Archive for Israel
Sadia Malik, a special education needs (SEN) coordinator at Cardiff Muslim primary school in Wales has been accused of “actively” promoting a banned hate group in the country’s capital. According to the Sunday Times newspaper, which has accessed a confidential police report, Malik was present at a meeting organised by the Supporters of Tawheed group in January.
The teacher was named a “key subject of interest” by police and linked to extremist Sajid Idris – the head of the group and former spokesman for the banned organisation Islamic Path.
On its website, the Supporters of Tawheed claim: “It is only a matter of time until Islam will prevail in the whole world and this is something that we believe in and are striving to see.”
There is no suggestion Malik’s links to the group have impeded on her work at the school, the Times reported, but the school has launched an investigation.
Malik, who is in her thirties, has publicly backed moves by what was then the Welsh Assembly Government to embrace young people from minority ethnic groups.
She told the BBC in 2005: “It’s always our parents’ generation who get approached. Maybe younger people would be more ready to speak out given the chance.”
Earlier this year, an Islamic teacher came under fire for calling on Welsh muslims to support the fight for Sharia law. Abu Hajar, who leads the same group Malik is allegedly connected to, told a meeting freedom and democracy are “false deities” before the it was broken up in an anti-terror raid.
In a last minute deal, Israel’s largest party joined the government to form a grand coalition and push back planned elections to the end of 2013.
The politicians in the this government are mostly committed to remain in their seats, and not rocking the boat in the near future. This certainly reduces the chances of a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities and will add to the downward pressure on oil prices.
The Israeli parliament was already deep in the process of approving early elections on September 4th. Also politicians were warming up, and many seemed keen to go to the people, including PM Binyamin Netanyahu, who leads the right-wing government.
Yet the leader of Israel’s largest party, centrist Kadima, was set for a severe loss in these elections. Also defense minister Ehud Barak was likely to end his career gaining no seats in the new parliament. Also some other leaders had an interest to cling to power and avoid elections, fearing the recovering Labor Party and a new party led by former journalist Yair Lapid.
In a deal made late at night, just before the final vote on the election law, Kadima and ruling party Likud reached a deal: Kadima’s leader, Shaul Mofaz would join the government. The elections are now pushed back to the original date: late 2013. Perhaps Netanyahu saw Hollande’s victory in France and feared the same fate.
Shaul Mofaz is a former chief of staff, like defense minister Barak. Nevertheless, Mofaz, born in Iran, is openly opposed to any strike on Iran and said that this is not the time and that this should be left for the Americans.
He also blamed Prime Minister Netanyahu for manipulating the Iranian story to change the agenda from the social justice protests that rocked the country in the summer of 2011 and are still high on the agenda.
Mofaz did not live up to his word by joining Netanyahu’s government. However, with a coalition encompassing most of the current parliament, and with elections due only in a year and a half, it’s hard to see the current leaders rushing for an attack on Iran.
In addition, the US is putting pressure on Israel not to make any move at least until the US elections in November.
Israel, Iran, Oil and the Dollar
So, it’s reasonable to expect that Israel will not strike Iran at least in the next 6 months and will also move to other things on the Israeli agenda such as recruiting ultra orthodox Jews to the army, as the controversial “Tal law” expires.
Lower rhetoric or no rhetoric regarding Iran means more downward pressure on oil prices. This goes hand in hand with the global slowdown that already weighs on crude oil.
Lower oil prices leave more money in the pockets of Americans, boost the US economy and support a stronger dollar.
You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”
This was the essence of Operation Gladio, a decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West — against their own populations. Hundreds of innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks — on train stations, supermarkets, cafes and offices — which were then blamed on “leftist subversives” or other political opponents. The purpose, as stated above in sworn testimony by Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra, was to demonize designated enemies and frighten the public into supporting ever-increasing powers for government leaders — and their elitist cronies.
First revealed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in 1991, Gladio (from the Latin for “sword”) is still protected to this day by its founding patrons, the CIA and MI6. Yet parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have shaken out a few fragments of the truth over the years. These have been gathered in a new book, “NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe,” by Daniele Ganser, as Lila Rajiva reports on CommonDreams.org.
Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated behind the lines in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and manipulation, directed by NATO and Washington. Using right-wing militias, underworld figures, government provocateurs and secret military units, Gladio not only carried out widespread terrorism, assassinations and electoral subversion in democratic states such as Italy, France and West Germany, but also bolstered fascist tyrannies in Spain and Portugal, abetted the military coup in Greece and aided Turkey’s repression of the Kurds.
Among the “smoking guns” unearthed by Ganser is a Pentagon document, Field Manual FM 30-31B, which details the methodology for launching terrorist attacks in nations that “do not react with sufficient effectiveness” against “communist subversion.” Ironically, the manual states that the most dangerous moment comes when leftist groups “renounce the use of force” and embrace the democratic process. It is then that “U.S. army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger.” Naturally, these peace-throttling “special operations must remain strictly secret,” the document warns.
Indeed, it would not do for the families of the 85 people ripped apart by the Aug. 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station to know that their loved ones had been murdered by “men inside Italian state institutions and … men linked to the structures of United States intelligence,” as the Italian Senate concluded after its investigation in 2000.
The Bologna atrocity is an example of what Gladio’s masters called “the strategy of tension” — fomenting fear to keep populations in thrall to “strong leaders” who will protect the nation from the ever-present terrorist threat. And as Rajiva notes, this strategy wasn’t limited to Western Europe. It was applied, with gruesome effectiveness, in Central America by the Reagan and Bush administrations. During the 1980s, right-wing death squads, guerrilla armies and state security forces — armed, trained and supplied by the United States — murdered tens of thousands of people throughout the region, often acting with particular savagery at those times when peaceful solutions to the conflicts seemed about to take hold.
Last month, it was widely reported that the Pentagon is considering a similar program in Iraq. What was not reported, however — except in the Iraqi press — is that at least one pro-occupation death squad is already in operation. Just days after the Pentagon plans were revealed, a new militant group, “Saraya Iraqna,” began offering big wads of American cash for insurgent scalps — up to $50,000, the Iraqi paper Al Ittihad reports. “Our activity will not be selective,” the group promised. In other words, anyone they consider an enemy of the state will be fair game.
Strangely enough, just as it appears that the Pentagon is establishing Gladio-style operations in Iraq, there has been a sudden rash of terrorist attacks on outrageously provocative civilian targets, such as hospitals and schools, the Guardian reports. Coming just after national elections in which the majority faction supported slates calling for a speedy end to the American occupation, the shift toward high-profile civilian slaughter has underscored the “urgent need” for U.S. forces to remain on the scene indefinitely, to provide security against the ever-present terrorist threat. Meanwhile, the Bushists continue constructing their long-sought permanent bases in Iraq: citadels to protect the oil that incoming Iraqi officials are promising to sell off to American corporations — and launching pads for new forays in geopolitical domination.
Perhaps it’s just a coincidence. But the U.S. elite’s history of directing and fomenting terrorist attacks against friendly populations is so extensive — indeed, so ingrained and accepted — that it calls into question the origin of every terrorist act that roils the world. With each fresh atrocity, we’re forced to ask: Was it the work of “genuine” terrorists or a “black op” by intelligence agencies — or both?
While not infallible, the ancient Latin question is still the best guide to penetrating the bloody murk of modern terrorism: Cui bono? Who benefits? Whose powers and policies are enhanced by the attack? For it is indisputable that the “strategy of tension” means power and profit for those who claim to possess the key to “security.” And from the halls of the Kremlin to the banks of the Potomac, this cynical strategy is the ruling ideology of our times.