THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Monday, June 30, 2008



A website calling itself ‘Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories’ seems to have certain characteristics that look suspiciously like neoconservative propaganda websites. Even the opening background colour is almost identical to the old Project for the New American Century website indicating, perhaps, that the same webmaster is behind this website.

debunking9/ is a very sophisticated, extensive and professionally put together website that clearly has had a lot of expensive expertise poured into it. It goes to extraordinary lengths to attempt to debunk the evidence that has presented itself on the internet over the last seven years as an alternative to the US government’s version of the events of 9/11, but – and this is where the site gives itself away – it doesn’t attempt to debunk just some aspects of the new evidence that has been presented, but it tries to debunk every bit of it. It is that characteristic that defines it as a propaganda site rather than a site that is scientifically objective with its arguments.

But what really gives it away is the rhetoric and tone of the narrative, which is presented in a pseudo-technical pseudo-academic way, but which is transparently intermingled with outright neoconservative propaganda which has nothing to do with the events of 9/11.

Take, for example, this on the ‘Osama bin Laden’ page of their website:
“Conspiracy theorists like to say ‘Some Arabs with box cutters couldn't have pulled this off.’ Let's forget for a minute how racist that statement is”.

Firstly, of course, one needs to ask; what conspiracy theorists like to say ‘Some Arabs with box cutters couldn't have pulled this off’? Trying to cast those that doubt the US government’s official version of the events of 9/11 as ‘racists’ is a classic neoconservative tactic used because of the connotations of the word ‘racist’ has with ‘anti-Semitism’.

The other classic attribute that gives the website its distinctive neoconservative characteristic is the way it attempts to belittle and demonise those that advocate alternative scenarios to the events of 9/11. The website even has a page dedicated to attacking Professor Steven E. Jones and Professor David Ray Griffin as well as others that have put forward ideas that are not in line with the government’s version of events.

One has to ask who has paid for this professionally put together and very sophisticated yet transparently propagandising website. Only dedicated neoconservatives with a political agenda of trying to prevent the truth of the events of 9/11 being exposed would go to such great lengths as producing such an obvious propaganda website. One can only assume that those seeking the truth must be on to something for the neocons to put this much effort into trying to prevent the truth from being revealed.

Sunday, June 29, 2008


As the window of opportunity for an attack against Iran by the Israelis and the US steadily closes as the George W. Bush presidency comes to an end so the likelihood of such an attack looms ever larger.

Those pushing for war argue, despite the total lack of any evidence to support their claims, that Iran has a nuclear weapons program and that they will use their nuclear weapons, once they have them, against Israel. Their allegations are reinforced by what they say are President Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric about ‘wiping Israel off the map’.

All of this is merely propaganda and neither Israel nor the US or even the International Atomic Energy Authority, the UNs nuclear watchdog, can produce any evidence whatsoever to support Israeli and US claims about Iran’s so-called nuclear weapons program.

The reality is this: Israel and their supporters have been carrying on about Iran’s nuclear ambitions for years and threats to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities were being made long before Ahmadinejad became President of Iran in August, 2005. Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric has merely been a reaction to Israel’s bellicose stance towards Iran and, with a little careful massaging of translations of his speeches by the neoconservative think tank, MEMRI, has provided much fodder for the Israel/neocon propaganda machine. However, the real reason Israel wants to attack Iran is not because of Iran’s ‘nuclear weapons program’ – it simply doesn’t have one – nor is it because Ahmadinejad has said he wants to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ – he never said any such thing – it is because Iran supports both Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories and Syria who are seeking to have the Golan Heights returned to them. What Israel and the US and their neoconservative allies really want is ‘regime change’ in Iran. They want an Iran that has an Israel and US friendly government so that Israel can continue in its quest to create a Greater Israel without having to worry about Iran supporting those that are resisting Israeli expansionism.

In the event of Israel and the US attacking Iran, one can expect to see not just Iran’s nuclear facilities destroyed, indeed, that will be just a minor part of the operation, but there will also be major attacks against Iranian military targets including air bases, missile storage areas, barracks, etc. Iran’s communications systems and government buildings will also likely be targeted. In short, the Iranian government would be bombed into capitulation.

One can also expect Israel to launch an attack, probably simultaneously with the assault on Iran, against Hamas in the Gaza and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Israel may also attack Syria pre-emptively on the basis that Syria has a mutual assistance treaty with Iran. The resulting conflict could have a devastating effect both on the region and around the world. As well as bringing death and destruction to countless Iranians, Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians, many Israelis may also die as Iran launches missiles in a counter attack against Israel, a move that could escalate rapidly if Israel decided to its use nuclear weapons against Iran in retaliation to an Iranian counter attack.

The economic consequences for the rest of the world could also be catastrophic. Oil prices, already at record levels due to the uncertainties prevailing in the region, would play havoc with economies world wide.

Then there are the unknowns. How, for example, will Russia, a supplier of nuclear equipment to Iran, and China, a customer of Iran’s resources, react to such an attack? How will the UN handle a pre-emptive assault against Iran? How will the governments of the other Arab states react? How will the peoples of the other Arab states react? What will happen in Iraq, already destroyed by over half a decade of fighting?

The world, somehow, is not reacting to the prospect of war in the same way as it did during the build-up to the invasion of Iraq. The reason for that is; the world knew the invasion of Iraq was coming, but this time around there is no overt preparations for war against Iran in the way that there was against Iraq. There is even a feeling that the US simply wouldn’t be stupid enough to do it again after the disaster of Iraq. The problem is, however, that the extreme right-wing of the US and Israel are convinced of their own self-righteousness and that all will go according to their plans.

It’s a frightening scenario. The Middle East could erupt into catastrophic war at any tick of the clock but the world doesn’t seem to think its going to happen.

How many times has it thought that before?!

Thursday, June 19, 2008


Turns out it was after all.

The only people to have benefited from the US invasion and occupation of Iraq have been the oil companies. Not only has the war and the insecurity that it has brought ensured rocketing higher prices that have given the oil companies massive profits at the expense of the lives of millions of people but now the control of the source of the oil in Iraq is about to be handed over to US and allied oil companies.

Andrew Kramer of The New York Times writes, ‘There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the United States had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract.’ Well, it seems their suspicions were well founded.

Kramer goes on; ‘The Bush administration has said that the war was necessary to combat terrorism.’ The war against the Iraqi people was never about ‘terrorism’; it was about Saddam Hussein being an immediate threat to the world and having WMDs which we were told he was able to use against the West within 45 minutes notice to his generals.

Kramer continues: ‘It is not clear what role the United States played in awarding the contracts; there are still American advisers to Iraq’s Oil Ministry.’ It seems perfectly clear to me. The Iraqi puppet government, bribed and bought by the US, have had no choice other than to award these ‘no-bid’ contracts to US and allied oil companies. They would never have gone to Chinese or Russian companies even if they had bid more for them.

Little of the wealth that these contracts bring will see its way back to the Iraqi people. Big Oil will take the lions share and then some will find its way back to their corrupt minions and puppets in the Iraq government leaving just a few crumbs for the Iraq people.

Oil? What oil?

Wednesday, June 18, 2008


As it becomes increasingly apparent that the reality of the events of 9/11 bear little resemblance to the US governments official explanation of that dreadful day, and given that the consequences of those events have been so utterly profound for the American people and the rest of the world, and given also that seven years later the Bush administration and the Israeli orientated neoconservatives within the Bush administration has still yet to achieve its aims of ridding Israel of its enemies, one wonders if the world will actually still see a 2008 Presidential election. I ponder the question because the next Presidential election is likely to see the demise entirely of the Bush/Cheney neocon/Israeli conglomerate that has dominated the last seven years of world history.

If all is not as it has been told to us, and it seems that it isn’t, then there are some people out there that had gone to an awful lot of trouble to make 9/11 and its subsequent consequences happen and one would have to wonder if, after having gone to all that trouble, they are simply going to just walk away from it all at the next Presidential election.

Since it looks increasingly likely that a Presidential election will indeed see the end of Bush and the neocons, one needs to ask what could possibly happen that would negate the need for such an election thus allowing the administration and the neocons and all of their allies the necessary extra time to complete their goal of ridding Israel of their enemies and to establish an everlasting US presence in a region that contains much of the worlds energy resources.

One of the consequences of 9/11 was the “Declaration of Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks” issued on 9/11 by Bush under the authority of the National Emergencies Act. Subsequent to that declaration has been the issuance of National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD 51) which has given the president authority to do whatever he deems necessary after any “catastrophic emergency”. This includes cancelling elections, suspending the Constitution or launching a nuclear attack.

There are, of course, a number of “catastrophic emergency” scenarios which might trigger the activation of NSPD 51. There could, for example, be another 9/11 type ‘attack’ by ‘terrorists’ who once again use airliners to crash into populated places or buildings. However, given the amount of suspicion raised over the last ‘attack’ made in this way it would seem unlikely that this type of attack will occur again. There could, perhaps, be a massive bomb ‘attack’ at, say, a packed sporting stadium, or even a series of coordinated ‘attacks’ on such events causing massive casualties that can be blamed on ‘terrorists’. One could conceivably imagine even a small nuclear devise being detonated in a middle sized city, though one could almost guarantee that it won’t be Washington DC or New York.

I’m not so sure that Bush would actually be in the loop for a conspiracy of that magnitude, particularly when one recalls the stunned mullet look on his face when he heard about the attacks on the World Trade Center. It wasn’t the look of a President shocked by what had happened because such a shock would have moved any President who wasn’t aware of what was happening into immediate action. Instead, the look on Bush’s face and his inability to react as a President should have was more like; ‘My god, they’ve actually gone and done it’. It’s a bit like knowing that a very old and ill but much loved person is about to pass away; it’s expected and inevitable but nonetheless it still comes as shock when you hear that it has actually happened. The reality of it finally dawns but it takes some moments to get used to it. That’s the look Bush had after Andy Card told him that the second aircraft had gone in. At that point there was no turning back. The first aircraft going in could have been written off as a terrible accident; indeed, Bush actually said that that was what he believed when he heard of the first aircraft going in. But the second aircraft clearly told the world that the first was no accident. My personal belief is, and I have no evidence at all to support this, is that Bush didn’t know exactly what was going to happen; he just knew that something was going to happen. He reacted accordingly after initially hearing the news and later he soon rallied his senses so that he could play his part in the rest of the plan.

I have no doubt that those that planned and perpetrated 9/11 are perfectly ruthless enough to perpetrate some other atrocity on the American people that will enable them to continue toward their goal. I further have no doubt that, whatever happens next, will happen regardless of Bush being in the loop or not; which brings us to one other scenario.

Vice-President Dick Cheney has been an unswerving supporter of the neocons and their goals. He is more hawkish than Bush could ever be and is far closer to the right-wing elements within Israel’s Likud party than Bush is. Where Bush favours developing a two-state solution where a fragmented and subservient Palestine exists always within the shadow of Israel, Cheney supports the one-state policy of Likud and their Zionist allies where there is no Palestine and only a Greater Israel where there was once a West Bank and Gaza Strip populated by Palestinians. Cheney does not support the two-state solution or the one-state binational solution. Cheney only supports the Zionists vision of a Greater Israel.

Cheney is also aware that the only way that Israel will be able to realise a Greater Israel is if its direct enemies, Hamas and Hezbollah, are able to be subdued and that will only happen when Iran is no longer able to support them. It is this that is the unfinished business of the neoconservatives and the Zionist extremists of Israel.

Now, if Dick Cheney were to become President….

Monday, June 16, 2008


As if to emphasise his contempt for a world that despises him, the UK Guardian has reported:

In an apparent riposte to the London demonstration, Bush said last night that public opinion had never been a guiding principle of his presidency. "I want it to be said about George W Bush that, when he finished his presidency, he looked in the mirror and [saw] a man who did not compromise his core principles for the sake of politics or the Gallup poll," he told Sky. "You can't lead in this world if you chase something as temporary as a popularity poll."

He forgot to add that he didn’t even compromise his core principles when the ultimate popularity poll, the one the American people use to decide who will be their next President, goes against him – he just ignored them as he has done ever since.

Sunday, June 15, 2008


Apparently President George W. Bush, the worlds most despised man judging by the amount of security the government of his closest ally, the UK, needs to provide him on his ‘farewell tour’ visit to Britain, and which for most people is more like a ‘good riddance tour’, wants to get Osama bin Laden before he finally leaves office.

Never mind that he’s had years to do it in and now all of a sudden it’s important. It wasn’t that long ago that Bush was telling neocon Fred Barnes and the world that ObL “was not a top priority use of American resources”. Perhaps that’s why Bush is asking for British resources to handle the job instead.

It seems it’s not about justice anymore, or about trying to put an end to the war on ‘terrorism’; it’s all about George W. Bush and him wanting to go out on a high note. However, he has a problem. As most of the world now knows, bin Laden doesn’t exist anymore accept as a figment of the imagination of the West’s dumb and gullible that have succumbed to the neocons propaganda that has for years attempted to perpetuate the myth of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda (with branches now everywhere). The reality is; bin Laden died years ago with his death widely reported even in the mainstream media.

Just after 9/11, Bush saw to it that bin Laden became the worlds most despised man; now, it is Bush that is the most despised man and no one cares anymore about the long dead bin Laden – except, of course, megalomanic lunatics like Bush who still actually imagines that the world is grateful for what he has done to it.

History will not be kind to Bush nor to those other Western leaders that supported his lies and fed his wars and ego. There will be no bin Laden ‘to get’ and Bush will remain forever the most despised and delusional leader the world has ever known.

Wednesday, June 11, 2008


By later today we should know what Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has decided to do. According to reports, Olmert at first decided he would fight off those within his own party, Kadima, who wanted him to step down but, since yesterdays cabinet meeting, it looks as though he has been discouraged from resisting further and has no alternative but to allow a primary spill to replace him.

However, such action may be too late to avert a general election. The Knesset, Israel’s parliament, is set to vote next week, 18 June, to dissolve itself; a move that will trigger a general election. Recent polling has shown that, if an election were to be held in the near future, Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the extreme right-wing and neoconservative Zionist party, Likud, together with its ultra right-wing nationalist allies, would win.

A Netanyahu win will mean disaster for the Palestinian people and for the wider Middle East region. The ultra-hawk Netanyahu is itching to have a go at the Iranian regime and is determined to see the fruition of a Greater Israel that includes the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Golan Height, the Shebaa Farms and even the south of Lebanon up to the Litani River.

One can only hope that all this doesn’t happen while Bush and Cheney are still around in the White House!


What the neoconservatives had hoped would have been a ‘New American Century’ is disappearing into historical oblivion as their dreams of a Central Asia and Middle East subservient to American and Israeli dictates flounders and collapses under the weight of blatant lies, arrogant hypocrisy and blind hatred. Instead of creating a new democratic Islamic world in the Middle East, they have only succeeded in demonstrating how utterly ruinous the result of their lies have been on the peoples of Iraq who have suffered possibly a million dead and millions more displaced from their homes in a nation that after five years of relentless abuse by the allies and their Iraqi puppets has been all but destroyed. And still no end in sight as the Americans, contrary to what they told the world, seek permanency in the oil-rich state they have destroyed.

But it’s not just the Iraqi nation that the neoconservatives have destroyed; America itself has also been forced to immeasurably suffer. It is the American people that have borne the cost of the neoconservatives dreams which for many Americans has turned out to be only a nightmare as they watched their sons and daughters go off to fight the neoconservatives wars from which some never returned alive and others who came back torn and mutilated only to die later or to live the rest of their lives dealing with their disabilities.

And the cost to the American people isn’t just measured in lives lost or smashed forever; every American has had to shoulder the financial burden of the neoconservative’s monumental folly as well. The US dollar has been severely weakened, petrol and other fuels have sky rocketed in cost and price, billions, no, trillions, of taxpayers dollars have been either wasted or simply stolen, military veterans go without care and shelter, America’s public health system is collapsing as is its public education system, and America’s standing in the world has been reduced to virtually nothing as the world increasingly recognises that it has been conned by the neocons and the Bush administration.

But from the beginning things have started to go sour for the neoconservatives and their dreams for a New American Century. The war against the Iraqi people didn’t go as the way they expected it to. US and allied troops weren’t welcomed with open arms by a grateful Iraqi people. There were no hordes of Iraqi people lining the road up to Baghdad throwing flowers at the feet of a glorious liberating army. There was no ‘cakewalk’ as the American people were told there would be. The lies were soon exposed. There were no Weapons of Mass Destruction as the neoconservatives told the world there was. Saddam, it turned out, had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 as the neoconservatives claimed as their reason for attacking Iraq. And when the Iraqis insisted that they have the ‘democracy’ the US had promised them, they gave their votes to the religious parties that were not interested in the kind of ‘democracy’ that the US had to offer. Insurgents that didn’t want invaders in their country fought back and five years later are still fighting back.

And then the neoconservative political empire began to collapse. First to go was Bush’s biggest supporter, ex British Prime Minister Tony Blair who dragged his country into a war that the vast majority of the British people didn’t want. And while Bush’s other supporter, Australia’s Prime Minister John Howard managed to lie his way back in to power at elections he should have otherwise lost, he too was eventually given the flick by a people that realised they had also been taken for a ride by this lying ultra-nationalist. So annoyed were the Australian people that they had been lied to that not only did they tell Howard’s government where to get off but they also ensured that Howard himself no longer had a seat in the Australian parliament.

Finally, now, the window is closing on the neoconservative era as it becomes increasingly apparent that the next Presidential elections will see an end to neoconservative domination of American politics for years to come and with it will be the end of a world dominated by war and fear that was the hallmark of the neocons New American Century.

But while it is the end of the New American Century, it is not the end of the world. The man that has replaced the Australian war criminal John Howard has announced the dawn of the New Asia-Pacific Century. Kevin Rudd, Australia’s new Labor government Prime Minister, made the announcement in a speech to the Asia Society Australasia last week. The notion of a New Asia-Pacific Century was reinforced by Rudd during a recent visit to Japan where he visited Hiroshima and announced an initiative that is so startlingly refreshing from a Western world leader that it, together with the demise of the New American Century and the neocons that bought the scourge of war and death along with it, could see the beginning of a new movement around the world that demands a Century that is free entirely of all nuclear weapons and the threat of war.

Look out for Part Two coming soon.

Monday, June 09, 2008


If those of us who seek the truth of history are known as ‘truthers’ by those on the extreme right who are unwilling to accept discussion about what the truth actually may be, what does that make them?

Well, for the most part, many of them have simply proved to be the opposite – and that, of course, is ‘liars’.

To be a ‘truther’ is a label I’m quite happy and, indeed, proud to wear despite the right-wings attempts to morph the term into having some kind of derogatory meaning. Those on the right-wing that are simple-minded enough to believe that the term ‘truther’ is something demeaning are merely only managing to demonstrate how absurd their misuse of the word is and how stupid they actually are; the only people they impress by using the term is their own kind .

Australian journalist, Tim Blair who writes for Rupert Murdoch’s (why isn’t that a surprise) Sydney ‘Daily Telegraph’, is a classic example of a right-wing warmonger and believer of government fairy stories who thinks that the truth is something that should never be sought especially when it comes to question marks that hang over the big events and affairs of our times. Included among these naturally is, for example, the extent of ‘al Qaeda’ influence on those that defend themselves against US and Israeli invasions and occupations of lands that don’t belong to them, or questions regarding the events of 9/11.

Tim Blair is more than happy to utilise well known and proven actual liars like Dylan Kissane and fraudsters like Eliot Ramsey at his blog at the ‘Daily Telegraph’ and his own previous blog in order to try and belittle those of us that seek the truth. He has a whole gaggle of them that regularly post comments there, mainly to just each other, competing to come up with the best insult or latest joke about ‘truthers’ and assorted ‘lefties’. One wonders if Blair realises that his main audience is just those right-wing lunatics that gather at his blog and very little of anyone else. And is he aware that the only people that are being made fools of are themselves and him on the odd occasion that someone other than a right-wing loon visits his Islamophobic warmongering anti left blog.


It’s been a year since Hamas asserted its rightful role as the democratically elected government in the Gaza Strip after corrupt Fatah forces there had unsuccessfully tried to usurp Hamas’s governance of the Palestinian enclave. Hamas’s victory in the January 2006 elections was not recognised by Israel or the US, the two nations on our planet that scream loudest about the necessity of democracy in the region. Instead, they ensured that the corrupt Fatah organisation under Abbas took control of Palestinian affairs, a move that, while successful in the West Bank, was unsuccessful in the Gaza.

Ever since Hamas took control of the Gaza, the Israelis have hounded the Gazan Palestinians, in many cases, literally to death through bombing and denial of basic health access. Hundreds of men, women and children have died through indiscriminate IDF helicopter gunship and strike fighter aircraft attacks on the densely populated Gaza Strip. Tens of thousands more are suffering through the lack fuel and other supplies. Scores have died through not being allowed to leave the Gaza for proper medical treatment. Homes have been demolished and much of what little productive land remains that is able to provide food has been bulldozed bare by the Israelis. All this has been in an effort to dislodge Hamas from their position of governance. In short, the Gazan people are being collectively punished for having had the temerity to exercise their democratic rights voting in a government that the Israel and the US do not accept.

In an effort to stem and deter the Israeli attacks on the Gazan people and their government, Palestinian fighters have launched crude and largely ineffective rockets against Israel, acts that Israel simply uses as an excuse for even more attacks against the Gazan people.

During the past year the Israelis have threatened to launch a full-on invasion of the Gaza to oust Hamas from power using Hamas’s futile rocket attacks against Israel as the casus belli for such an invasion. Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister has on countless occasions threatened such action but, as yet, has not carried it out despite Hamas and other Palestinian fighters continuing to launch their rockets against Israel.

Israel has always sought to justify anything they do militarily by telling the world that they are merely acting in response to acts committed against them by their Arab enemies. They rarely strike openly without trying to find some excuse to justify their crimes, even if it is one that they have had to invent for the purpose.

As the USS Liberty Affair and the Lavon Affair has demonstrated in the past, the Israelis are not above committing crimes themselves and then deflecting blame for those crimes onto others in order to get other nations to help their fight wars with them or, better still, for them. Nor are the Israelis above getting non-Israeli Diaspora Jews that support the Zionist dream to work toward those ends. Jewish-American neoconservatives whose loyalties to Israel are stronger than their loyalties to the US together with their non-Jewish supporters have orchestrated and manipulated US governmental affairs over the last eight years in such a way as to benefit Israel. As a direct result of the 9/11, a crime that is now increasingly being questioned with regard to who the true perpetrators were, has resulted in the US launching an all out propaganda war against Islam. It also provided the casus belli for an attack against the peoples of Afghanistan where Israel says its enemies hide, and it also provided the casus belli for the invasion and destruction of Iraq, a country led by Saddam Hussein who financially supported the Palestinian cause but had nothing to do with 9/11.

Iran is now the only nation left that is powerful enough to stand in the way of the Zionist’s dream of a Greater Israel that includes the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, the Shebaa Farms and south Lebanon up to the Litani River. Without Iran to supply and support Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas the Israeli Zionists believe that their dream of a Greater Israel can be realised.

All they need is an excuse, a casus belli, to attack Iran but it is something that they cannot do alone; they need the US to do it for them. Hamas in the Gaza may just be the fuse they need to ignite their final confrontation against Iran. By attacking Hamas, Israel knows that Hezbollah will likely come to their aid by launching rockets against northern Israel. This, as in the last war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, will be the excuse the Israelis need to launch an all-out attack against and an invasion of Lebanon. The first sign of any Iranian weapons being used by Hezbollah against the Israelis will be all that is needed to launch a deadly aerial bombardment campaign against Iran designed to force capitulation and regime change.

The on-again-off-again threatened attack against Hamas in the Gaza that could well spark the final confrontation between Israel and Iran and drawing in the US is being threatened again.

The world should make no mistake about what is happening. Hamas and their hold on the Gaza are being used by the Israelis to provide the launch pad for their final confrontation with Iran. As the window of opportunity closes as Bush’s presidency comes to an end, the threat of such a confrontation has become more urgent.

It’s just a matter of timing now – and time is running out.

Saturday, June 07, 2008


Geoff Pahoff, one of the most obnoxious Islamophobes in the blogosphere, has posted at Webdiary to support his delusional lying friend Craig Warton.

I remind readers of Pahoff’s disgusting hate-speak:

I celebrated wildly when that filthy bag of puss [sic], ‘the old blind wheel-chair bound spiritual leader’ finally kissed what was left of his miserable fanny and did the world the enormous favour, albeit somewhat forced, of departing from it for all eternity. Thereby correcting a major anomaly in the order of things by being born in the first place. Or not drowned slowly at the first opportunity. The slimy ignorant lying slice of toxic shit.

One wonders if the equally obnoxious Noelene Konstandinitis is likely to show up at Webdiary at any moment to complete the display of assorted liars, fraudsters, warmongers, hatemongers, decievers and manipulators that Kingston entertains at Webdiary these days.

Kostandinitis will be rembered for this piece of hate-speak:

Of course it is EXCELLENT news that Israel is FINALLY sticking up for itself! What neither the Pals, nor the western bourgeois left, seems [sic] to be able to get their think [sic] heads around is that Israel could have destroyed Egypt, Syria, AND Jordan AND kicked the Pals out in 1948, 56, 67, 73, etc. The only thing stopping them every single time was the US! All this would have been over DECADES over [sic], if the U.S. had just let nature take its course.The wretched camel-jockeys have NO right to be in the Holy Land and the sooner they catch the next magic carpet or camel sleigh to Jordan, Syria, or Egypt the better! The Israelis MUST seize this opportunity to totally turn around the whole tedious farce of the middle east. It is time to bitchslap the fetid Mohammedans into next week. Vaporize the pigs! A world without Muslims would be a lovely world indeed!

These are the sorts of people that Kingston gives space to at Webdiary. Free speech is one thing but allowing this bunch of right-wing lunatics space to strut their stuff is pure hypocrisy for someone that professes to be left-wing. Let them spout ther evil garbage and propaganda somewhere else.


An obsessed right-wing supporter of Webdiary’s liars and fraudsters has been making a nuisance of him/herself at this site with a constant barrage of childish comments about myself and some other Webdiarists and former Webdiarists. In the main I simply delete these comments or switch on the moderation option when I’m not at the computer.

Here’s an example of this persons handiwork:

Damian Lataan is a con artist liar and deceiver.
He censors comments from people who disagree with him.
He is guilty of the things he accuses Jenny Hume of!
He is a hypocrite, who's credibility is in tatters.
His puerile [sic] behaviour is certainly unbecoming for the supposed academic that he is!
Pathetic really.
I will continue to let people know of this sham [sic].
My comment may only appear for a few minutes before it is deleted, other times (as I will continue to post at various times) it may be up longer.
Rest assured I will not give up the good fight to expose this fraud!

This self-important coward prefers, not entirely unexpectedly, to write anonymously.


Jenny Hume’s latest post at Webdiary provides a classic demonstration of this person’s gross hypocrisy. She writes: “It is sad that adults use the net to try and bully those whose opinions they object to.”

The supreme hypocrisy, of course, is in the way that Jenny Hume herself is the person guiltiest of using ‘the net to try and bully those whose opinions she objects to’. It was Jenny Hume that manipulated her friendship with Margo Kingston to ban discussion on the events of 9/11 based simply on the fact that she objected to some of the opinions that would have been presented.

She goes on to say: “Webdiary is the only site I bother with, not because it is a coward's site”, (which it clearly is since she knows that those who she is referring to are unable to respond there) “but simply because by and large you get rational debate here on a whole range of important issues with people of undoubted intellect participating.”

This is pure nonsense. Hume, together with the fraud Paul Morrella/Jay White, the delusional liar Craig Warton and others at Webdiary have made it their business to ensure that a range of some of the most important issues of our time cannot be rationally debated there.

Friday, June 06, 2008


Craig Warton, the delusional right-wing lunatic who actually believes that a person he knows successfully taxied out to the end of a runway in a light aircraft, took off, completed a circuit, landed and then taxied back, all without any assistance and without having had any actual flying experience and having only had lessons in a simulator, has returned to Webdiary to cast more lies. And, what’s more, he says he’s proud of it.

I have over 43 years of flying experience and have met and had the pleasure of flying with several outstanding young men and women who were naturally gifted pilots with many of them having had sophisticated simulator experience before getting into the real thing. However, every one of them needed at least five hours of flight training before going off on their first solo. There is no way that any person with only flight simulator experience could have done what this delusional lunatic claims.

Craig Warton indeed, as he concedes himself, is an arch liar.

As for deceiver; his latest post at Webdiary is proof of his propensity to deceive. He has attempted to imply that I and others that used to post and comment at Webdiary are Holocaust deniers. There may well have been holocaust deniers at Webdiary, but I wasn’t one of them despite Warton’s crude attempt to make it seem I was. This is a blatant attempt to deceive Webdiarists.

I should also remind Webdiarists that it was Craig Warton, supported by that other liar and fraud, Jay White/Paul Morrella, who pressured Kingston into banning any discussion on the most historical events of the Twenty-First Century. Margo Kingston then caved into these lunatics as well as to the threats on her life apparently from Zionist interests.

Webdiary has become a home for liars and fraudsters. Parsons/Ramsey, White/Morrella, Dylan Kissane, and now Craig Warton. One has to wonder who will turn up next.

Webdiary has become a joke. Margo Kingston has become a fraud sucked in by liars and manipulators.


For a leader who is about to have the rug pulled from under his government by members of his own coalition, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was in chirpy mood as he left the US to head home to Israel.

Various statements he made prior to taking off have left observers wondering what exactly he and President Bush had planned during Olmert’s visit to America. Ha’aretz reports Olmert as having told reporters: "…it would appear we are very close to a decisive crossroads in Gaza," and that "The people of Israel have reason to be pleased with the results of the visit to the U.S. in relation to all sensitive security matters concerning the future of the state."

One has to wonder if that includes Hezbollah, Syria and Iran as well as Hamas in the Gaza; after all, he did say ‘all sensitive security matters…’ Action against Hamas in the Gaza has been on the cards and threatened for some time so Olmert would feel quite comfortable talking about what for many has been seen as a long time coming anyway, but action by Israel against Hamas in the Gaza is hardly likely to go unanswered by their allies Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The question is, however, will Israel pre-empt any Hezbollah retaliation by launching an attack against them at the same time as they go into the Gaza, or will they, as usual, create some kind of false flag event that will provide them with the excuse they think the world would be happy with for them to attack Lebanon to try, once again, to defeat Hezbollah once and for all.

And then, of course, there is the big question; is this really all about drawing Syria and the big prize, Iran, into the conflict providing the casus belli for the US to attack Iran?

The window of opportunity is closing in on both leaders as their respective tenures draw to a close. There will never be a docile, subservient and fragmented Palestinian state while Hamas and Hezbollah are around. Obama will support Israel but would not support a pre-emptive attack against Iran. To achieve their aims, Bush and Olmert may just think that now is the time to strike using Hamas in the Gaza as the springboard to the final confrontation.

The world should be frightened.

Thursday, June 05, 2008


In an article today in the neocons comic ‘The Weekly Standard’, Jonathan Schanzer, director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and ex-Treasury intelligence analyst, [sic] has deliberately lied saying: “The majority of Americans do not wish to end a just war before it is won.”

This is pure nonsense and a flat out lie designed to deliberately deceive the reader into believing that the majority of Americans are in favour of continuing the war in Iraq.

The reality is something completely different. A recent poll shows that some 67% disapprove of the way Bush is handling the situation in Iraq while some 62% think that going to war with Iraq was the wrong thing to do in the first place. When asked: “What should the United States do in Iraq: withdraw all troops as soon as possible, or, set a timetable to withdraw troops gradually, or, keep troops in Iraq as long as needed?" only 28% of respondents said keep the troops in Iraq as long as needed.

If I were an American my faith in Schanzer as an ‘intelligence analyst’ and the credibility of any organisation he worked for would be utterly shattered. He can’t do basic research, which makes him a lousy analyst, or he’s just a flat out liar – like most neocons! And, of course, any remaining crumbs of credibility that ‘The Weekly Standard’ did have have also gone out the window.


Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with President George W. Bush Wednesday for an hour with the major topic of conversation being Iran. At the end of the meeting the two leaders made a joint statement that seems to have left no doubt that both the US and Israel has something other than discussions with, or sanctions against, Iran but which neither seemed eager to discuss. All Olmert was prepared to say was: "Naturally the Iranian issue was central to our talks, and our shared point of departure is the need to deal with Iran before it manages to acquire non-conventional capabilities," Olmert went on to say: "Every day that goes by we are making significant steps in dealing with this problem [Iran]. We, with the world under American leadership, are dealing with it in an effort to reach the goal which is to prevent Iran from acquiring [nuclear] arms."

But most significant of all was this remark: "I do not think it is appropriate for Iran to know what we are doing," a veiled but nonetheless transparent threat if ever there was one.

In a pre-discussion briefing, Bush took Israel’s stance on the Iranian ‘existential threat to Israel’ rhetoric a stage further by saying that ‘Iran was an existential threat to peace’. Certainly, the mood of this week, what with the AIPAC conference, Obama increasingly looking like being the President, time running out for Bush, Olmert looking like he won’t be Prime Minister for much longer, Cheney also meeting with Olmert, and Netanyahu waiting in the wings for an election in Israel, the signs do not look good for Iran.

Wednesday, June 04, 2008


Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has addressed the AIPAC conference in Washington and has told delegates: "We must stop the Iranian threat by all possible means.” Later today Olmert is due to meet with Bush to discuss Iran and Israel’s security.

Olmert is a man on his way out of power. While Bush would like to leave the Presidency having seen the establishment of a Palestinian state, the reality is; it will not happen. Olmert wants a Palestinian state that is totally subservient to Israel in order to have a place where Israel can send its Israeli Arabs so that Arab demographic growth doesn’t get the better of Jewish dominance in an Israeli state. The extreme right-wing Zionists both in Israel and in the US and elsewhere do not want any form of Palestinian state. With Olmert on the way out, and the likelihood if there is an election of right-wing Zionist Benjamin Netanyahu becoming the next Israeli Prime Minister, Bush may now dismiss any notion of a Palestinian state being likely and opt simply to ‘deal’ with Iran by bombing it into ‘regime change’ prior to leaving office.

It’s a frightening scenario.


Yesterday it was Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice’s turn to patronise the Israel Lobby conference in Washington when she addressed AIPAC delegates calling for “Our partners in Europe and beyond… to exploit Iran's vulnerabilities more vigorously and impose greater costs on the regime, economically, financially, politically and diplomatically”.

What went almost unnoticed was the hint that the time for talk was over – assuming there ever was a time that the US and Israel sat down and talked with Iran; if there was then I must have blinked and missed it. "Diplomacy is not a synonym for talking," Rice told the conference, pushing back against those who are calling for such engagement. "True diplomacy means structuring a set of incentives and disincentives to produce change in behaviour."

Statements like this are designed purely to give the world the impression that Iran has been given every opportunity to capitulate to US demands that it stops doing something that it isn’t actually doing. The US and its allies have no evidence whatsoever to support their claims that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. The reason the US and their allies don’t wasn’t to sit down with Iran is because they know that there isn’t anything to actually discuss. The US and Israel will soon claim that Iran has ‘defied the world’ and has no alternative but to launch an attack against Iran in order to ‘eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat to the world’.

The reality is that what they actually want to eliminate is a regime that stands in the way of Israeli aspirations for a Greater Israel. The Bush administration and the Israeli Zionists know full well that sanctions against Iran are not going to bring about regime change; indeed, such sanctions are more likely to stiffen Iranian resolve to resist US and Israeli demands rather than cause a backlash to the Iranian government’s posture in standing up to the US.

Time is running out for the US and Israel as the US presidential elections roll ever closer. They are becoming desperate to gain public support for an attack on Iran and the ‘Hate Iran Week’ AIPAC conference is their last big chance of swinging the American people behind them to support an attack.

Tuesday, June 03, 2008


The annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference got under way yesterday and wasted no time in kicking off the proceedings with Republican presidential candidate John ‘Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran’ McCain launching into a hate tirade against Iran by accusing his likely presidential election opponent, Barack Obama, of having ‘policies toward Iraq and Iran [that] would create chaos and endanger the United States and Israel’. It’ll be interesting to see how Obama responds to McCain’s accusations when he gets to address AIPAC. Hillary Clinton too is down to address the conference and, if by the time she appears she has decided that she’s still in the running, it’ll be interesting to see what she has to say as well. If, on the other hand, Hillary has decided to withdraw from the Democrat race, it will be just as interesting to see how closely whatever remarks she makes to the conference fall in line with Obama’s. Either way, it’s going to be interesting.

On Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is scheduled to address the conference. He will, no doubt, be telling them and the world how evil the Iranians are for developing nuclear power and how underhanded they are being because they may be pursuing nuclear weapons. And the audience, of course, will be totally oblivious to the superb irony of an underhandedly nuclear armed Israel telling the world that Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons.

Well, why not? The world fell for it last time when they accused that other thorn in the side of Israeli aspirations for a Greater Israel, Iraq, of secretly developing nuclear weapons long after they’d actually given the idea away. Surely, they believe, the world will fall for it again. And, while they’re at it, they will more than likely accuse Syria of the same thing in the hope that two birds might be killed with the same stone if they could just get America to do the job for them.

And while the US is dealing with Iran, it would leave Israel free to deal with Hamas in the Gaza and Hezbollah in south Lebanon.

There’s a lot riding on this years AIPAC conference what with it being the last one to be held during the Bush administration and, therefore, the last opportunity the American Israel Lobby has to effectively call for America to attack Iran. They know that a US under an Obama administration will not be likely to attack Iran. For this reason, the ‘Hate Iran Week’ will be the most intense yet.

Monday, June 02, 2008


In her continuing outrageous attempts to manipulate and control what may and may not be discussed at Webdiary, and who may or may not be allowed to comment there, the insufferably arrogant and unrepentantly self-righteous Jenny Hume has posted a comment that plainly and clearly exposes this pretentious know-all for the obsessive control freak that she actually is. (Now that’s what you call a spray!)

She writes: “That is the sort of stuff we read on TB [presumably ‘TB’ is Tim Blair] and Damian Lataan's site, and yes often posted there by Webdiarists seeking to personally insult, deride and belittle others here personally. But such has no place here and thankfully most have now been banned or left WD.”

I must say I’m a little disappointed that my name was mentioned in the same sentence as Tim Blair’s but then that’s exactly the type of thing a control freak like Jenny Hume would do; nothing like a little wedging of opposite ends to try and keep on top.

Demanding apologies is another characteristic of Jenny Hume’s though this time she has gone one further and demanded that the offending comment from Paul Walter be “taken down”.

However, there is an upside to Jenny Hume’s arrogance; she has threatened to have no further part in Webdiary if the comment is not taken down or if there is no apology forthcoming, indeed, as she says, “It is not often [sic] I put my foot down but this is one such occasion when I am doing so.”

We can only hope that she is true to her word and that Webdiary can see the back of this disruptive control freak and get back to discussing the real issues that concern the world without her demanding what can or cannot be discussed.

Within just a few minutes of posting the above it seems that Webdiary has caved in to Jenny Hume's demands; Richard Tonkin has taken down the offending comments. However, if anyone was able to archive or save the offending comment, or if Paul Walter would like to send them to me here, I'll gladly republish them.

What a control freak!

For those that would like to know, the comment from Paul Walter that Jenny Hume demanded be taken down from the Webdiary site went thus:

“Out of consideration to Scott Dunmore, will move finally to Jenny Hume's appalling comment, that any possible harm done the photo model is solely the mother's responsibility who hopefully should suffer ( if the desired harm to the girl comes) rather than opportunist scum Dahvinist media or the numberless vulgar hysterics who have drawn attention to the girl in indulging the luxury of indulging their own hangups, prejudices and compulsive control freakery and inevitably, the parading of their ignorance and own unconscious but publicly overt, meanness of spirit.”

Humes response went like this:
“Would the editor who allowed this comment please refer to my last comment on this thread and tell me if that is a correct interpretation of what I wrote because to me it is a deliberate, vicious, nasty warped interpretation for the purpose of a vicious personal attack on me by Paul Walter. And his closing remark is an extremely offensive personal judgement about me and the motives of people like me who voice genuine concern about the use of children in such a manner.”

For Hume the lively debate had stopped being about a controversial issue; it had become about her and her demands.

Paul sums it up nicely; 'prejudices and compulsive control freakery'.
(Salvaged comments courtesy of Phil)