such self-reliance will grant Israel greater freedom of action and remove a significant lever of pressure used against it in the past.

To reinforce this point, the Prime Minister can use his forthcoming visit to announce that Israel is now mature enough to cut itself free immediately from at least U.S. economic aid and loan guarantees at least, which prevent economic reform. (Military aid is separated for the moment until adequate arrangements can be made to ensure that Israel will not encounter supply problems in the means to defend itself). As outlined in another Institute report, Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, relegislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises - moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

Israel can under these conditions better cooperate with the U.S. to counter real threats to the region and the West's security. Mr. Netanyahu can highlight his desire to cooperate more closely with the United States on anti-missile defense in order to remove the threat of blackmail which even a weak and distant army can pose to either state. Not only would such cooperation on missile defense counter a tangible physical threat to Israel's survival, but it would broaden Israel's base of support among many in the United States Congress who may know little about Israel, but care very much about missile defense. Such broad support could be helpful in the effort to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

To anticipate U.S. reactions and plan ways to manage and constrain those reactions, Prime Minister Netanyahu can formulate the policies and stress themes he favors in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the Cold War which apply well to Israel. If Israel wants to test certain propositions that require a benign American reaction, then the best time to do so is before November, 1996.

Conclusions: Transcending the Arab-Israeli Conflict

TEXT: Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them.

Notable Arab intellectuals have written extensively on their perception of Israel's floundering and loss of national identity. This perception has invited attack, blocked Israel from achieving true peace, and offered hope for those who would destroy Israel. The previous strategy, therefore, was leading the Middle East toward another Arab-Israeli war. Israel's new agenda can signal a clean break by abandoning a policy which assumed exhaustion and allowed strategic retreat by reestablishing the principle of preemption, rather than retaliation alone and by ceasing to absorb blows to the nation without response.

Israel's new strategic agenda can shape the regional environment in ways that grant Israel the room to refocus its energies back to where they are most needed: to rejuvenate its national idea, which can only come through replacing Israel's socialist foundations with a more sound footing; and to overcome its "exhaustion," which threatens the survival of the nation.

Ultimately, Israel can do more than simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict though war. No amount of weapons or victories will grant Israel the peace it seeks. When Israel is on a sound economic footing, and is free, powerful, and healthy internally, it will no longer simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict; it will transcend it. As a senior Iraqi opposition leader said recently: "Israel must rejuvenate and revitalize its moral and intellectual leadership. It is an important -- if not the most important--element in the history of the Middle East." Israel - proud, wealthy, solid, and strong - would be the basis of a truly new and peaceful Middle East.

Participants in the Study Group on "A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000:"

Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader

James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAIS
Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates
Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University

8Bush Channels Neoconservative Vision,
9 Democracy Under Threat,§ionID=22
Perle's social network, as rendered by mystery technology:


Back in college I took every opportunity to get Clean Break info on the record since it was so unusual. My interview with Rashid Khalidi in the Mac Weekly 2003: From the Internet Archives: My 2003 Interview with Rashid Khalidi on Middle East politics, Iraq, Palestine, Neo-Cons & beyond | [Part of this interview was actually cited & footnoted by James Bamford in 2004's "A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies." ]

DF: Noam Chomsky used the phrase ‘re-Ottomanization’ to describe the neoconservative strategy towards the Middle East, which would involve breaking down the strong states into pieces, giving them regional warlords, with Israel as the hegemonic power. Do you believe there’s merit in that viewpoint?

RK: I think that’s what some of them want to do. I’m not sure that has anything to do with US policy. That’s their fantasy. That’s really what the Clean Break strategy, if you read it very carefully, amounts to. And they’ve argued this in other places. It’s not just one document you have to go on. But to what extent that is more than the wet dreams of a bunch of neoconservatives who love Israel—love a certain muscled, hegemonic Israel—is very arguable.

I wonder about the extent to which that has any influence on US policy. I think that the idea that you crush all the strong states in the Arab world and create a situation of total instability is not something that most American policymakers accept. So, you know, maybe some of them are trying to edge crabwise towards that end, but I don’t think in the larger scheme of things it has a whole lot of influence on US policy.
DF: A Frontline interview with Richard Perle was published with the documentary “Truth, War and Consequences.” He talked about the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans, which reviewed intelligence on Iraq prior to the war. Perle said the office was staffed by David Wurmser, another author of the Clean Break document. Perle says that the office “began to find links that nobody else had previously understood or recorded in a useful way.” Were the neo-cons turning their ideology into intelligence data, and putting that into the government?

RK: I can give you a short answer to that which is yes. Insofar as at least two of the key arguments that they adduced, the one having to do the connection between the Iraqi regime and al-Qaeda, and the one having to do with unconventional weapons programs in Iraq, it is clear that the links or the things they had claimed to have found were non-existent. The wish was fathered to the reality. What they wanted was what they found.

It was not just the Office of Special Plans, or whatever. There are a lot of institutions in Washington that were devoted to putting this view forward. Among them, other parts of the bureaucracy, and the vice president’s national security staff.

The vice president’s chief of staff Lewis Libby is a very important member of the neo-con group. He and the vice president have created the most powerful national security staff that anybody has ever had in the office of the vice president. I’ve read published assessments, which say that this is actually more influential than Condi Rice’s staff, the real NSC. This is another center of these views.

And then there are the think-tanks—I would use the word ‘think’ in quotes—like the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institution and so on, all of which are devoted to spreading similar ideas. Basically any fantasy that Chalabi's people brought in, “we have a defector who says,” was turned into gold by these folks.

We now know this stuff, with a few exceptions, to be completely and utterly false, just manufactured disinformation designed to direct the United States in a certain direction. Whether the neo-cons knew this or not is another question, but I believe Chalabi’s people knew it. I would be surprised if some of them didn’t know it.


“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East | Global Research (June 2014)

“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

The Infamous "Oded Yinon Plan". Introduction by Michel Chossudovsky

By Israel Shahak - Global Research, June 13, 2014
Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc. 3 March 2013
Settlements israeli flag

This article was published on Global Research April 29, 2013.

Global Research Editor’s Note

The following document pertaining to the formation of “Greater Israel” constitutes the cornerstone of powerful Zionist factions within the current Netanyahu government, the Likud party, as well as within the Israeli military and intelligence establishment.

According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.” According to Rabbi Fischmann, “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project.

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.

The Zionist project supports the Jewish settlement movement. More broadly it involves a policy of excluding Palestinians from Palestine leading to the eventual annexation of both the West Bank and Gaza to the State of Israel.

Greater Israel would create a number of proxy States. It would include parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the Sinai, as well as parts of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. (See map).

According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya in a 2011 Global Research article, The Yinon Plan was a continuation of Britain’s colonial design in the Middle East:

“[The Yinon plan] is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

File:Greater israel.jpg

Greater Israel” requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states.

“The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation… This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.” (Yinon Plan, see below)

Viewed in this context, the war on Syria is part of the process of Israeli territorial expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand in glove with the US, Turkey and NATO is directly supportive of the Al Qaeda terrorist mercenaries inside Syria.

The Zionist Project also requires the destabilization of Egypt, the creation of factional divisions within Egypt as instrumented by the “Arab Spring” leading to the formation of a sectarian based State dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, April 29, 2013

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Translated and edited by

Israel Shahak

The Israel of Theodore Herzl (1904) and of Rabbi Fischmann (1947)

In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 July 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”


Oded Yinon’s

“A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”

Published by the

Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.

Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982

Special Document No. 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8)

Table of Contents

Publisher’s Note1

The Association of Arab-American University Graduates finds it compelling to inaugurate its new publication series, Special Documents, with Oded Yinon’s article which appeared in Kivunim (Directions), the journal of the Department of Information of the World Zionist Organization. Oded Yinon is an Israeli journalist and was formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. To our knowledge, this document is the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East. Furthermore, it stands as an accurate representation of the “vision” for the entire Middle East of the presently ruling Zionist regime of Begin, Sharon and Eitan. Its importance, hence, lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare which it presents.


The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation.


This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme. This theme has been documented on a very modest scale in the AAUG publication, Israel’s Sacred Terrorism (1980), by Livia Rokach. Based on the memoirs of Moshe Sharett, former Prime Minister of Israel, Rokach’s study documents, in convincing detail, the Zionist plan as it applies to Lebanon and as it was prepared in the mid-fifties.


The first massive Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1978 bore this plan out to the minutest detail. The second and more barbaric and encompassing Israeli invasion of Lebanon on June 6, 1982, aims to effect certain parts of this plan which hopes to see not only Lebanon, but Syria and Jordan as well, in fragments. This ought to make mockery of Israeli public claims regarding their desire for a strong and independent Lebanese central government. More accurately, they want a Lebanese central government that sanctions their regional imperialist designs by signing a peace treaty with them. They also seek acquiescence in their designs by the Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian and other Arab governments as well as by the Palestinian people. What they want and what they are planning for is not an Arab world, but a world of Arab fragments that is ready to succumb to Israeli hegemony. Hence, Oded Yinon in his essay, “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980′s,” talks about “far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967″ that are created by the “very stormy situation [that] surrounds Israel.”


The Zionist policy of displacing the Palestinians from Palestine is very much an active policy, but is pursued more forcefully in times of conflict, such as in the 1947-1948 war and in the 1967 war. An appendix entitled ”Israel Talks of a New Exodus” is included in this publication to demonstrate past Zionist dispersals of Palestinians from their homeland and to show, besides the main Zionist document we present, other Zionist planning for the de-Palestinization of Palestine.


It is clear from the Kivunim document, published in February, 1982, that the “far-reaching opportunities” of which Zionist strategists have been thinking are the same “opportunities” of which they are trying to convince the world and which they claim were generated by their June, 1982 invasion. It is also clear that the Palestinians were never the sole target of Zionist plans, but the priority target since their viable and independent presence as a people negates the essence of the Zionist state. Every Arab state, however, especially those with cohesive and clear nationalist directions, is a real target sooner or later.


Contrasted with the detailed and unambiguous Zionist strategy elucidated in this document, Arab and Palestinian strategy, unfortunately, suffers from ambiguity and incoherence. There is no indication that Arab strategists have internalized the Zionist plan in its full ramifications. Instead, they react with incredulity and shock whenever a new stage of it unfolds. This is apparent in Arab reaction, albeit muted, to the Israeli siege of Beirut. The sad fact is that as long as the Zionist strategy for the Middle East is not taken seriously Arab reaction to any future siege of other Arab capitals will be the same.

Khalil Nakhleh

July 23, 1982


by Israel Shahak


The following essay represents, in my opinion, the accurate and detailed plan of the present Zionist regime (of Sharon and Eitan) for the Middle East which is based on the division of the whole area into small states, and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states. I will comment on the military aspect of this plan in a concluding note. Here I want to draw the attention of the readers to several important points:


1. The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze’ev Schiff, the military correspondent of Ha’aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about the “best” that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: “The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi’ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part” (Ha’aretz 6/2/1982). Actually, this aspect of the plan is very old.


2. The strong connection with Neo-Conservative thought in the USA is very prominent, especially in the author’s notes. But, while lip service is paid to the idea of the “defense of the West” from Soviet power, the real aim of the author, and of the present Israeli establishment is clear: To make an Imperial Israel into a world power. In other words, the aim of Sharon is to deceive the Americans after he has deceived all the rest.


3. It is obvious that much of the relevant data, both in the notes and in the text, is garbled or omitted, such as the financial help of the U.S. to Israel. Much of it is pure fantasy. But, the plan is not to be regarded as not influential, or as not capable of realization for a short time. The plan follows faithfully the geopolitical ideas current in Germany of 1890-1933, which were swallowed whole by Hitler and the Nazi movement, and determined their aims for East Europe. Those aims, especially the division of the existing states, were carried out in 1939-1941, and only an alliance on the global scale prevented their consolidation for a period of time.


The notes by the author follow the text. To avoid confusion, I did not add any notes of my own, but have put the substance of them into this foreward and the conclusion at the end. I have, however, emphasized some portions of the text.

Israel Shahak

June 13, 1982

A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties

by Oded Yinon

This essay originally appeared in Hebrew in KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism; Issue No, 14–Winter, 5742, February 1982, Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee: Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor, Elieser Schweid. Published by the Department of Publicity/The World Zionist Organization, Jerusalem.


At the outset of the nineteen eighties the State of Israel is in need of a new perspective as to its place, its aims and national targets, at home and abroad. This need has become even more vital due to a number of central processes which the country, the region and the world are undergoing. We are living today in the early stages of a new epoch in human history which is not at all similar to its predecessor, and its characteristics are totally different from what we have hitherto known. That is why we need an understanding of the central processes which typify this historical epoch on the one hand, and on the other hand we need a world outlook and an operational strategy in accordance with the new conditions. The existence, prosperity and steadfastness of the Jewish state will depend upon its ability to adopt a new framework for its domestic and foreign affairs.


This epoch is characterized by several traits which we can already diagnose, and which symbolize a genuine revolution in our present lifestyle. The dominant process is the breakdown of the rationalist, humanist outlook as the major cornerstone supporting the life and achievements of Western civilization since the Renaissance. The political, social and economic views which have emanated from this foundation have been based on several “truths” which are presently disappearing–for example, the view that man as an individual is the center of the universe and everything exists in order to fulfill his basic material needs. This position is being invalidated in the present when it has become clear that the amount of resources in the cosmos does not meet Man’s requirements, his economic needs or his demographic constraints. In a world in which there are four billion human beings and economic and energy resources which do not grow proportionally to meet the needs of mankind, it is unrealistic to expect to fulfill the main requirement of Western Society, 1 i.e., the wish and aspiration for boundless consumption. The view that ethics plays no part in determining the direction Man takes, but rather his material needs do–that view is becoming prevalent today as we see a world in which nearly all values are disappearing. We are losing the ability to assess the simplest things, especially when they concern the simple question of what is Good and what is Evil.


The vision of man’s limitless aspirations and abilities shrinks in the face of the sad facts of life, when we witness the break-up of world order around us. The view which promises liberty and freedom to mankind seems absurd in light of the sad fact that three fourths of the human race lives under totalitarian regimes. The views concerning equality and social justice have been transformed by socialism and especially by Communism into a laughing stock. There is no argument as to the truth of these two ideas, but it is clear that they have not been put into practice properly and the majority of mankind has lost the liberty, the freedom and the opportunity for equality and justice. In this nuclear world in which we are (still) living in relative peace for thirty years, the concept of peace and coexistence among nations has no meaning when a superpower like the USSR holds a military and political doctrine of the sort it has: that not only is a nuclear war possible and necessary in order to achieve the ends of Marxism, but that it is possible to survive after it, not to speak of the fact that one can be victorious in it.2


The essential concepts of human society, especially those of the West, are undergoing a change due to political, military and economic transformations. Thus, the nuclear and conventional might of the USSR has transformed the epoch that has just ended into the last respite before the great saga that will demolish a large part of our world in a multi-dimensional global war, in comparison with which the past world wars will have been mere child’s play. The power of nuclear as well as of conventional weapons, their quantity, their precision and quality will turn most of our world upside down within a few years, and we must align ourselves so as to face that in Israel. That is, then, the main threat to our existence and that of the Western world. 3 The war over resources in the world, the Arab monopoly on oil, and the need of the West to import most of its raw materials from the Third World, are transforming the world we know, given that one of the major aims of the USSR is to defeat the West by gaining control over the gigantic resources in the Persian Gulf and in the southern part of Africa, in which the majority of world minerals are located. We can imagine the dimensions of the global confrontation which will face us in the future.


The Gorshkov doctrine calls for Soviet control of the oceans and mineral rich areas of the Third World. That together with the present Soviet nuclear doctrine which holds that it is possible to manage, win and survive a nuclear war, in the course of which the West’s military might well be destroyed and its inhabitants made slaves in the service of Marxism-Leninism, is the main danger to world peace and to our own existence. Since 1967, the Soviets have transformed Clausewitz’ dictum into “War is the continuation of policy in nuclear means,” and made it the motto which guides all their policies. Already today they are busy carrying out their aims in our region and throughout the world, and the need to face them becomes the major element in our country’s security policy and of course that of the rest of the Free World. That is our major foreign challenge.4


The Arab Moslem world, therefore, is not the major strategic problem which we shall face in the Eighties, despite the fact that it carries the main threat against Israel, due to its growing military might. This world, with its ethnic minorities, its factions and internal crises, which is astonishingly self-destructive, as we can see in Lebanon, in non-Arab Iran and now also in Syria, is unable to deal successfully with its fundamental problems and does not therefore constitute a real threat against the State of Israel in the long run, but only in the short run where its immediate military power has great import. In the long run, this world will be unable to exist within its present framework in the areas around us without having to go through genuine revolutionary changes. The Moslem Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners (France and Britain in the Nineteen Twenties), without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. It was arbitrarily divided into 19 states, all made of combinations of minorites and ethnic groups which are hostile to one another, so that every Arab Moslem state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging. 5 Most of the Arabs, 118 million out of 170 million, live in Africa, mostly in Egypt (45 million today).


Apart from Egypt, all the Maghreb states are made up of a mixture of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers. In Algeria there is already a civil war raging in the Kabile mountains between the two nations in the country. Morocco and Algeria are at war with each other over Spanish Sahara, in addition to the internal struggle in each of them. Militant Islam endangers the integrity of Tunisia and Qaddafi organizes wars which are destructive from the Arab point of view, from a country which is sparsely populated and which cannot become a powerful nation. That is why he has been attempting unifications in the past with states that are more genuine, like Egypt and Syria. Sudan, the most torn apart state in the Arab Moslem world today is built upon four groups hostile to each other, an Arab Moslem Sunni minority which rules over a majority of non-Arab Africans, Pagans, and Christians. In Egypt there is a Sunni Moslem majority facing a large minority of Christians which is dominant in upper Egypt: some 7 million of them, so that even Sadat, in his speech on May 8, expressed the fear that they will want a state of their own, something like a “second” Christian Lebanon in Egypt.


All the Arab States east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with inner conflict even more than those of the Maghreb. Syria is fundamentally no different from Lebanon except in the strong military regime which rules it. But the real civil war taking place nowadays between the Sunni majority and the Shi’ite Alawi ruling minority (a mere 12% of the population) testifies to the severity of the domestic trouble.


Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi’ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren’t for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq’s future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past or of Syria today. The seeds of inner conflict and civil war are apparent today already, especially after the rise of Khomeini to power in Iran, a leader whom the Shi’ites in Iraq view as their natural leader.


All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil. In Kuwait, the Kuwaitis constitute only a quarter of the population. In Bahrain, the Shi’ites are the majority but are deprived of power. In the UAE, Shi’ites are once again the majority but the Sunnis are in power. The same is true of Oman and North Yemen. Even in the Marxist South Yemen there is a sizable Shi’ite minority. In Saudi Arabia half the population is foreign, Egyptian and Yemenite, but a Saudi minority holds power.


Jordan is in reality Palestinian, ruled by a Trans-Jordanian Bedouin minority, but most of the army and certainly the bureaucracy is now Palestinian. As a matter of fact Amman is as Palestinian as Nablus. All of these countries have powerful armies, relatively speaking. But there is a problem there too. The Syrian army today is mostly Sunni with an Alawi officer corps, the Iraqi army Shi’ite with Sunni commanders. This has great significance in the long run, and that is why it will not be possible to retain the loyalty of the army for a long time except where it comes to the only common denominator: The hostility towards Israel, and today even that is insufficient.


Alongside the Arabs, split as they are, the other Moslem states share a similar predicament. Half of Iran’s population is comprised of a Persian speaking group and the other half of an ethnically Turkish group. Turkey’s population comprises a Turkish Sunni Moslem majority, some 50%, and two large minorities, 12 million Shi’ite Alawis and 6 million Sunni Kurds. In Afghanistan there are 5 million

Shi’ites who constitute one third of the population. In Sunni Pakistan there are 15 million Shi’ites who endanger the existence of that state.


This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems.


In this giant and fractured world there are a few wealthy groups and a huge mass of poor people. Most of the Arabs have an average yearly income of 300 dollars. That is the situation in Egypt, in most of the Maghreb countries except for Libya, and in Iraq. Lebanon is torn apart and its economy is falling to pieces. It is a state in which there is no centralized power, but only 5 de facto sovereign authorities (Christian in the north, supported by the Syrians and under the rule of the Franjieh clan, in the East an area of direct Syrian conquest, in the center a Phalangist controlled Christian enclave, in the south and up to the Litani river a mostly Palestinian region controlled by the PLO and Major Haddad’s state of Christians and half a million Shi’ites). Syria is in an even graver situation and even the assistance she will obtain in the future after the unification with Libya will not be sufficient for dealing with the basic problems of existence and the maintenance of a large army. Egypt is in the worst situation: Millions are on the verge of hunger, half the labor force is unemployed, and housing is scarce in this most densely populated area of the world. Except for the army, there is not a single department operating efficiently and the state is in a permanent state of bankruptcy and depends entirely on American foreign assistance granted since the peace.6


In the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Egypt there is the largest accumulation of money and oil in the world, but those enjoying it are tiny elites who lack a wide base of support and self-confidence, something that no army can guarantee. 7 The Saudi army with all its equipment cannot defend the regime from real dangers at home or abroad, and what took place in Mecca in 1980 is only an example. A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it, problems, risks but also far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967. Chances are that opportunities missed at that time will become achievable in the Eighties to an extent and along dimensions which we cannot even imagine today.


The “peace” policy and the return of territories, through a dependence upon the US, precludes the realization of the new option created for us. Since 1967, all the governments of Israel have tied our national aims down to narrow political needs, on the one hand, and on the other to destructive opinions at home which neutralized our capacities both at home and abroad. Failing to take steps towards the Arab population in the new territories, acquired in the course of a war forced upon us, is the major strategic error committed by Israel on the morning after the Six Day War. We could have saved ourselves all the bitter and dangerous conflict since then if we had given Jordan to the Palestinians who live west of the Jordan river. By doing that we would have neutralized the Palestinian problem which we nowadays face, and to which we have found solutions that are really no solutions at all, such as territorial compromise or autonomy which amount, in fact, to the same thing. 8 Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state.


In the course of the Nineteen Eighties, the State of Israel will have to go through far-reaching changes in its political and economic regime domestically, along with radical changes in its foreign policy, in order to stand up to the global and regional challenges of this new epoch. The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil. 9 The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs.


(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979. 10


Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect. The direct option is the less realistic one because of the nature of the regime and government in Israel as well as the wisdom of Sadat who obtained our withdrawal from Sinai, which was, next to the war of 1973, his major achievement since he took power. Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-

Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day. 11


The myth of Egypt as the strong leader of the Arab World was demolished back in 1956 and definitely did not survive 1967, but our policy, as in the return of the Sinai, served to turn the myth into “fact.” In reality, however, Egypt’s power in proportion both to Israel alone and to the rest of the Arab World has gone down about 50 percent since 1967. Egypt is no longer the leading political power in the Arab World and is economically on the verge of a crisis. Without foreign assistance the crisis will come tomorrow. 12 In the short run, due to the return of the Sinai, Egypt will gain several advantages at our expense, but only in the short run until 1982, and that will not change the balance of power to its benefit, and will possibly bring about its downfall. Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.


Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt. The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run. 13


The Western front, which on the surface appears more problematic, is in fact less complicated than the Eastern front, in which most of the events that make the headlines have been taking place recently. Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today. 14


Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization. 15


The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run, the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure. 16


Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short run but not in the long run, for it does not constitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution, the termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians in the short run.


There is no chance that Jordan will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time, and Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority. Changing the regime east of the river will also cause the termination of the problem of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under conditions of peace, emigration from the territories and economic demographic freeze in them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to be active in order to accelerate this process in the nearest future. The autonomy plan ought also to be rejected, as well as any compromise or division of the territories for, given the plans of the PLO and those of the Israeli Arabs themselves, the Shefa’amr plan of September 1980, it is not possible to go on living in this country in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river. Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan. 17


Within Israel the distinction between the areas of ’67 and the territories beyond them, those of ’48, has always been meaningless for Arabs and nowadays no longer has any significance for us. The problem should be seen in its entirety without any divisions as of ’67. It should be clear, under any future political situation or military constellation, that the solution of the problem of the indigenous Arabs will come only when they recognize the existence of Israel in secure borders up to the Jordan river and beyond it, as our existential need in this difficult epoch, the nuclear epoch which we shall soon enter. It is no longer possible to live with three fourths of the Jewish population on the dense shoreline which is so dangerous in a nuclear epoch.


Dispersal of the population is therefore a domestic strategic aim of the highest order; otherwise, we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence, and if we do not become the majority in the mountain areas, we shall not rule in the country and we shall be like the Crusaders, who lost this country which was not theirs anyhow, and in which they were foreigners to begin with. Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today. Taking hold of the mountain watershed from Beersheba to the Upper Galilee is the national aim generated by the major strategic consideration which is settling the mountainous part of the country that is empty of Jews today. l8


Realizing our aims on the Eastern front depends first on the realization of this internal strategic objective. The transformation of the political and economic structure, so as to enable the realization of these strategic aims, is the key to achieving the entire change. We need to change from a centralized economy in which the government is extensively involved, to an open and free market as well as to switch from depending upon the U.S. taxpayer to developing, with our own hands, of a genuine productive economic infrastructure. If we are not able to make this change freely and voluntarily, we shall be forced into it by world developments, especially in the areas of economics, energy, and politics, and by our own growing isolation. l9


From a military and strategic point of view, the West led by the U.S. is unable to withstand the global pressures of the USSR throughout the world, and Israel must therefore stand alone in the Eighties, without any foreign assistance, military or economic, and this is within our capacities today, with no compromises. 20 Rapid changes in the world will also bring about a change in the condition of world Jewry to which Israel will become not only a last resort but the only existential option. We cannot assume that U.S. Jews, and the communities of Europe and Latin America will continue to exist in the present form in the future. 21


Our existence in this country itself is certain, and there is no force that could remove us from here either forcefully or by treachery (Sadat’s method). Despite the difficulties of the mistaken “peace” policy and the problem of the Israeli Arabs and those of the territories, we can effectively deal with these problems in the foreseeable future.



Three important points have to be clarified in order to be able to understand the significant possibilities of realization of this Zionist plan for the Middle East, and also why it had to be published.


The Military Background of The Plan

The military conditions of this plan have not been mentioned above, but on the many occasions where something very like it is being “explained” in closed meetings to members of the Israeli Establishment, this point is clarified. It is assumed that the Israeli military forces, in all their branches, are insufficient for the actual work of occupation of such wide territories as discussed above. In fact, even in times of intense Palestinian “unrest” on the West Bank, the forces of the Israeli Army are stretched out too much. The answer to that is the method of ruling by means of “Haddad forces” or of “Village Associations” (also known as “Village Leagues”): local forces under “leaders” completely dissociated from the population, not having even any feudal or party structure (such as the Phalangists have, for example). The “states” proposed by Yinon are “Haddadland” and “Village Associations,” and their armed forces will be, no doubt, quite similar. In addition, Israeli military superiority in such a situation will be much greater than it is even now, so that any movement of revolt will be “punished” either by mass humiliation as in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or by bombardment and obliteration of cities, as in Lebanon now (June 1982), or by both. In order to ensure this, the plan, as explained orally, calls for the establishment of Israeli garrisons in focal places between the mini states, equipped with the necessary mobile destructive forces. In fact, we have seen something like this in Haddadland and we will almost certainly soon see the first example of this system functioning either in South Lebanon or in all Lebanon.


It is obvious that the above military assumptions, and the whole plan too, depend also on the Arabs continuing to be even more divided than they are now, and on the lack of any truly progressive mass movement among them. It may be that those two conditions will be removed only when the plan will be well advanced, with consequences which can not be foreseen.


Why it is necessary to publish this in Israel?

The reason for publication is the dual nature of the Israeli-Jewish society: A very great measure of freedom and democracy, specially for Jews, combined with expansionism and racist discrimination. In such a situation the Israeli-Jewish elite (for the masses follow the TV and Begin’s speeches) has to be persuaded. The first steps in the process of persuasion are oral, as indicated above, but a time comes in which it becomes inconvenient. Written material must be produced for the benefit of the more stupid “persuaders” and “explainers” (for example medium-rank officers, who are, usually, remarkably stupid). They then “learn it,” more or less, and preach to others. It should be remarked that Israel, and even the Yishuv from the Twenties, has always functioned in this way. I myself well remember how (before I was “in opposition”) the necessity of war with was explained to me and others a year before the 1956 war, and the necessity of conquering “the rest of Western Palestine when we will have the opportunity” was explained in the years 1965-67.


Why is it assumed that there is no special risk from the outside in the publication of such plans?

Such risks can come from two sources, so long as the principled opposition inside Israel is very weak (a situation which may change as a consequence of the war on Lebanon) : The Arab World, including the Palestinians, and the United States. The Arab World has shown itself so far quite incapable of a detailed and rational analysis of Israeli-Jewish society, and the Palestinians have been, on the average, no better than the rest. In such a situation, even those who are shouting about the dangers of Israeli expansionism (which are real enough) are doing this not because of factual and detailed knowledge, but because of belief in myth. A good example is the very persistent belief in the non-existent writing on the wall of the Knesset of the Biblical verse about the Nile and the Euphrates. Another example is the persistent, and completely false declarations, which were made by some of the most important Arab leaders, that the two blue stripes of the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates, while in fact they are taken from the stripes of the Jewish praying shawl (Talit). The Israeli specialists assume that, on the whole, the Arabs will pay no attention to their serious discussions of the future, and the Lebanon war has proved them right. So why should they not continue with their old methods of persuading other Israelis?


In the United States a very similar situation exists, at least until now. The more or less serious commentators take their information about Israel, and much of their opinions about it, from two sources. The first is from articles in the “liberal” American press, written almost totally by Jewish admirers of Israel who, even if they are critical of some aspects of the Israeli state, practice loyally what Stalin used to call “the constructive criticism.” (In fact those among them who claim also to be “Anti-Stalinist” are in reality more Stalinist than Stalin, with Israel being their god which has not yet failed). In the framework of such critical worship it must be assumed that Israel has always “good intentions” and only “makes mistakes,” and therefore such a plan would not be a matter for discussion–exactly as the Biblical genocides committed by Jews are not mentioned. The other source of information, The Jerusalem Post, has similar policies. So long, therefore, as the situation exists in which Israel is really a “closed society” to the rest of the world, because the world wants to close its eyes, the publication and even the beginning of the realization of such a plan is realistic and feasible.

Israel Shahak

June 17, 1982 Jerusalem

About the Translator

Israel Shahak is a professor of organic chemistly at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the chairman of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights. He published The Shahak Papers, collections of key articles from the Hebrew press, and is the author of numerous articles and books, among them Non-Jew in the Jewish State. His latest book is Israel’s Global Role: Weapons for Repression, published by the AAUG in 1982. Israel Shahak: (1933-2001)


1. American Universities Field Staff. Report No.33, 1979. According to this research, the population of the world will be 6 billion in the year 2000. Today’s world population can be broken down as follows: China, 958 million; India, 635 million; USSR, 261 million; U.S., 218 million Indonesia, 140 million; Brazil and Japan, 110 million each. According to the figures of the U.N. Population Fund for 1980, there will be, in 2000, 50 cities with a population of over 5 million each. The population ofthp;Third World will then be 80% of the world population. According to Justin Blackwelder, U.S. Census Office chief, the world population will not reach 6 billion because of hunger.

2. Soviet nuclear policy has been well summarized by two American Sovietologists: Joseph D. Douglas and Amoretta M. Hoeber, Soviet Strategy for Nuclear War, (Stanford, Ca., Hoover Inst. Press, 1979). In the Soviet Union tens and hundreds of articles and books are published each year which detail the Soviet doctrine for nuclear war and there is a great deal of documentation translated into English and published by the U.S. Air Force,including USAF: Marxism-Leninism on War and the Army: The Soviet View, Moscow, 1972; USAF: The Armed Forces of the Soviet State. Moscow, 1975, by Marshal A. Grechko. The basic Soviet approach to the matter is presented in the book by Marshal Sokolovski published in 1962 in Moscow: Marshal V. D. Sokolovski, Military Strategy, Soviet Doctrine and Concepts(New York, Praeger, 1963).

3. A picture of Soviet intentions in various areas of the world can be drawn from the book by Douglas and Hoeber, ibid. For additional material see: Michael Morgan, “USSR’s Minerals as Strategic Weapon in the Future,” Defense and Foreign Affairs, Washington, D.C., Dec. 1979.

4. Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov, Sea Power and the State, London, 1979. Morgan, loc. cit. General George S. Brown (USAF) C-JCS, Statement to the Congress on the Defense Posture of the United States For Fiscal Year 1979, p. 103; National Security Council, Review of Non-Fuel Mineral Policy, (Washington, D.C. 1979,); Drew Middleton, The New York Times, (9/15/79); Time, 9/21/80.

5. Elie Kedourie, “The End of the Ottoman Empire,” Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No.4, 1968.

6. Al-Thawra, Syria 12/20/79, Al-Ahram,12/30/79, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79. 55% of the Arabs are 20 years old and younger, 70% of the Arabs live in Africa, 55% of the Arabs under 15 are unemployed, 33% live in urban areas, Oded Yinon, “Egypt’s Population Problem,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No. 15, Spring 1980.

7. E. Kanovsky, “Arab Haves and Have Nots,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No.1, Fall 1976, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79.

8. In his book, former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said that the Israeli government is in fact responsible for the design of American policy in the Middle East, after June ’67, because of its own indecisiveness as to the future of the territories and the inconsistency in its positions since it established the background for Resolution 242 and certainly twelve years later for the Camp David agreements and the peace treaty with Egypt. According to Rabin, on June 19, 1967, President Johnson sent a letter to Prime Minister Eshkol in which he did not mention anything about withdrawal from the new territories but exactly on the same day the government resolved to return territories in exchange for peace. After the Arab resolutions in Khartoum (9/1/67) the government altered its position but contrary to its decision of June 19, did not notify the U.S. of the alteration and the U.S. continued to support 242 in the Security Council on the basis of its earlier understanding that Israel is prepared to return territories. At that point it was already too late to change the U.S. position and Israel’s policy. From here the way was opened to peace agreements on the basis of 242 as was later agreed upon in Camp David. See Yitzhak Rabin. Pinkas Sherut, (Ma’ariv 1979) pp. 226-227.

9. Foreign and Defense Committee Chairman Prof. Moshe Arens argued in an interview (Ma ‘ariv,10/3/80) that the Israeli government failed to prepare an economic plan before the Camp David agreements and was itself surprised by the cost of the agreements, although already during the negotiations it was possible to calculate the heavy price and the serious error involved in not having prepared the economic grounds for peace.

The former Minister of Treasury, Mr. Yigal Holwitz, stated that if it were not for the withdrawal from the oil fields, Israel would have a positive balance of payments (9/17/80). That same person said two years earlier that the government of Israel (from which he withdrew) had placed a noose around his neck. He was referring to the Camp David agreements (Ha’aretz, 11/3/78). In the course of the whole peace negotiations neither an expert nor an economics advisor was consulted, and the Prime Minister himself, who lacks knowledge and expertise in economics, in a mistaken initiative, asked the U.S. to give us a loan rather than a grant, due to his wish to maintain our respect and the respect of the U.S. towards us. See Ha’aretz1/5/79. Jerusalem Post, 9/7/79. Prof Asaf Razin, formerly a senior consultant in the Treasury, strongly criticized the conduct of the negotiations; Ha’aretz, 5/5/79. Ma’ariv, 9/7/79. As to matters concerning the oil fields and Israel’s energy crisis, see the interview with Mr. Eitan Eisenberg, a government advisor on these matters, Ma’arive Weekly, 12/12/78. The Energy Minister, who personally signed the Camp David agreements and the evacuation of Sdeh Alma, has since emphasized the seriousness of our condition from the point of view of oil supplies more than once…see Yediot Ahronot, 7/20/79. Energy Minister Modai even admitted that the government did not consult him at all on the subject of oil during the Camp David and Blair House negotiations. Ha’aretz, 8/22/79.

10. Many sources report on the growth of the armaments budget in Egypt and on intentions to give the army preference in a peace epoch budget over domestic needs for which a peace was allegedly obtained. See former Prime Minister Mamduh Salam in an interview 12/18/77, Treasury Minister Abd El Sayeh in an interview 7/25/78, and the paper Al Akhbar, 12/2/78 which clearly stressed that the military budget will receive first priority, despite the peace. This is what former Prime Minister Mustafa Khalil has stated in his cabinet’s programmatic document which was presented to Parliament, 11/25/78. See English translation, ICA, FBIS, Nov. 27. 1978, pp. D 1-10.

According to these sources, Egypt’s military budget increased by 10% between fiscal 1977 and 1978, and the process still goes on. A Saudi source divulged that the Egyptians plan to increase their militmy budget by 100% in the next two years; Ha’aretz, 2/12/79 and Jerusalem Post, 1/14/79.

11. Most of the economic estimates threw doubt on Egypt’s ability to reconstruct its economy by 1982. See Economic Intelligence Unit, 1978 Supplement, “The Arab Republic of Egypt”; E. Kanovsky, “Recent Economic Developments in the Middle East,” Occasional Papers, The Shiloah Institution, June 1977; Kanovsky, “The Egyptian Economy Since the Mid-Sixties, The Micro Sectors,” Occasional Papers, June 1978; Robert McNamara, President of World Bank, as reported in Times, London, 1/24/78.

12. See the comparison made by the researeh of the Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and research camed out in the Center for Strategic Studies of Tel Aviv University, as well as the research by the British scientist, Denis Champlin, Military Review, Nov. 1979, ISS: The Military Balance 1979-1980, CSS; Security Arrangements in Sinai…by Brig. Gen. (Res.) A Shalev, No. 3.0 CSS; The Military Balance and the Military Options after the Peace Treaty with Egypt, by Brig. Gen. (Res.) Y. Raviv, No.4, Dec. 1978, as well as many press reports including El Hawadeth, London, 3/7/80; El Watan El Arabi, Paris, 12/14/79.

13. As for religious ferment in Egypt and the relations between Copts and Moslems see the series of articles published in the Kuwaiti paper, El Qabas, 9/15/80. The English author Irene Beeson reports on the rift between Moslems and Copts, see: Irene Beeson, Guardian, London, 6/24/80, and Desmond Stewart, Middle East Internmational, London 6/6/80. For other reports see Pamela Ann Smith, Guardian, London, 12/24/79; The Christian Science Monitor 12/27/79 as well as Al Dustour, London, 10/15/79; El Kefah El Arabi, 10/15/79.

14. Arab Press Service, Beirut, 8/6-13/80. The New Republic, 8/16/80, Der Spiegel as cited by Ha’aretz, 3/21/80, and 4/30-5/5/80; The Economist, 3/22/80; Robert Fisk, Times, London, 3/26/80; Ellsworth Jones, Sunday Times, 3/30/80.

15. J.P. Peroncell Hugoz, Le Monde, Paris 4/28/80; Dr. Abbas Kelidar, Middle East Review, Summer 1979;

Conflict Studies, ISS, July 1975; Andreas Kolschitter, Der Zeit, (Ha’aretz, 9/21/79) Economist Foreign Report, 10/10/79, Afro-Asian Affairs, London, July 1979.

16. Arnold Hottinger, “The Rich Arab States in Trouble,” The New York Review of Books, 5/15/80; Arab Press Service, Beirut, 6/25-7/2/80; U.S. News and World Report, 11/5/79 as well as El Ahram, 11/9/79; El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, Paris 9/7/79; El Hawadeth, 11/9/79; David Hakham, Monthly Review, IDF, Jan.-Feb. 79.

17. As for Jordan’s policies and problems see El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, 4/30/79, 7/2/79; Prof. Elie Kedouri, Ma’ariv 6/8/79; Prof. Tanter, Davar 7/12/79; A. Safdi, Jerusalem Post, 5/31/79; El Watan El Arabi 11/28/79; El Qabas, 11/19/79. As for PLO positions see: The resolutions of the Fatah Fourth Congress, Damascus, August 1980. The Shefa’amr program of the Israeli Arabs was published in Ha’aretz, 9/24/80, and by Arab Press Report 6/18/80. For facts and figures on immigration of Arabs to Jordan, see Amos Ben Vered, Ha’aretz, 2/16/77; Yossef Zuriel, Ma’ariv 1/12/80. As to the PLO’s position towards Israel see Shlomo Gazit, Monthly Review; July 1980; Hani El Hasan in an interview, Al Rai Al’Am, Kuwait 4/15/80; Avi Plaskov, “The Palestinian Problem,” Survival, ISS, London Jan. Feb. 78; David Gutrnann, “The Palestinian Myth,” Commentary, Oct. 75; Bernard Lewis, “The Palestinians and the PLO,” Commentary Jan. 75; Monday Morning, Beirut, 8/18-21/80; Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1980.

18. Prof. Yuval Neeman, “Samaria–The Basis for Israel’s Security,” Ma’arakhot 272-273, May/June 1980; Ya’akov Hasdai, “Peace, the Way and the Right to Know,” Dvar Hashavua, 2/23/80. Aharon Yariv, “Strategic Depth–An Israeli Perspective,” Ma’arakhot 270-271, October 1979; Yitzhak Rabin, “Israel’s Defense Problems in the Eighties,” Ma’arakhot October 1979.

19. Ezra Zohar, In the Regime’s Pliers (Shikmona, 1974); Motti Heinrich, Do We have a Chance Israel, Truth Versus Legend (Reshafim, 1981).

20. Henry Kissinger, “The Lessons of the Past,” The Washington Review Vol 1, Jan. 1978; Arthur Ross, “OPEC’s Challenge to the West,” The Washington Quarterly, Winter, 1980; Walter Levy, “Oil and the Decline of the West,” Foreign Affairs, Summer 1980; Special Report–”Our Armed Forees-Ready or Not?” U.S. News and World Report 10/10/77; Stanley Hoffman, “Reflections on the Present Danger,” The New York Review of Books 3/6/80; Time 4/3/80; Leopold Lavedez “The illusions of SALT” Commentary Sept. 79; Norman Podhoretz, “The Present Danger,” Commentary March 1980; Robert Tucker, “Oil and American Power Six Years Later,” Commentary Sept. 1979; Norman Podhoretz, “The Abandonment of Israel,” Commentary July 1976; Elie Kedourie, “Misreading the Middle East,” Commentary July 1979.

21. According to figures published by Ya’akov Karoz, Yediot Ahronot, 10/17/80, the sum total of anti-Semitic incidents recorded in the world in 1979 was double the amount recorded in 1978. In Germany, France, and Britain the number of anti-Semitic incidents was many times greater in that year. In the U.S. as well there has been a sharp increase in anti-Semitic incidents which were reported in that article. For the new anti-Semitism, see L. Talmon, “The New Anti-Semitism,” The New Republic, 9/18/1976; Barbara Tuchman, “They poisoned the Wells,” Newsweek 2/3/75.


Transcript of interview: Full post from ISIS: The Bombshell Interview to Impeach Obama by Arabi Souri:

The author found some difficulties in finding a proper title for this post, which is based on a TV interview with the founder of Jihadist movement in Egypt and a former top Al-Qaeda commander. Each line of the interview is a title by itself, each piece of information is more than enough to put tens of western officials and their regional stooges behind bars for long times, those who are acting as the Humanitarian Bastards crying for the suffering of the innocent they only inflicted their suffering.

Finally, I decided to post the text of the interview as it is without my usual adding in noting how the western citizens are played by their governments, so I’ll leave you with the interview conducted by pan Arab Al-Maydeen TV with Sheikh Nabeel Naiem, who was introduced by the TV presenter as: ‘the former founder of Jihad Organization & expert in Islamist groups’, enjoy:

The interview text:

- With us here in the studio Sheikh Nabeel Naim former founder of Jihad Organization & expert in Islamist groups, welcome..

Noting that you were in Afghanistan with Osama Bin Laden & Dr. Ayman Zawahri, in accommodation and also in prison with Dr. Ayman Zawahri, can we say now you retired from Al-Qaeda?

Nabeel Naiem: Not really, they are the ones who deviated, we went there to fight the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and there was almost a unanimous agreement among Islamic clerics that time on that (Jihad against Soviets), and after that they deviated and turned their activities against Islamic and Arabic countries, and they committed the prohibited which is killing Muslims, and at the same time after the death of Osama Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda turned into a mercenary (group)..

- You are one of the founders of Jihad in Egypt, and you were at the beginning times of Al-Qaeda so to speak, can a member of that rank distance himself from Al-Qaeda, leave the organization? Will the organization leave him? Some say it is not accepted in the ideology of the organization..

Nabeel Naiem: No, the organization deviated, they became Takfiris, they are killing Muslims.. Am I fighting Jihad (holy war) to go to hell or seeking heaven?!

What is the cause of Jihad? (whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment) [Quran 4:93]

- Did they call you a Kafir (non-believer) now?

Nabeel Naiem: The high ranks, like Ayman, no they did not, but the small lads they’re the ones who consider me Kafir.

- The natural question one would ask: Why wouldn’t some who consider you Kafir try to assassinate you?

Nabeel Naiem: No, I’m a legend.. I have a history those same boys are astonished with my history, and they wonder why I changed, I was the cloud above those boys..

I was a solid warrior and I fought and have a horrible history whether inside Egypt or outside it, I’m not just a lad, or someone who just joined, I was everything in the organization..

- I mean now after the Takfiri ideology (labeling people as Kuffar – non-believers) why nobody tried to liquidate you with this Takfiri ideology?

Nabeel Naiem: This is with God’s grace upon me, and then I have a history.. When they get to know my history.. none of them have achieved the history I did.

- Back to the questions I understand you’re telling me the main structure of Al-Qaeda does not exist anymore.. Are we
talking now about schism? Can we say that (Daesh) ISIS is part of Al-Qaeda?

Nabeel Naiem: No, the old commanders have left the whole organization, only Ayman is left and around him a few we call them mentally retarded or crazy, Takfiri people.. But all the founders have left, some died and the others just left..

As for ISIS, it follows the ideology of Al-Qaeda organization, which was found by Sayyed Imam Sherif and put it in his book Al Jamei Fi Talab Al-ilm Al Sharif (Bible of Seeking Honorable Learning), & it’s one of the most dangerous books circulated in the world, and it’s translated to all languages by the way, Kurdish, Urdu, Persian, Turkish.. etc.

- You say that ISIS is a branch of Al-Qaeda?

Nabeel Naiem: It adopts the ideology of Al-Qaeda. ISIS was established in 2006, we created Al-Qaeda since 1989.

- Explain to me now the position of Dr. Ayman Zawahri from ISIS and Abu Bakr Baghdadi (head of ISIS), what do they consider him?

Nabeel Naiem: He (Zawahri) asked Abu Bakr Baghdadi to pledge allegiance to him (as the Emir..) but Abu Bakr Baghdadi, since he’s basically a U.S. agent, told him: we are the people of cause, the cause of liberating Iraq, Syria and so.. You’re the one who should pledge allegiance to us, Ayman (Zawahri) refused so there was a dispute and a fight between them.

- How he is an American agent? Explain to us how?

Nabeel Naiem: It is known that the USA released him from prison and he spent 20 to 30 million US Dollars to establish these ISIS groups and the first ISIS camps were established in Jordan, and Jordan doesn’t allow camps for charity, when Jordan establish camps to train terrorist groups, it doesn’t do that out of good will and charity, these camps were supervised by the Marines, and the arming of ISIS is all American.. and how do they arrange their expenses? I was in charge of a camp for 120 men, we were spending thousands of thousands (of dollars).. food, drinks, weapons, munition, training..

- Excuse me, you’re talking about ISIS? You were in charge of an ISIS camp?

Nabeel Naiem: No, I am telling you I was once in charge of a camp of 120 men and we were spending that time thousands (of Dollars), imagine how much this ISIS is spending?! Let me tell you something.. The wounded from ISIS during (terrorist) operations, are they being treated here in Lebanon? No, neither in Syria, nor in Saudi nor in Egypt, where do they go? They go to Israel. Now as we speak there are 1,500 of ISIS & Nusra (Front) are in Tel Aviv hospitals.

- From where this information?

Nabeel Naiem: Where are their wounded? Don’t they have wounded? Where are they being treated? This is well known..

- They have field hospitals, and it’s remarkable that they have a number of doctors in their ranks, even doctors from
European countries..

Nabeel Naiem: Yes, the field doctor would only give first aid until you reach the hospital.

- You mentioned an important point about financing, I read for your a lot actually when at the beginning of Al-Qaeda when talking about Osama Bin Laden you were talking about self-financing..

Nabeel Naiem: Osama was spending by himself, but before Osama there was the International Islamic Relief Organization and the connection between us and them was Dr. Abdulla Azzam, then we had some issues with Adbulla Azzam so he cut off from us the money and expenses so we replaced him with Osama Bin Laden, and the brothers in Al-Qaeda, mainly from the GCC countries called him Emir of Arabs.

- You just mentioned that 120 members required thousands, we are talking about a structure spread worldwide, could this be understood in the context of self-financing reaching ISIS today? I’ll read what the British Independent Newspaper said, it reveals there are a number of donors from Saudi who played an essential role in establishing Jihadist groups since over 30 years, that’s why I ask you about the beginnings as you were there then.. It’s a CIA report and it’s after September 11 attacks and it suggests Al-Qaeda had relied on middlemen who collected money from Saudi & other GCC donors..

Nabeel Naiem: This is ‘crap’ what the Independent says, these are foolish people, a fool journalist who doesn’t know what to say. First of all, the donations of GCC citizens to the Jihadist groups in Afghanistan was known and done publicly and it was advertised in newspapers and on TV, what this Independent guy adding?

I’m one of the people who took more than a thousand free air tickets from the International Islamic Relief Organization

- Please explain what are you aiming at with the International Islamic Relief Org.?

Nabeel Naiem: It was paying our expenses while we were in the Afghani Jihad, bring weapons, ammunition, training, food, drinks.. all of this we were getting from the Islamic Relief Org.. they were spending..

- This is what I meant, Islamic Relief Org. is specialized in collecting Zakat (charity) and it’s in Saudi (Arabia)..

Nabeel Naiem: These are fools.. Prince Sulaiman Bin Abdul Aziz was in charge of it, it was not running loose you grab what you want and go on.. It was Saudi Intelligence and Prince Sulaiman Bin Abdul Aziz was in charge of it, it wasn’t a loose charity you fill your pockets and walk, No.

Secondly, there was a hospital called Kuwaiti Crescent Hospital, it had 250 beds, it had all kinds of operations, and it had doctors employed there, money (budget), medicine, used to spend millions, it was under Kuwaiti (Red) Crescent.

So what new this Independent is telling? USA itself was supporting Hikmatyar, Who brought Stinger missiles to the Afghani Mujahideen? The missiles which badly hurt the USSR? It was brought by the USA..

- This is the point you mentioned when talking about Al-Qaeda, USA supported Al-Qaeda because it was fighting Russia, today when we come closer to this region, who supports who in favor of who? ISIS works for who?

Nabeel Naiem: Look, there’s nothing constant in these matters, take for example after Russia was defeated (in Afghanistan) the Americans wanted to get rid of the Arab Afghanis, and in fact the Arab Afghanis were arrested, deported and some like us were jailed, so Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan was struck by September 11 attacks and after Osama Bin Laden’s death Al-Qaeda was bought by the Qatari Intelligence, and I tell you during the International Conference of Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) in Istanbul, Qatar decided to create a fund to sponsor Free Egyptian Army and paid 1 billion dollar for it, and the person in charge of this fund is Ali Kurrah Zadah, Muslim Brotherhood official in Turkey, this is the finance, not like someone says 1 sheikh is donating..!

- This is one side, what’s important to know is what ISIS wants from Iraq? Is it the issue of borders? The borders strategy? Borders war? But this ideology is trans-borders it seems, how did ISIS expand from Syria into Iraq? What does it want exactly from Iraq?

Nabeel Naiem: No dear, ISIS started in Iraq, and Ibrahim Abu Bakr Baghdadi is Iraqi (national), and after that they were given camps to train in Jordan and they smuggled into Syria from Jordan and they were defeated in Syria then they moved back into Iraq once again.

As to what’s happening in Iraq, it’s bigger than ISIS, Mosul city has 4 million residents & it’s second largest province, in Iraq there’s a problem between the Arabs in Anbar and (Prime Minister) Maliki, and ‘Maliki Army’ who handed over their weapons had Shiite commanders, so nobody would argue ISIS and Shiites, those commanders handed over their weapons to Arab tribes but ISIS is in the headlines.

ISIS has something called Management of Savagery, a book titled Management of Savagery..

- We have shown some details about this book on our channel..

Nabeel Naiem: Abu Bakr Muhammad Maqdisi in this book has taken the same policy of Genghis Khan, thanks God they didn’t claim they derived their policies from prophet Muhammad, because God said: ‘There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.’ [Quran 33:21].. So their ‘excellent pattern’ was Genghis Khan.

Genghis Khan used to enter a village and annihilates all living in it, even animals he’d slaughter it, and burn down the houses, so the next village hears that Genghis Khan is coming they flee away and this is what ISIS is doing in Iraq, and what’s the goal of ISIS? When ISIS entered Samerra they killed a thousand Sunni, and now killing Shiites, and this is the American policy.

Henry Kissinger wrote a memo in 1982 or 1984, don’t remember exactly, it’s titled The 100 Years War. When asked where this 100 years war will occur? He said in the Middle East when we ignite the war between the Sunnah and the Shiites.

So they’re working on igniting the war between the Sunna and the Shiites, just like what Abu Mussab (Zarqawi) used to blow up Sunnah mosques then blow up Shiite mosques, to start the sectarian war in the region; and this is of course an American plot, and I tell you ISIS didn’t kill a single American.

ISIS didn’t behead a single American and didn’t play football with his head, they beheaded Muslims and ate livers of Muslims and didn’t kill a single American though it’s established since 2006..

- You’re talking about ISIS’s brutality and ideology but it finds popularity among the youth.. and popularity among many sides and it practices the highest level of violence and brutality, can you explain to us what makes all these groups with all its diversities to join this organization?

Nabeel Naiem: It’s the Takfiri ideology, the problem with this Takfiri ideology it’s widely spread among the European Muslims, why?

I sat with them.. The European Muslims denounced everything they saw in Europe..

- But they also come from GCC countries and Islamic countries even..

Nabeel Naiem: I’m with you, it’s spread among the Muslims in Europe and it’s spread in Saudi because Wahhabism is the closest to Takfir than others. And when I sat with them I found out they have a single-sided Takfiri thinking, like when I spoke with Sayyed Imam in the judgment against the ruler’s assistants, where he said there’s no ruler who can rule by himself, he must have the support of the police and army thus the police & army are all also Kuffar (infidels) like him, so I asked what about who goes to the polls to elect the ruler? He replied: He’s a Kafir (infidel).

I told him: you have labeled the Army, police and the people as Kuffar (infidels), you’re a Takfiri..

The religion (Islam) is not so strict, it includes prevention excuses like ignorance, circumstances, causes.. they didn’t study all this, for them the ruler is an infidel that means all of those with him are infidels.. Bashar (Assad) is a Nusairi then all of those with him are Nusairis, although that the Syrian Army 90% of it is Sunni, because that’s the Sunni percentage of Syrians.

But they are one-sided thinking and they’re ignorant..

- Ignorant in what sense?

Nabeel Naiem: Ignorant of the religion (Islam). I was living with Ayman (Zawahri), Ayman is ignorant, he wasn’t saying anything without consulting me first..

- In spite that you mentioned that Ayman Zawahri was refusing at one stage of time to accept the Takfiris (in Al-Qaeda)..

Nabeel Naiem: Yes, we were the ones who didn’t allow them. I told him: If your brother Muhammad joins the organization we will dissolve it because your brother is Takfiri. So he agreed until we entered jail and we’re separated, his brother came in and took over the whole organization, and his brother is retarded actually, he’s Takfiri and retarded, if you talk with him you feel you’re talking with someone who is brainless..

- That’s what’s strange as I mentioned we’re talking about different segments of societies from different countries and even from different education levels, we see PHD holders, how do you call all of these ignorant?

Nabeel Naiem: Ignorance in religion is something and being a doctor is something else.. I’ll give you an example. If I’m a doctor in a clinic, and with me is a nurse, and for 30 years he will be with me, will he become a doctor after 30 years?

Will this nurse become a doctor after 30 years being a nurse?

- This is as a description, right?

Nabeel Naiem: They’re like this, they educate themselves by themselves, they’re like the nurses, they’ll never become doctors. I am specialized in Islamic Sharia, for me he’s ignorant, ignorant in the religion, he doesn’t understand the religion.

- We should explain, you’re talking about Jihad? Salafist Jihad or Takfiris? These are the segments?

Nabeel Naiem: Yes, they’re ignorant..

- All of them?

Nabeel Naiem: I argued with their top sheikh (cleric) – Salafists, Salafist Jihadist and Takfiris, these are 3 different samples, all of them are ignorant?

They’re not different they’re all ignorant, I was living with Sayyed Imam Sharif, he’s the international founder of the whole ideology spread in the region from Jakarta to Nouakchott (in Mauritania), he wrote them a book titled ‘Al Jamei Fi Talab Al-ilm Al-Sharif (Bible in Seeking Honorable Learning), this book is the manifest and ideology of all the Takfiri groups like ISIS, Nusra Front, Ansar Bet Maqdas (Jerusalem House Supporters), Salafist Jihadist, and all of those you can imagine, and nobody wrote after the book of Sayyed Imam (Sharif).

I debated with Sayyed Imam and debated with him about a lot of matters, he told me in the next edition of the book he will rectify & mention the comments I said, he didn’t, he re-issued the book as it is.

I also argued with someone a Takfiri just for sins, a sin is infidelity, like the one committing adultery doesn’t do so and he’s a believer thus he’s a Kafir (infidel), so I argued with him: the punishment for the believer who becomes a disbeliever (leaves Islam) is death, and the adulterer’s punishment is flogging, how does the punishment differ (when committing a sin only)?

The differ in ideology and thinking is long since the beginnings, after Osama Bin Laden (era) between (Ayman) Zawahri & (Abu Bakr) Maqdisi, which resulted in the schism among other organizations, but when we talk now about ISIS, if we compare them with Al-Qaeda, there’s an essential difference between them..

There’s no difference in ideology, only organizational difference..

- Then what is the future of ISIS based on?

Nabeel Naiem: As long as the youth are convinced with the Takfir ideology, ISIS will continue.

Secondly, ISIS is playing on 2 levels: Bashar Assad (Syrian president) is a Nusairi infidel & should be fought, and they use the Fatwas (religious judicial opinion) of Ibn Taymiyyah in regards with the Nusairi sect..

- Depending on feeding these thoughts will ensure its continuity, and maybe other interests..

Nabeel Naiem: And oil.. All sorts of feeding: intellectual, money, gears, munition, all of that.. As long as there are sources feeding this ideology ISIS will continue..

Bernard Lewis founder of Fourth-Generation Warfare said so, he said: we do not need trans-continent armies that would awake nationalism and they return to us as bodies like what happened in Afghanistan & Vietnam, but we should find agents inside the (targeted) country who will carry out the task of the soldiers, and we need a media tool to falsify truths for the people, and money to spend on them..

This is the Fourth-Generation Warfare, agents instead of soldiers..

- This is an alternative army, a war by proxy?

Nabeel Naiem: Yes of course.

- Between who (this war)? We are talking about armies on the ground, Al Qaeda and all what branches out of it, these armies work for the account of which battle and between who?

Nabeel Naiem: It works for the US Intelligence (CIA).

- Who it fights?

Nabeel Naiem: The regimes, they put a plan in 1998 called Clean Break (PNAC)..

- In Iraq, who is it fighting? Is it fighting Nouri Maliki (Iraqi PM)?

Nabeel Naiem: It fights both Sunnah and Shiites, when they entered Sammerra, Sheikh Ali Hatimi, head of Anbar Tribes said: ISIS entered Sammerra and killed a thousand Sunni in cold blood.. and it kills Shiites and kills Christians and kills whoever it faces, ISIS considers all people infidels and their bloods are free.

Who killed Imam Ali appropriated his blood, who slaughtered Hussein wasn’t he a Muslim and from a sect claims they’re Islamist?

All these have a shameless historic extension, the prophet PBuH called them Dogs of Hell, the prophet said: ‘if I meet them I will kill them the same killing of ‘Aad and Iram of the Pillars’, those are the ones behind these ideologies, the ideologies of Khawarij (outlaws in Islam) who the prophet warned of them, and these will continue, as for ISIS, ISIS did not kill a single American. The opposition fighting Bashar Al-Assad fiercefully for 3 years did not shoot a single bullet against Israel..

- What makes the close enemy, so to speak, in the ideology of these groups, the close enemy is these countries and its leaders, geographically speaking, this term as close enemy and far enemy exists in Al-Qaeda, you mentioned Israel which is not far geographically, what makes it far for them?

Nabeel Naiem: No, they don’t say this, they say: fighting an apostate is a more priority than fighting the original infidel, close and far that’s an old saying.. The apostate is us now..

- As per their understanding?

Nabeel Naiem: Yes, we are apostate, the Arab rulers are apostate, the Arab armies are apostate, thus fighting the apostate is a priority over fighting the original infidel, the Jew.

For instance, Issam Hattito, head of Muslim Brotherhood responsible for leading the battles against Bashar Assad, where does he reside? Is he in Beirut? Riyadh or Cairo? He’s residing in Tel Aviv.

Ahmad Jarba, does he stay in Riyadh, Cairo or Tehran? He’s moving between New York, Paris and London, his employers, who pay his expenses..

When Obama was exposed and it was learned that he’s arming ISIS and Nusra Front with American and Turkish weapons said: ‘We will stop the arming because the American weaposn were leaked to Nusra..’ Didn’t Obama say that?

Leaked?! You discovered it was leaked after 2 years war?!

Nusra Front fighters are 10,000 and ISIS fighters are another 10,000, all 20,000 fighters using American weapons, and Obama claims after 2 years he discovers his (American) weapons are leaked to them?! Are you thinking we are fools?

Muslim Brotherhood

When Obama Raised the Muslim Brotherhood (cartoon from

This is a conspiracy against the region, and I told you Netenyahu & Dick Chenney put the Clean Break plan in the year 1998, and it’s destroying 4 countries, they start with Iraq, then Syria then Egypt then Saudi Arabia. It’s called Clean Break plan (PNAC), well known.. Using radical groups in the region.

The legal case (former Egyptian president) Mohammad Morsi is being tried for, the case of communicating (with the enemy) and contacting Ayman Zawahri was an assignment of Issam Haddad by Obama in person on 28 December 2012, he was at the White House in a meeting with the CIA, he says in his confessions when interrogated by the public prosecution in the case..

- How did you get it?

Nabeel Naiem: These public prosecution confessions are published and are available.. Obama entered (the meeting room) and gave the CIA team a paper and left, they read it and told him: it’s required by the Muslim Brotherhood to contain the radical groups in the region starting with Hamas & Al-Qaeda, so he called Ayman Zawahri through Rifa’a Tahtawi, head of presidential court, who happens to be Ayman’s cousin from Rifa’a Tahtawi’s phone.

Ayman (Zawahri) talking to Mohammad Morsi and Morsi says to him: Peace be Upon You Emir (Prince) of Believers, we need your people here in Sinai, and I will provide them with expenses, food and water and prevent security from pursuing them..

This was recorded and sent to the public prosecutor and this is what Mohammad Morsi is being tried for.

If you ask how I got to know this? I was in Channel 2 of Egyptian TV, and with me was General Gamal, 1st secretary of Egyptian Intelligence, who recorded the call and written it down and based on it the memo was written and handed to the Public Prosecutor.

The TV presenter asked him: Is it allowed for the Intelligence Services to tap the telephone of the president of the republic?

He replied: I’m not tapping the president’s phone, I was tapping Ayman’s (Zawahri) phone and found the president talking to him, telling him Peace be Upon You Emir of Believers, so I wrote down the tape, wrote a report and submitted to the head of intelligence..

She asked him: Did you inform the president? He replied: It’s not my job, I do not deal with the president (directly), I deal with the head of intelligence and that’s my limits.

She asked him: What did you write in your investigations and your own report, what did you write after you wrote down the tape (contents)?

I swear to God he told her, & I was in the same studio,: I wrote that Mr. Mohammad Morsi Ayyat president of the republic is a danger for Egypt’s National Security.

So the ignorant should know why the army stood by the side of the people on 30 June, because the president is dealing with Al-Qaeda organization, and it’s recorded, and he’s being on trial for it now, and head of intelligence wrote that the president of the republic is a danger on Egypt’s National Security.

This is the task of these groups in the region. When Obama said he supported Morsi’s campaign with 50 million (Dollars), and when (Yousuf) Qaradawi said: Obama sent us 60 million Dollars for the Syrian ‘Resistance’, God bless you Obama, and we need more..

Did Obama convert to Islam or America became a Hijabi (wore a burqa, veil)?

I ask Qaradawi: When Obama supports the Syrian opposition, is it to establish the Caliphate? And return the days of the Rashideen Caliphates? Or Obama converted to Islam or America became a Hijabi to support the Syrian opposition?

This is the work of agents (spies), exposed and debunked, and we don’t want to fool ourselves and hide our heads in the sand, the region is under a conspiracy and it’s to drag Iran to a war of attrition..

The first statement ISIS announced after the fight with Maliki it said: ‘We will head to Najaf & Karballa and destroy the sacred shrines’, they dragged the legs of Iran (into Iraq).

Iran said they’ll defend the sacred shrines, it has to, it cannot (not defend them), this is what’s required,

It’s required to clash Saudi and Iran in the 100 years war, an endless war, it exhausts Saudi resources and its monies, and it exhausts Iran resources and its monies, like what they did during the days of Saddam in Iraq (with Iran). This is what we should understand, fight and stand against..

- You mentioned Egypt, Syria and Iraq, we see in all of it similar activities, and you also mentioned Saudi, is it in a coming phase Saudi will be targeted?

Nabeel Naiem: It was meant when Muslim Brotherhood lay their ground in ruling Egypt, problems would start in Saudi in 2016 and in the whole Gulf (GCC), this is not my words, this what the head of national security in United Arab Emirates Dhahi Khalfan said, he arrested those who confessed.

From where did Dhahi Khalfan get this? They arrested cells which confessed in details: If Muslim Brotherhood settles in Egypt, they’ll start exporting problems to the Gulf (GCC) through their existing cells, and destabilize the security of the Gulf, and this is what Dhahi Khalfan, head of national security in UAE said, not what I say.

- The circumstances and factors we saw in Cairo, Damascus and Baghdad, in the countries: Syria, Egypt and Iraq, there was a security vacuum and repercussions of so called Arab Spring, what vacuum we are talking about in Saudi Arabia? Where to find the circumstances and factors that would allow these organizations to enter the (Saudi) kingdom? Opening gaps? Where?

Nabeel Naiem: Look, they have a book being circulated in London titled The Rule of Al Saud, in this book they called the Saudi family as Kuffar (infidels), and that it is unjust, and it steals the monies of the Saudis, and it’s an infidel doesn’t rule by God’s commands, and only applies Sharia law on the weak while the strong and the princess no law being applied on them, a book to educate the Saudi youths abroad to fight a war against the Saudi government, they also say: we call on the kingdom to become a constitutional monarchy, ie. the king doesn’t rule, like the British queen, and this trend is being supported by America and Britain and the people working on this are residing in London, the nest of spies, all the spies of the world reside in London..

Their goal is to divide the region in order to achieve Israel’s security.

Israel is a weak and despicable state, by the way, geopolitical, Israel is not a state, like Qatar, is Qatar a state? Qatar is only a tent and a man sitting it with his money and that’s it..

There are countries like Iran, Saudi and Egypt, in geography it exists until the end of times, and there are countries called the Satanic Shrubs, it’s just found you don’t know how, like Israel and Qatar, it can vanish in one day and you won’t find it..

So for Israel to guarantee its existence, all the surrounding entities around it should be shredded.. Kurds to take one piece, Sunnah take one piece, Maliki takes one piece.. each sect has their own piece just like Lebanon they keep fighting between each other, once they finish beating each other they drink tea then go for a second round beating each other..

- I want to get back to the factors in regards with the Saudi Kingdom, you mentioned what is planned for based on this ideology, and you know better, you have experience and you talk about examples and evidences, but how they will enter?

True there was a statement by the Saudi ministry of interior in last May claiming they dismantled a cell that follows ISIS of 62 members, as they stated, but how they’ll enter (Saudi), what are the factors they’ll be depending on to enter?

Nabeel Naiem: I’m telling you they are preparing for the revolution against the ruling family, that it’s a corrupt family, this family steals the money of the Saudis, talks about the roots of the family..

- From inside the kingdom?

Nabeel Naiem: From inside the kingdom, and there are strong Takfiri members inside the kingdom, because as you know the difference beteween Wahhabi and Takfiri ideologies is as thin as a single hair, thus there are a lot of youths who follow this (Takfiri) ideology, add to it the feeding against the kingdom and its government and against the ruling family, it’s very easy for him to blow himself up with anything..

- So it will be only based on these factors, we don’t want to disregard an important point that groups of the ISIS are from the Gulf countries, and there are reports that the (governments of GCC) are turning a blind eye away from recruiting a number of them and sending them to fight in Syria and in a number of other countries including Iraq, as per these reports, could there be recruiting to use inside the kingdom? To move inside the kingdom?

Nabeel Naiem: Yes, yes, most are Saudis & the move will be like that but they were hoping for the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt to settle in power, that’s why when (Saudi) king Abdallah supported the 30 June revolution (in Egypt), he did so based on the information he has of what will happen in the region

Why did he stand against the Muslim Brotherhood? Saudi was always containing the MBs, and if the MBs (Muslim Brotherhood) ever made money, it was from Saudi, and Mohammad Qotb, the father of all Takfir in the world, spent 40 years of his life in Saudi, he wrote a book called The Ignorance in the Twentieth Century, and he claims we’re living in an ignorance more than the one in the days of the prophet PBuH, and Saudi hosted him and he was teaching in the university.. What made them go against them (MBs)?

Because the Muslim Brotherhood have no religion, no nation, not safe to be with them, they’ll betray anyone.

- On the other hand, how to deal with such an organization and such an ideology?

Nabeel Naiem: The voices of the Islamic moderation very low, throaty, so to speak..

- We do not hear that loud voice who would stand against them, is it not convincing? Or need mediums?

Nabeel Naiem: No, the sapien voice doesn’t have a vim, they’re employees, they’d say let ISIS burn out with who brought it..

It doesn’t have the vim to respond, doesn’t feel the danger, secondly, Azhar in Egypt, which was leading the movement of religious enlightenment, is absented for the past 40 years, the reason for its absent for 40 years is the oil boom, and the voices of the Saudi clergy becoming higher than the Azhar clergy. Salafism was found in Egypt just to fight Azhar (Islamic University), then, the scholars duty is to respond to the ideology of ISIS, detail it and respond to it, scholars should come and say this is what ISIS is saying and the right respond is this.. and I sat with people who came from London to fight in Syria, they sat with me and thanks to God they went from Egypt back to London.

They came to ask me, and I told them, let’s assume that Bashar (Assad) died in the morning, would I be saying: Why God did you take Bashar while the war is not over yet? Who will replace Bashar?

They replied: (Ahmad) Jarba..

I said: Jarba is worth of Bashar shoes only.. They said: true. And they went back.

I told them you are going to fight in favor of America and Israel, will you be the one to rule Syria?

If you were the one who will rule Syria I will come and fight on your side, I swear by God I’ll come and fight on your side..

But are you going to rule Syria after Bashar? He said no, I told him you are being used to remove Bashar and then Jarba, Salim Idress, Issam Hattito will come, all of those are being raised in the spy nest in London, it’s not you who will rule.

- How can we differentiate between religious commitment and the national responsibility? Is there a problem in combining both?

Nabeel Naiem: Yes, yes, of course, there is a strong fault between the national responsibility and the religious commitment. I’ll tell you what the General Guide (leader) of (Muslim) Brotherhood said? He said Toz (B.S.) with Egypt. This is their vision of the national responsibility.

And when the MBs ruled Egypt.. I’ll give you one evidence for their despise to the nation (Egypt), in the last interview done by the Consular Adli Mansour, the interim president of Egypt with Mrs. Lamis Hadidi, the last question she asked him was about the background picture of the map of Egypt behind him, she asked him to tell her the story about this picture behind him..

He said: this picture was done by King Fouad a 100 years ago, we know that first was King Fouad, then King Farouq then Abdul Nasser, Sadat then Mubarak. He told her since King Fouad did this photo a 100 years ago and it’s hanged there, it was removed for 1 year only, when the Muslim Brotherhood ruled Egypt. They removed it and put in the stores..

And they were working on a plot to concede 600 square kilometers to Hamas to resolve the Palestinian cause..

There is a link between the national responsibility and the religious commitment, and this contradicts with the understanding of the Salafists clerics, and I’ll tell you the political theory of imam Ibn Taymiyyah, who people consider him the most strict imam, Ibn Taymiyyah was asked: if the nation’s interest conflicts with applying Sharia, if we apply Sharia will lose the country, what to do?

He said: Maintaining the homeland is a priority over applying Sharia, because if you lose the country, where will you apply Sharia?

I’ll give you an example to make it clearer, if someone is naked and will fall from the 10th floor, will you rescue him or get him something to wear?

Thus, to preserve the country is more important than to apply Sharia if there’s interest conflict.

- And the interest now?

Nabeel Naiem: To preserve the nation.

- And in fact this is the most absented side between the politics, we called the national responsibility and..

Nabeel Naiem: This is because of ignorance, not knowing what’s the national responsibility, there’s no conflict between national responsibility and religious commitment, it’s because those are ignorants the conflict is happening between the nation and the belief.

- This topic needs more discussing, especially in regards with the relations with regional countries, western countries, in regards with the nature of these countries, its backgrounds and its beliefs, we see relations are allowed with India and China, and when we talk about countries like Iran then the religious backgrounds are mentioned and this also might require further research if possible we can get a comment from you on it?

Nabeel Naiem: What I want to tell you, the efforts of all Islamic countries, Sunnah and Shiites, must combine, to eradicate these groups, because these groups are the claws of colonialism in the region, it’s not on religious bases, there are members of ISIS who do not pray, so in Al-Qaeda, there are members who didn’t pray a single kneeling, there must be a combination of the countries efforts to organically eliminate these groups by security and by intellect, disprove their ideology..

There must be a response to these groups and explaining its ideology is a stray ideology, contrary to the Islamic Sharia, and this is the ideology that the prophet warned from when he said about Khawarij (Outlaws in Islam):

‘Newly in the religion, ribald in their aims, they go through the religion like how an arrow goes through the bow, if I meet them I will kill them the way Iram and A’ad were killed, they’re the worse killers under the skies, blessed who they kill or who kills of them..’ and he called them: ‘the dogs of hell.’

- Thank you a lot sheikh Nabil Naiem, our guest here in the studio, founder of Jihad Organization formerly, and expert in the Islamist groups. – end of interview.

Yours truly kept saying: ‘They fool you, they keep fooling you and they enjoy fooling you, not because they’re smart, but because you’re foolable‘, so I repeat it once again.


Anyway that is the Clean Break, Yinon Plan and an interview with a high-level Jihadi imprisoned for 20 years. While there is plenty more to research about the Middle East, these particular information points still seem as relevant as ever.

Also, who has been using that "Peace through strength" phrase lately? Sigh: Rand Paul: My Foreign Policy Is the Same as Reagan's Peace Through Strength.

More note on impending Syria Fail! Dempsey vs R2P interventionist hawks; Al-Nusra rebels caught with 2kg Sarin in May 2013, possible links to Libya Chemical Weapons stash, the Britam leaks & McCain Playing Portable Poker

Ugh, the Syria scenario is really dispiriting but I think much of the western political leadership may finally be backing down from another round of interventionism - let's hope! Here are a bunch of new notes - take em all with a grain of salt, and may they hopefully shed a bit of light on matters.

No matter how it turns out, it will be really hard to get the Middle East moving into a politically independent foundation, respectful of human rights and devoid of massacres and social 'sloshing' as mistrust escalates on all sides, with various specialists in destruction jumping in to make matters worse at every turn.

See also: Press Release mirrored here: Whistleblower ex-US Mil Intel agent Frank Ford flags VX WMD distribution in Iraq & Syria, smoking gun @ Carlyle Group chemical weapons network as new Obama target


MCCAIN GAME: The terrible Sen John McCain should not even be quoted in papers let alone allowed in the government. Dan McCall at made this great McCain meme, along with many other fun political art pieces like NSA spoofs that - believe it or not - the NSA branding police have been trying to crush. Yes the NSA patrols against McCall's parodies as explained in interview on Corbett Report. (fb) See also Cryptome notes on this.


Satire: Raytheon: Delay on Syria Strike is a Threat to Freedom & Democracy Everywhere - Newslo

The Britam Defense Leak involving a Syria chemical weapons plan is denied, but perhaps one of those things like a Project Northwoods about the Syrian Chemical Weapons scenario: (Northwoods was an infamous JFK-era doc from the Joint Chiefs suggesting a fake attack involving Cubans and hijacked planes.)

Britam Defence, David Goulding and Philip Doughty | Mail Online - PUBLISHED: 12:59 EST, 18 April 2013 | UPDATED: 12:59 EST, 18 April 2013

An article on 29 January reported allegations on the internet that the US Government had backed a plot to launch a chemicals weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime.

The reports made reference to an email said to have been from David Goulding, the Business Development Director of Britam Defence, to company founder, Philip Doughty. The email had been published on the internet after Britam’s computer system was illegally hacked in Singapore. It referred to a proposal that Britam would deliver chemical weapons to Syria for enormous financial reward and suggested that the directors were willing to consider the illegal proposal.

We now accept that email was fabricated and acknowledge there is no truth in any suggestion that Britam or its directors were willing to consider taking part in such a plot, which may have led to an atrocity.

We apologise to each of them and have agreed to pay substantial damages.

A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files && britam defence hacked, confidential documents leaked, site offline -

A British defence company has been breached and as a result a heap of documents have been published online and now the site has gone offline.

The attack is on britam defence ( and has been claimed by a hacker using the handle JAsIrX who uploaded the leaked information to various file sharing websites and released it via a single pastebin post with the a message about the release (see bottom).

The documents come in 6 parts and total over 423MB compress zip files and inside the compress files appears to be a common layout of three main folders named !!Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Inside these appear to be documents like passports, incident reports about drunk employees which are labelled private and confidential as well.

A quick look into the files shows shocking plans for chemical warfare attacks where they have planned to lure victims to kill zones. The file can be found in the Iran folder under OPLAN (Ruhayyat) 1433H-1.doc.

Also on Britam: U.S. Was Offering `Enourmous` Sums of Money for Chemical Weapon Attack

More possible chemical weapons false flags from previous months: video "Chemical Weapons False Flag against Syria Update posted on August 3rd 2012.

Also worth noting this! Iraq uncovers al-Qaeda 'chemical weapons plot' BBC News June, 1 2013, and this RT report on the Turkish authorities discovery of Sarin in a Jabhat al Nusra safehouse in May 2013.

Reported by RT in May and firmly in the memory hole right now: 2 kilograms of sarin captured with rebels in Turkey?! WTF

Published on May 31, 2013 RussiaToday: Suspected Syrian militants have reportedly been detained in Turkey with a cylinder of highly poisonous sarin gas found in their possession. Those arrested are believed to be members of the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front. Earlier this month, UN investigators voiced suspicion the nerve agent was being used by opposition fighters. RT's Middle East correspondent Paula Slier reports.

Obviously RT has a Russian perspective here but indeed as we will see this is not the only clue floating around about Al-Nusra & chemical weapons.


Chomsky misquoted? LOCAL - Chomsky accuses Turkish daily of fabricating parts of interview

Not sure deal here - eh: High Probability Of A Major Attack On The Financial System | InvestmentWatch - anyone heard of x22report?


DC alternative journalist Wayne Madsen is not always correct but this particular narrative just smells really damn likely right now. R2P is "responsibility to protect" interventionist faction of Beltway, the newest iteration of "cruise missile liberals" more-or-less. Go get em Wayne:


September 1-2, 2013 -- Special Weekend Report. Washington, DC (WMR) Obama caved under last-minute pressure from Dempsey

WMR's White House sources report that on the evening of Friday, August 29, President Obama was on track to launch a sustained 72-hour cruise missile and drone attack on pre-selected air defense and other strategic military targets in Syria.

Obama had been convinced by his national security adviser Susan Rice, UN ambassador Samantha Power, and deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes, all "Responsibility to Protect" advocates, that he could trump congressional approval for his attack by claiming that humanitarian operations do not require approval under the War Powers Resolution or Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.

Many of Washington's insiders went to bed Friday night firmly convinced that Obama would give the final order to attack Syria sometime during the early Saturday morning hours of August 30. However, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, made a hurried trip to the White House during the early morning hours of Saturday to make one last final plea to hold off on any attack.

WMR has learned from White House sources that Dempsey told Obama that the president's plan would not work. "If you do this, the plan will fail and you'll get in deeper. And without congressional approval, you'll be screwed," Dempsey told Obama.

Dempsey's warning about Congress had merit. Already, 210 House members signed a letter to Obama warning him not to attack Syria without congressional authorization. In addition, a head count showed that some Democrats would join Republicans in voting for impeachment if a bill were introduced.

Dempsey's argument prevailed and Obama decided to hold off on any attack until Congress reconvenes after Labor Day. Obama decided he would seek a congressional vote to authorize a military strike on Syria. However, in overriding Rice, Power, Rhodes, and Secretary of State John Kerry, who all favored a military strike, Dempsey incurred the wrath of the R2P faction that dominates the National Security Council. State Department sources began spreading the word that Obama would still attack Syria without congressional approval. The Pentagon, on the other hand, pointed out that none of the National Security Council "heavies," Rice, Power, or Rhodes had any military experience and that Kerry was channeling the wishes of his good friend Senator John McCain, who has consistently supported Al Qaeda-led rebels in Syria and Libya.

Obama is faced with another grim reality. Some within the Pentagon ranks are so displeased with Obama's policies on Syria, they have let certain members of Congress of both parties know that "smoking gun" proof exists that Obama and CIA director John O. Brennan personally authorized the transfer of arms and personnel from Al-Qaeda-linked Ansar al Sharia Islamist rebels in Libya to Syria's Jabhat al Nusra rebels, who are also linked to Al Qaeda, in what amounts to an illegal "Iran-contra"-like scandal. The proof is said to be highly "impeachable."

The developing scandal involves Turkish, Qatari, Lebanese, and Croatian firms and front operations; Qatar Airways Cargo; ousted officials of the Mohamed Morsi government of Egypt; small Turkish and Jordanian air service companies contracted by the CIA; Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud; the September 11, 2012 attack on the CIA annex in Benghazi; and "black" carve-out contracts with the U.S. Air Force.

[pic,4.jpg ] Barack Obama, right, dressed as a Somali Elder during his visit to Kenya, near the borders with Somalia and Ethiopia. Obama plays the role of Al Qaeda arms provider.

Obama's, Brennan's, and then-CIA director David Petraeus's knowledge of the operation was so intimate, Petraeus visited GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney in October of last year to plead with him not to bring up the covert operation in the third presidential debate. Romney acceded to Petraeus's request.


Fluoride for the Win: Frankly at this point in the demented charade, the possible Sodium Fluoride - aka fluoridated water precious bodily fluids casus belli - angle is now my favorite. Naturalnews is not always dead on either, but it's too damn appropriate I say.

See: NaturalNews: Bombshell: Syria's 'chemical weapons' turn out to be sodium fluoride used in the U.S. water supply and sold at Wal-Mart. Breaking in UK Independent: Revealed: UK Government let British company export nerve gas chemicals to Syria - UK Politics - UK - The Independent Sept 2 2013.


Max Blumenthal has good points Sept 2 posted: OpEdNews - Article: Dubious Intelligence and Iran Blackmail: How Israel is driving the US to war in Syria

GlobalResearch: Dangerous Crossroads. A War on Syria, Prelude to a World War III Scenario? | Washington's Blog


I am borrowing another excerpt from Madsen which includes a possible connection between major CIA pointman on the Caucasus and indeed Islamic fundamentalist network logistical support over the years (interesting in the pre-2001 interval eh) . Graham Fuller keeps popping up as a major figure in all of this, perhaps he will turn out to be something like the Oliver North of 9-11 itself - not to mention the sponsor of the Boston bombers' uncle Ruslan. Once the angles with Fuller surfaced, did anyone notice how fast mainstream press attention drained away from their backgrounds??!!!

SOURCE: - August 30-September 1, 2013 -- Partner of Boston bombers' "Uncle Ruslan" right hand man to 3 CIA directors

The murky world of the CIA's past and current support for radical Islamist groups on three continents has emerged in newly-released documents from the CIA that show that Graham Fuller, the agency's one-time top interlocutor with the Saudis, Afghan mujaheddin, and Muslim Brotherhood, was a right-hand man to three CIA directors.

Fuller, a business partner of Ruslan Tsarni (Tsarnaev), the uncle of the accused Boston Marathon bombers, served as a close adviser to CIA directors William Casey, William Webster, and Robert Gates, according to recently declassified internal CIA memoranda. Since retiring from the CIA, Fuller has been engaged in supporting the Chechen Islamist guerrilla groups fighting Russia as well as the Republic of Georgia, which has become a base for anti-Russian and anti-Syrian military activities, which includes, the transport of chemical weapons to Syrian rebels from the Pentagon-operated Richard G. Lugar Center for Public Health Research in Tbilisi, which, although a biological weapons research laboratory, also warehouses chemical agents, according to U.S. intelligence sources familiar with the facility. The Tbilisi facility was the major source of chemical agents used by Syrian rebels to attack civilians outside of Damascus in a "false flag" terrorist operation coordinated by the CIA and Mossad.

Throughout the 1980s, Fuller was front and center at many of the acts of violence in the Middle East and South Asia, from Lebanon and Syria to Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and South Yemen. One CIA memo describes how Fuller was also heavily involved in the early part of the CIA's stirring political activities in the Balkans during the collapse of Communism in eastern Europe. A May 22, 1985, memo from George Kolt, the CIA's National Intelligence Officer for Europe, invited Fuller to a June 11, 1985, dinner at CIA Headquarters at which the former U.S. ambassador to Bulgaria, Robert Barry, discussed at the Confidential level "The Strategic Importance of the Balkans for the United States." [......]

I'm leaving the rest of the story off for now out of respect for an indie journo making a run at this ... and moments after plugging this in, Wayne's site is having Varnish caching issues. It's all got to be cross checked - someone could be feeding him knowingly bad info for their own purposes certainly - I think we have a substantial amount of paydirt on our hands here.

Also Outrage is not a strategy:

Anyway hope people can find this useful, or at least less useless than the mainstream spams...

World Bank whistleblower flags laundering money & impending gold backwardation "whole system come to screeching halt"

Another interesting whistleblower item. Very quick post. Karen Hudes from World Bank notes major crises including something related to the major disruption of gold markets. I suspect this is the COMEX paper gold situation.... This is a pretty big deal. Starts around 6 minutes. Also covers Brazil. Google around for "COMEX" and "backwardation", allocated vs registered gold etc. ie. Why Is Gold Draining Out of COMEX Warehouses? | Keith Weiner | FINANCIAL SENSE && Risk of continuing gold backwardation.

EPISODE BREAKDOWN: On this episode of Breaking the Set, Abby Martin talks to BTS producer, Ameera David, about the mounting death toll stemming from increased violence in Iraq, as well as the rules the NSA is using to spy on Americans. Abby then talks to Karen Hudes, former senior executive at the World Bank, about her experience blowing the whistle on the high level corruption within the international financial system and how her story was censored. Abby then breaks down the grievances behind the Brazilian protests that have resulted in over one million people taking to the streets in over 100 cities. BTS wraps up the show with an interview with Michelle Cornette, Subject Matter Expert: Military Suicide at the Center for Deployment Psychology, about the factors contributing to the drastic rise of military suicides.

2013: Boston, paper gold, Obama signs Stock Act reversal, Homeland Security and food stamps

UPDATE 4.19.2013: MOAR about domestic military operations policy shifts w doc & video:


Hang tight folks, it looks like we are on the cusp of another 'burst of change' on a few fronts. You should probably double the watts going to your news radar for at least 10-14 days, if you possibly can. And all those cheesy "financial systems" are getting Extra Discontinuous as they usually do when Collapse starts happening in various segments. I decided to cork out a very rough post on these topics, Your Mileage May Vary thx::

While the Boston situation loaded with symbolism like international flags & the JFK library fire attracts most attention, the reality is that bombings at events are pretty rare and unlikely to happen; once it does the media loops the same traumatizing video clips for web hits. The editorial style: giving viewers agog consciousness that spells ratings. I saw Good Morning America a few mornings ago, it was a massive blitz of domestic violence and a patina of Victoria's Secret models.

With that spectacle set aside for a moment, other trends hitting key points this week include a shady new Stock Act law being signed by Obama and dramatic corrections in several markets including particularly gold. Gotta give some space to the Hill, this is ridiculous:

President Obama quietly signed legislation Monday that rolled back a provision of the STOCK Act that required high-ranking federal employees to disclose their financial information online.

The White House announced Monday that the president had signed S. 716, which repealed a requirement of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act requiring the disclosure, which had previously been delayed several times by Congress.

That provision, added to the bipartisan bill aimed at halting insider trading by members of Congress, would have required roughly 28,000 senior government officials to post their financial information online, and had come under harsh criticism from federal government employee unions.
Both chambers of Congress quickly — and near silently — approved the repeal legislation at the end of last week by unanimous consent, just before heading home to their districts.

The STOCK Act was signed by the president a little over one year ago in a highly visible signing ceremony, where he said the legislation would tackle the "deficit of trust" that exists between Washington and the rest of the nation.

The new law scraps a provision that had been hotly contested by federal employees, as well as found to be problematic and even dangerous for high-ranking government workers. Congress twice had passed legislation to delay its implementation. Under that provision, high-ranking government workers would have been required to post their financial information on a publicly available online database.


PAPER GOLD BIG MOVES: The gold market is a peculiar misunderstood beast - it's like a bunch of stuff in vaults with IOU's attached to numbered bars. The IOUs underwrite the financial products like Exchange Traded Fund GLD "gold" - it is operated in reference to the underlying gold's supposed value, but it's not actually a contract providing recourse to the gold.

I flagged for some people a few days ago that the COMEX or commodities exchange gold market, as well as JP Morgan, has had large declines in physical gold reserves in the warehouses recently.

See just recently: 30% of CNT Silver Inventories Withdrawn from COMEX Vaults in 2 Days! | // Why Is JPMorgan's Gold Vault, The Largest In The World, Located Next To The New York Fed's? | Zero Hedge // Especially: Comex Gold Inventories Collapse By Largest Amount Ever On Record

Now today a whopping 122 tons of 'paper gold' got flipped around & tons of margin hikes are getting called on gold traders in different markets around the world, forcing people to keep dumping gold in bursts.

Gold Crush Started With 400 Ton Friday Forced Sale On COMEX | Zero Hedge - tactical deals of the Mega short sale to break through the 'important' price of $1540. Aha... Via Ross Norman of Sharps Pixley,

"Futures trading is performed on a margined basis.. One fund in particular, based in Stamford Connecticut, was identified as the previous shorter of gold and has a history of being caught on the wrong side of the law on a few occasions. As baddies go - they fit the bill nicely.

......The value of the 400 tonnes of gold sold is approximately $20 billion but because it is margined, this short bet would require them to stump up just $1b. The modest short selling in Jan 2013 had prompted little response from the longs - raising questions about their real commitment. By forcing the market lower the Fund sought to prompt a cascade or avalanche of additional selling, proving the lie ; predictably some newswires were premature in announcing the death of the gold bull run doing, in effect, the dirty work of the shorters in driving the market lower still."

These charts are nuts. In recent years, gold drops coincided with bubbles in the S&P type prices, that then crashed. What Happened The Last Time We Saw Gold Drop Like This? | Zero Hedge see 2008 and 2011. Gold Drops Most In 30 Years | Zero Hedge

In recent weeks due to Japan's new hyper-loose monetary policy, crazy things have been happening around the Yen's value. (Australia is spiking moar than anything else it seems) Europe also has a new wave of trust destabilizing the banking system with various deals being attempted in Cyprus & Greece.

(see Which Country's Gold Will Be Sold Next? | Zero Hedge). Also the creditor fascist complex has angled to get at the Greek government's remaining stash of gold so that they can be sacrificed on the altar of the billionaires once and for all.

See also, All Eyes On The Gold Rout, Most Oversold In 14 Years | Zero Hedge . Gold Plummets By Most In 30 Years, Stocks Have Biggest Drop Of 2013 | Zero Hedge - this cuts across a lot of sectors. The CFTC needs to be looked at as well, as some of this material indicates.

The DJIA has been flying high above all of this, though even the corporate news points out that this whole phase of asset value inflation is at least partially due to the Fed's loose monetary policy. Housing prices are "up" they say, what could possibly go wrong?


It's pretty sick meanwhile that an incredibly high level of food stamps are the formal basis for America's food security, at around 23,000,000 households and rising. When Obama entered office this was less than 15,000,000 households -- and the benefits per household are slowly being cut along with much of the social safety net programs both in Minnesota and nationwide. US Households On Foodstamps Hit Record High | Zero Hedge. USDA data.


This is a consequence of bailing out banks with trillions of dollars, collateralizing the American people and introducing tons of sovereign credit risk into the US Dollar, the Euro & beyond. It has altered the "biopolitics" of the US to the point that this many people cannot handle generating economic activity in this system to keep themselves alive - and clearly the amount parceled out is declining fast.


CSA's [relatively cheap & nutritious food share subscriptions] and local barter-based currencies are among the more resilient network ideas that ought to get looked at right now. I think there is a pretty severe risk to the stability of the whole country (let alone world) when food stamp debit card systems keep that many millions of families from starving. If nothing else there needs to be fallback systems from the US Dollar & conventional banking system may abruptly halt or radically shift in value or stability. This is something people need to start getting their heads around - so that if the debit cards stop working, different ones operating on some other basis (ie local currencies) can be handed out & millions aren't put in such imminent danger. (see for 1930s substitute local credit instruments - key!)

The food stamp debit cards are usually administered by big banks - giving them yet another lever of functions to 'terrorize' elected officials and bureaucrats into further handing over all the nation's "commons" through fraud & socially constructed economic schemes. The banks have probably the biggest, quickest "kill switch" on social stability. A trivial switch for them to hit compared to most!!


Bitcoin had a big run-up for several days and now has retreated somewhere into the $50-100 range - for a good time keep an eye on Bitcoin Charts. Still, it seems like there's more than enough demand to keep it above $40. However the Bitcoin economy suffers from overly concentrated exchanges.

The biggest exchange, MtGox, has such a large market share - and can't keep up once really huge, shady order floods come in, that the whole Bitcoin economy tends to get "goxxed" and bog down, panic selling and various cats stepping in to buy all the way down.

I am doing a lot of research on Bitcoin right now including the various exchanges (LIST) - in the long run, Bitcoin and other alternative cryptocurrencies share certain features like peer-to-peer encryption/hashing based universal linear transaction registers called "blockchains", and ways of verifying those blockchains with CPU or GPU intensive cryptographic calculations to award more 'coins' and slowly expand the money supply while shoring up trust in the global account ledger.

A new website as well as local Facebook & Twitter accts are getting rolling :) Brand new: follow and for Minnesota Bitcoin goodies!

Bitcoin OTC order book is a chat network approach to decentralized exchange design with trust ranking (like eBay rankings in a way).

Good news for people interesting in making exchanges or intercambios in the form of Ripple, in the early stages an open source project with VC backing to build multi-currency exchanges and trust networks among peers. (chart) Some open source software is available on GitHub for Ripple and its "XRP" intermediary currency, which could then be a proxy to regular fiats or Bitcoin etc.

See also: wow Six reasons why Chinese people will drive the next bull market in bitcoin – Quartz

Mining Bitcoins takes power, but is it an “environmental disaster?” | Ars Technica - wattage will improve - and compared to the phenomenal amount of energy blown on fractional reserve banking derived parasitic functions, Bitcoin is nothing! Also: “Taming the bubble”: investors bet on Bitcoin via derivatives markets | Ars Technica

Paul Krugman Goes on the Attack: Calls Bitcoin “Antisocial” // The Antisocial Network of Bitcoins - by Krugman! "We have huge economic problems, but green pieces of paper are doing fine — and we should let them alone." LOL that food stamp chart is definitely not keeping the great Keynesian up at night.


A moment for weird Boston links: What did Peter Griffin know about Boston and when did he know it? Watch! Family Guy boston bombing - YouTube Yeah this petition is picking up steam - Petition | Demand that Seth MacFarlane make a public accounting for his foreknowledge of the Boston Bombing |

This is a popular item now: Boston to Deploy Mass-Casualty Tablet Device During Marathon

Excellent videography: viral video page - Also: Israel honors war dead with somber Memorial Day - News -

Oh also in that viral video above you can see the military incongruously popping up within about 1 minute 44 secs in Boston as Cryptogon and other news have noted. You'll want to check out TC Indymedia Exclusive: Secret 'Trigger' & blueprint for emergency domestic military crackdown plan revealed | about USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502 if you haven't already.


SEE previously Meet the new Boss in Town: ICE spawns... HSI Homeland Security Investigations, for great justice & cocaine cowboys |

Homeland Security's New $3.9 Billion Headquarters - Businessweek. Money quote:

In February, one of the DHS’s more persistent naysayers, U.S. Representative John Mica, a Florida Republican, boasted about how he and his fellow party members had curtailed the project. He said he would also like to dismantle much of the DHS.

He’d better act swiftly. If the White House ever gets all the DHS’s divisions on one campus, nobody will want to move them again.

Homeland Security bloat and the great Unemployed: Word went around that ICE was serving a federal warrant pertaining to Boston. ICE is a unit of Department Homeland Security which spawned the little known HSI, or Homeland Security Investigations, division, a new kind of (literal) black helicopter FBI-style agency

The dip in metals and the odd security situation brought to recall a post from late 2012 from, the Northeast Intelligence Network site edited by Doug Hagmann & his son. They are pretty conservative and have a fair bit of alarming material about Homeland Security. See Flashback: Warning: "Watch The Metals, When They Dip. It Will Be A Good Indication That Things Are About To Happen."

I'm not even going to get into the stuff coming up about the bomb sniffing dogs and weird "training exercise" angles right now because this other stuff seems more pertinent right now. People that have been at this a long time frequently bump into "exercises" that happen to overlap with 'live events', the argument being many times that exercises created the opportunity for staged events at many previous key points -- though of course governments do run a *lot* of exercises with all their security bloatware anyway.

This is the late 2012 Hagmann interview with a purported Homeland Security "insider" which stated that a dip in precious metals, after the fiscal cliff sets the stage, would presage further economic chaos and an escalation of repression against the American people, along with a major collapse in standard of living. DHS Insider Report: Coming This Spring: "Life for the Average American is Going to Change Significantly". It is kind of "classic stuff" for those of us that keep an eye on these things. The earlier predictions of source "Rosebud" didn't really pan out much in 2012, as these things often don't. But timelines are hard to nail down even for "deep weird" sources with good faith. Take a little while to glance over this, even if it's not your usual fare.

"Rosebud": Stop thinking about a normal situation. The country is divided, which is exactly where Obama wants us to be. We are as ideologically divided as we were during the Civil War and that rift is growing every day. Add in a crisis – and economic crisis – where ATM and EBT cards will stop working. Where bank accounts will contain nothing but air. They are anticipating a revolution and a civil war rolled into one (emphasis added by this author).

We all saw what happened with the Feds & Occupy camps. The American Occupy-style organizing eased off as the US economy was in a kind of stasis during 2012, but if things tense up in 2013 we are looking at a different political situation. In Europe things have been moving at a much different tempo, along with a great deal of confusion, snaky liberal operations, and a rising neofascist & quasi-fascist network is taking root in many nations.

See also The Terrifying Reality of Long-Term Unemployment - Matthew O'Brien - The Atlantic

On a decidedly anti-alarmist tack, Bruce Schneier: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On - Bruce Schneier - The Atlantic

See TC Indymedia Exclusive: Secret 'Trigger' & blueprint for emergency domestic military crackdown plan revealed |


MOAR LINX: A bunch of stuff sitting around you may find interesting.

Just weird - part of a scifi based GE marketing campaign: 'The Matrix' is back (in your hospital) | Technically Incorrect - CNET News

Is Facebook's Secretbook Secure? CRYPTOME Colin Powell & Malcolm McDowell at Bohemian Grove 2013-0347.pdf // Hacktivists as Gadflies - Socrates to Jeremy Hammond // DoD Communications Systems Breach in 9/11 Trials

A little grumpycat may be worth reading - Guest Post: Are Individuals The Property Of The Collective? | Zero Hedge amirite Minneapolis?!

In Control at Layer 2: a Tectonic Shift in Network Security| Whitepapers | TechRepublic - hacking optic networks.

Wells Fargo 401(k) Loans Jump 28% as Older Workers Borrow - Bloomberg

CNBC! USD/Bitcoin - MTGOXUSD - Stock Quotes

The Real Story Behind Facebook Moderation and Your Petty Reports | The Internet Offends Me

DARKWEBSEARCH: Shodan: The scariest search engine on the Internet - Apr. 8, 2013

Australian FiberFail with a last mile of copper, you idiots: FTTN a huge “mistake”, says ex-BT CTO | Delimiter

Peak Recovery? | Zero Hedge

11 Economic Crashes That Are Happening RIGHT NOW

Wordpress Mess going on: This plugin should help: WordPress › Limit Login Attempts « WordPress Plugins


Anyway this is just a few trends happening now... I feel like the overall tone of this post is pretty conservative, as a lot of the research is coming out of places with that editorial slant. Nonetheless these are sources of information and lines of analysis that anyone is welcome to look at and come to their own conclusions.

I think that we urgently need to get real and start considering lots of alternate solutions, hopefully to avoid more authoritarian and crisis driven, panicky policies, like those fostered in the climate of the Fear of Terrorism which they are going to tediously lay on with a trowel for weeks, alongside major economic instability.

Batten All the Hatches.

The New 21st Century COINTELPRO Mobius Strip: Undisclosed Participation, "OTHERWISE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY," Federal & State Informants, drug ops auditing in MN


A quick update on a number of different fronts developing around 21st century Cointelpro operations. This material includes the important bureaucratic fault line of authorizing "otherwise" illegal government operations, an important topic of research... Granted, Season 3 of the X-Files is playing over my shoulder, a product of a more skeptical decade. Yeah, the truth is out there - and at least here we get tiny, but real, slivers of crucial folds in the origami.

The FBI file and the Minnesota State Auditor files aren't really smoking guns, but they clearly show us interesting & almost totally unknown new levels of the modern 21st century COINTELPRO system. Four apparently new documents about the obscure and rather deliberately shadowy world around the insertion of informants into political organizations, information with implications for any political movement that might get "spammed" by fake realities generated by people working as informant handlers, or also in the state level documents, outstate drug buys, interesting examples of cash, firearms and drugs floating around. The "upper" FBI reality described here certainly has implications for the "lower" state-level drug operations, paid informant & prosecution world - thus they make an interesting contrast for one post!

From two different sources, parts of the FBI's Unclassified / For Official Use Only (FOUO) Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide [DIOG] apparently revised September 5 2007, and from the other set of requests, Minnesota State Auditor Rebecca Otto's office checks in on the processes of outstate drug task forces engaged in asset forfeiture, drug buys, firearms stuff. When various audited processes turn out to be fails, some corrective actions are recommended. I'm also throwing in a motion for discovery on certain types of informants that could be promising - the next step down this line.

This is a continuation of: 2010 Oklahoma City Bombing Conspiracy Notes for April 19; Eric Holder's Trentadue Mission; SPLC Cutout @ Elohim City; CIA, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency roles | See also our friends who made A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995 - writeup.

The topic of the FBI file is certain to make almost any careerist in the world of "that Law thing" squirm because it is a form of documentation showing the entire edifice is one MC Escher-style mobius strip of fake morality, crimes truly authorized on paper -- heavily censored paper, but this is indeed clearly one such paper without any doubt.

Other parts of a similar DIOG file, with the same front page, was published by the ACLU in 2011(included below), but I think we got some new pages here. It's usually hard to find the precise chunks or "twists of the mobius strip of officially sanctioned crime" but fortunately I think we all got at least a few entirely fresh pages via a lucky FOIA. (I'm not totally certain the FBI drop is truly partly-new, but I haven't found key matching pages elsewhere. Plz let me know if you do!)

Group readings of this file [with a toast for every LOL] should be a mandatory drinking game / CLE for every single bar association and law review, because they show that the entire conceit is one big clusterfail, and I would dare any lawyer to make a coherent argument to the contrary.

This new relatively short FBI FOIA, I'm suspecting right now, hit some new paydirt because there are certain subtypes of FBI informants that are described with certain keywords, which could include people violating confidences, including within the media, clergy, doctors, lawyers etc. It opens up a line of inquiry that one Utah attorney Jesse Trentadue, has apparently stumbled into in his long-rolling FOIA lawsuit spurred by the suspicious murder of his brother in a federal prison (see for more).

At least we get some look at the terrain of specially labeled, high level FBI informants, the Gerald Fords of the world if you will [aka the Warren Commission snitch]. I can't think of another source that quite nails the different categories of FBI informants like the motion posted below, filed in the lawsuit which already has produced this (not to mention hard proof the CIA have at least some formal records of something related to the Oklahoma City Bombing still censored from our reach).

Mother Jones covered his case including the CIA angle in 7/2011: Did the FBI Bury Oklahoma City Bombing Evidence? | Mother Jones. Also: Trentadue OKC Lawsuits Expand To CIA, Add Demand For Videos via @intelwire. This new document also references the decidedly low-profile realm of private companies operated as FBI fronts. Not too bad!

On the Minnesota side, these drug task force audits are in fact publicly requestable records but not released on the interweb by default (part of the reason that very very few people are aware of the state auditor Otto's overall respectable role in the scheme of things).

Let's dive in - look for your favorite weird angle including FBI-controlled front businesses, "otherwise" illegal acts, and creating synthetic detours in authentic First Amendment Expression! Show to your favorite law-and-order acquaintances for some high-quality cognitive dissonance! :-D

[Partially] NEW FBI FILE:

FBI Illegal Informant Procedures - Confidential Human Source Policy Manual by

RELEVANT (but not particularly new) DOJ files:

Here is the ACLU 2011 file - I really think we got something similar but different:

FBI Confidential Human Source Policy Manual by

Cited as relevant see page 17 as marked, 23 as paginated PDF - AG Use of FBI confidential human sources authorization - includes Media Snitches (violating media confidentiality). The new Trentadue motion demands quantities, not names!

DOJ AG Use of FBI confidential human sources by


West Central Drug Task Force Audit

West Central Drug Task Force Audit by

Paul Bunyan Gang & Drug Task Force Audit

Paul Bunyan Gang &amp; Drug Task Force Audit by

Lakes Area Drug Investigation Team Audit

Lakes Area Drug Investigation Team Audit by


Among the other small angles to consider here, the role of Executive Order 12333 from Ronald Reagan indeed turns out to be crucial in understanding the formal institutionalization of the FBI as a bureaucracy which can operate illegally, in the realm of intelligence. It was pointed out in Al Martin's The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider that EO12333 was an important greenlight of sorts, as it led the way for "legalizing the illegal systems" of the "Iran-Contra" world particularly those involving drug and weapons trafficking through private shell companies (and EO12333 does talk a lot about front companies operated for intel functions).

Also I am adding part of a post from Bob McCarty about this case and this particular request, which shows a pretty good avenue into further inquiry. We could expect at least a few more interesting crumbs out of this line of research - certainly, stuff worth looking at. [A whole series of McCarty posts on Oklahoma City and the Trentadue inquiry I haven't even looked at!]

SOURCE: Brother of Murder Victim Seeks Details of FBI's 'Sensitive Informant Program' |

Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue filed a motion Monday asking a federal judge to determine whether he is entitled to limited discovery into the FBI’s “Sensitive Informant Program.”

In his motion, Trentadue described the program as one used by the bureau “to recruit and/or place informants on the staffs of members of the United States Congress and perhaps even federal judges, in the national media, within other federal agencies as well as the White House, on defense teams in high-profile federal and/or state criminal prosecutions, inside state and local law enforcement agencies, and even among the clergy of organized religions.”

Trentadue’s interest in the program stems from questions that have surfaced during his ongoing investigation into the death of Kenneth Trentadue, his brother who died in 1995 under suspicious circumstances while in custody at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City, months after theOklahoma City Bombing.


Click to learn more at

With his latest legal maneuver, Trentadue hopes to convince Judge Clark Waddoups to compel the FBI to provide all documentation outlining what he describes in the motion as an“unlawful and unconstitutional domestic spying program.”

The maneuver comes almost four weeks after the FBI answered a federal court complaint Trentadue filed under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain copies of the manual the FBI uses to recruit and place“sensitive informants.” Citing national security concerns as the basis for their response, FBI officials answered that complaint by saying they “can neither confirm nor deny the allegations [of the Complaint] regarding its confidential informant program.”

Shown below, Trentadue’s definition of a “sensitive informant” is, perhaps, the most interesting aspect of his motion:

“…the term ‘Sensitive Informant’ is defined as anyone acting, directly or indirectly and with or without any compensation, on behalf of the FBI as a member of, person associated with or otherwise a participant in or observer of the activity or activities of an entity, organization, group, governmental agency or unit, association of organizations or individuals, public official, member of Congress, judge, cleric and/or religious or political organization AND who does not disclose or reveal to such entity, organization, group, governmental agency or unit, association of organizations or individuals, public official, member of Congress, judge, cleric and/or religious or political organization his or her FBI affiliation.

“A Sensitive Informant is, in other words, some one who is acting, directly or indirectly, on behalf of the FBI as an undisclosed participant in or observer of the activity or activities of an entity, organization, group, governmental agency or unit, association of organizations or individuals, public official, member of Congress, judge, cleric and/or religious or political organization.

“The term ‘Sensitive Informant’ likewise includes what the FBI’s current terminology refers to as a ‘Confidential Human Source’ including any and all sub-categories of Confidential Human Sources such as, but not limited to, what the FBI refers to as a ‘Privileged Confidential Human Source,’ who is someone reporting confidential information to the FBI in violation of a privilege such as an attorney reporting his client’s confidential communications, a physician reporting upon his patient’s medical or mental condition, a cleric informing on a member of his or her church or other religious organization, etc.

In his motion, Trentadue requested the judge order FBI officials to answer 11 critical questions about the scope of their “Sensitive Informant Program” prior to a yet-to-be-scheduled hearing during which, according to Trentadue, FBI officials have said they will file a motion for summary judgment to prevent him access to the information he seeks.

Looking only for numbers of Sensitive Informants and not for specific names from the FBI, Trentadue’s questions target the time frame, “since January 1, 1995.” In short, he wants to know whether or not the agency has had Sensitive Informants inside a variety of government and non-governmental organizations.

Among the government organizations mentioned in his queries were the state and federal court systems, the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, federal agencies other than the FBI, federal prosecutors’ offices, and law enforcement agencies at the municipal, county and state levels.

Among non-governmental agencies, he listed management positions inside news organizations, including but not limited to, the following:  Associated Press, ABC,CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NBC, NPR, PBS, Reuters or Scripps-Howard;Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Miami Herald, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and/or Washington Post; The Daily Beast, Mother Jones, The New American, Newsweek, TIME and/orU.S. News & World Report.

Curiously, he also asked whether the FBI has had a Sensitive Informant(s) who was a cleric or member of the clergy in any religious organization.

Though I doubt the FBI will answer Trentadue’s questions, I’m convinced the attorney will continue fighting until he learns the whole truth about his brother’s death and, perhaps, about the Oklahoma City Bombing, too.

To appreciate the full scope and breadth of Trentadue’s latest effort, I suggest you read the motion. It’s one of more than two-dozen posts I’ve published in my series, Untold Stories of the Oklahoma City Bombing. Included in the series are more than a dozen posts aboutTrentadue’s pursuit of the truth.

Hopefully not a problem to copy the post as this is a relatively important issue. Anyway I will leave it there for the moment as the hour is late. Informants and protected illegal operations -- truly the can of worms is enormous. The FBI's informant systems across many elite sectors remains to be sniffed out further - and the curious goings-on of obscure rural Minnesota drug task forces also suggests more research is needed.

The other problems with informants, the political spam and the psychological wreckage they leave in their wake -- along with indeed the damage to their own psyches -- will hopefully get further attention, as we have a few other key facts bubbling up. Good luck to everyone on finding more info - regardless of political orientation it's really important to nail down as much of this stuff as possible, before you get spammed by yet another informant!!

Syndicate content