Langer

Hitler's personal Junkers Ju-290 landed at Barcelona on 16 April 1945, four days after the assassination of President Roosevelt by White Russian Fascist networks affiliated to Allen Dulles of the OSS Legation in Berne, who was in the final stages of negotiating the surrender of Nazi armies in Italy and the West.

HITLER'S PROBABLE BEHAVIOUR IN THE FUTURE

As the tide of battle turns against Hitler it may be well to consider very briefly the possibilities of his future behaviour and the effect that each would have on the German people as well as on ourselves.

1. Hitler may die of natural causes.

This is only a remote possibility since, as far as we know, he is in fairly good health except for his stomach ailment which is, in all probability, a psychosomatic disturbance. The effect such an event would have on the German people would depend on the nature of the illness which brought about his death. If he would die from whooping cough, mumps, or some other ridiculous disease, it would be a material help in breaking the myth of his supernatural  origins.

2. Hitler might seek refuge in a neutral country.

This is extremely unlikely in view of his great concern about his immortality. Nothing would break the myth more effectively  than to have the leader run away at the critical  moment. Hitler knows this and has frequently condemned the Kaiser for his flight to Holland at the close of the last war. Hitler might want to escape as he has escaped from other unpleasant situations, but it seems almost certain that he would restrain himself.

3. Hitler might get killed in battle.

This is a real possibility. When he is convinced he cannot win, he may lead his troops into battle and expose himself as the fearless and fanatical leader. This would be most undesirable from our point of view because his death would serve as an example to his followers to fight on with fanatical, death-defying determination to the bitter end. This would be what Hitler would want for he has predicted that:

'We shall not capitulate...no, never. We my be destroyed, but if we are, we shall drag a world with us... A world in flames."

"But even if we could not conquer them, we should drag half the world into destruction with us and leave no one to triumph over Germany. There will not be another 1918."

At a certain point the uould do more towards the achievement of this goal by dying heroically than he could by living. Furthermore, death turn this  would do more to bind the German people to the Hitler

legend and insure his immortality than any other course he could pursue.

4. Hitler might be assassinated.

Although Hitler is extremely well protected there is a possibility that someone may assassinate him. Hitler is afraid of this possibility and has expressed the opinion that:

"His own friends would one day stab him mortally in the end it would be just before the last and greatest victory, at the moment of supreme tension. Once more Hagen would slay Seigfried. Once more Hermann the Liberator would be murdered by his own kinsmen. The eternal destiny of the German nation must be fulfilled yet again, for the last time."

This possibility too, would be undesirable from our point of view inasmuch as it would make a martyr of him and strengthen the legend.

It would be even more undesirable if the assassin were a Jew for this would  convince  the  German  people of  Hitler's  infallibility  and strengthen the fanaticism of the German troops and people. 

Needless to say, it would be followed by the complete extermination or all Jews in Germany and the occupied countries.

5. Hitler may go insane.

Hitler has many characteristics which border on the schizophrenic. It is possible that when faced with defeat his psychological structure may collapse and leave him at the mercy of his unconscious forces.

The possibilities of such an outcome diminish as he becomes older, but they should not be entirely excluded. This would not be an undesirable eventuality from our point of view since it would do much to undermine the Hitler legend in the minds of the German people.

6. German military might revolt and seize him.

This seems unlikely in view of the unique position Hitler holds in the minds of the German people. From all the evidence it would seem that Hitler alone is able to muse the troops, as well as the people to

greater efforts and as the road becomes more dificult this should be an important factor. One could imagine, however, that as defeat approaches Hitler's behavior may become more and more neurotic

and reach a point where it would be well for the military to confine him. In this ease, however, the German people would probably never know about it.

If they discovered it, it would be a desirable end from our point of view because it would puncture the myth of the loved and invincible leader.

The only other possibility in this connection would be that the German military should decide, in the face of defeat, that it might be wiser to dethrone Hitler and set up a puppet government to sue for

peace. This would probably cause great internal strife in Germany.

What the ultimate outcome might be would depend largely on the manner in which it was handled and what was done with Hitler. At the present time the possibility seems extremely remote.

7. Hitler may fall into our hands.

This is the most unlikely possibility of all. Knowing his fear of being placed in the role of the vanquished, we can imagine that he would do his utmost to avoid such a fate. From our point of view it would not be undesirable.

8. Hitler might commit suicide.

This is the most plausible outcome. Not only has he frequently threatened to commit suicide, but from what we know of his psychology it is the most likely possibility. It is probably true that he has an inordinate fear if death, but Mills an hysteric he could undoubtedly screw himself up into the super-man character and perform the deed. In all probability, however, it would not be a simple suicide. He has too much :r.. the dramanc for that and since immortality is one of his dominant modves we can imagine that he would stage the most dramanc and effecdve death scene he could possibly think of. 

He knows how to bind the people to him and if he cannot have the bond in life he will certainly do his utmost to achieve it in death. He might even engage some other fanatic to do the final killing at his orders.

Hitler has already envisaged a death of this kind, for he has said to

Rauschning:

"Yes, in the hour of supreme peril I must sacrifice myself for the people."

This would be extremely undesirable from our point of view because if it is cleverly done it would establish the Hitler legend so firmly in the minds of the German people that it might take generations to

eradicate it.

Whatever else happens, we may be reasonably sure that as Gennany suffers  successive  defeats  Hitler  will  become  more  and  more neurotic. Each defeat will shake his confidence and further and limit his opportunities for proving his own greatness to himself. In consequence he will feel himself more and more vulnerable to attack from his associates and his rages will increase in frequency. He will

probably 11y to compensate for his vulnerability on this side by continually his brutality and ruthlessness.

His public appearances will become less and less fur, as we have seen, he is unable to face a critical audience. He will probably seek solace in his Eagle's Nest on the Kehlstein near Berchtsegaden. There

among the ice-capped peaks he will wait for his "inner voice" to guide him. Meanwhile, his nightmares will probably increase in frequency and intensity and drive him fuser to a nervous collapse. It is not wholly improbably that in the end he might lock himself into this symbolic womb and defy the world to get him.

In any case, his mental condition will continue to deteriorate. He will fight as long as he can with any weapon or technique that can be conjured up to meet the emergency. The course he will follow will

almost certainly be the one which seems to him to be the surest road to immortality and at the same time drag the world down in flames.

Rwanda

"Be Careful.  Legal at State was worried about this yesterday—Genocide finding could commit USG to “do something”.

Discussion Paper, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Middle East/Africa Region, Department of Defense, May 1, 1994.  Secret.

Source: Freedom of Information Act release by Office of the Secretary of Defense

Samantha Power and the Revisionist History of Humanitarian Bombers from Spike EP on Vimeo.
This event is brought to you by the United States Holocaust Museum (TM).
The Dallaire Genocide Fax: A Fabrication

Facsimile from Maj. Gen. Romeo Dallaire, Force Commander, United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda, to Maj. Gen. Maurice Baril, United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations, “Request for Protection for Informant”, January 11, 1994. Source: US House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, “Hearing: Rwanda: Genocide and the Continuing Cycle of Violence”, May 5, 1998

Facsimile from Maj. Gen. Romeo Dallaire, Force Commander, United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda, to Maj. Gen. Maurice Baril, United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations, “Request for Protection for Informant”, January 11, 1994. Source: US House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, “Hearing: Rwanda: Genocide and the Continuing Cycle of Violence”, May 5, 1998

   
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0512/S00081/chris-black-the-dallaire-genocide-fax.htm 

Chris Black: The Dallaire Genocide Fax  Wednesday, 7 December 2005, 1:40 pm Opinion: sandersresearch.com.

www.sandersresearch.com

Inside Track

December 1, 2005

View from Rwanda:

The Dallaire Genocide Fax: A Fabrication [1]

By Chris Black

© 2003-5. Sanders Research Associates. All rights reserved.

*************

Chris Black, since 2000, has been a lead counsel at the International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda. From that perspective he has seen that Rwanda was not a situation in which the United States and its allies failed to act. On the contrary, it was an example of direct interference by the United States and its allies. Why? Three reasons: the US wished to replace the Hutu regime which did not want to cooperate with US aggression towards Mobutu in Zaire. Secondly, the US wants to reduce French influence in central Africa. The final US objective was and is control of the vast resources of the Congo.

*************

UNAMIR military force commander, Canadian General Romeo Dallaire.

The murder of two African presidents
The idea that the Rwandan government planned the genocide of the minority Tutsi population in 1994 rests primarily on the statements of the enemies of that government who need the idea of a genocide in order to justify the final act of aggression against Rwanda by the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF) so-called and its allies. That final act of aggression was the RPF offensive launched the night of April 6, 1994 with the massacre of everyone on board the jet aircraft of President Habyarimana, the Hutu president of Rwanda and President Ntaryamira, the Hutu president of Burundi.
The two presidents were returning from a meeting called by President Museveni of Uganda to discuss the implementation of the Arusha Accords, the peace agreement between the Rwandan government and the RPF-Ugandan forces which had invaded the country in 1990. Also on board the plane was the Rwandan Army Chief of Staff, other dignitaries and a French military crew. The plane was shot down by anti-aircraft missiles as it approached Kigali airport. It is now established that the plane was shot down by the RPF with the cooperation and assistance of western powers including the United States of America, Britain, Belgium and Canada. President Ntaryamira was the second Hutu president murdered by Tutsis. President Ndadaye of Burundi was murdered by Tutsi officers of the Burundi Army in October of 1993.
British and US interests
The attack on the plane was the culmination of a long-planned war by the RPF and its allies. The war began in 1990 when Ugandan soldiers of Tutsi origin invaded Rwanda under the name of the RPF. This act of aggression by Uganda was supported by both Britain and the USA. Those countries provided the encouragement and the financial, material, logistical, advisory and training support necessary, flowing it all through the Ugandan Army to the RPF. The American and British instigated and controlled the war as a means of advancing their grand strategy of invading Zaire to seize control of the vast resources of the Congo basin.
The first attack was repelled and the RPF then adopted terrorism and guerilla operations to undermine Rwanda. Several other major attacks took place in the following three years. At the same time, the western allies of the RPF pressured the Rwandan government to come to terms with the RPF and in 1993 at Arusha, Tanzania, a series of negotiations resulted in the signing of the Arusha Accords. The Rwandan government was forced to make several major concessions to the RPF even though it could only claim, at best, to represent 15% of the Rwandan population. The Accords called for the establishment of a transition government sharing power with the RPF, leading to elections of a final government. However, it was known by everyone that the RPF could never win such elections and could only win power by force of arms and treachery.
Enter Dallaire
The Accords also called for the presence in Rwanda of a neutral UN force to help keep the peace during the process. That force, known as UNAMIR, was headed by Jacques Roger Booh-Booh and, under him, the military force commander, Canadian General Romeo Dallaire.
As UN documents show, Dallaire was aware, at least from December 1993, and probably before, that the RPF, with the support of the Ugandan Army, was daily violating the Accords by sending into Rwanda men, materiel, and light and heavy weapons in preparation for a final offensive. Dallaire kept this information from his boss Booh-Booh and the Secretary General, Boutros-Ghali. The RPF was assisted in these violations of the Accords by the Belgian contingent of UNAMIR and the Canadian officers involved who turned a blind eye to the RPF and Ugandan Army smuggling into Rwanda men and materiel and even assisted them in doing so all the while protesting that the Hutu regime was hiding weapons, a charge which has never been proved.
In conjunction with the military build-up by the RPF and its allies, including the infiltration into Kigali, the capital city, of up to 10,000 RPF soldiers, western journalists and western intelligence services masquerading as “human rights” organizations began a concerted propaganda campaign against the Government and through it the Hutu people, accusing it of various human rights abuses, none of which were substantiated. The RPF engaged in assassinations of officials, politicians and civilians, and attempted to cast the blame on the government. Dallaire assisted in this campaign by suppressing facts concerning these crimes and openly siding with the RPF propaganda statements.
A country pushed to the brink
These actions, combined with the stresses of the war on the economy and the social fabric of the country, mass unemployment, a large internal refugee population fleeing RPF attacks, and the breakdown of the government’s ability to function caused by the collapse of revenue from coffee and tea exports, resulted in a tinderbox. Only a spark was needed for the country to explode. That spark was the murder of the much-loved President and the country-wide offensive launched by the RPF and its allies the night of April 6, 1994.
From the very start of their offensive, the RPF began a propaganda campaign claiming that they were motivated by the need to stop a “genocide”. This entirely false claim was never questioned by the western press, always eager to support their governments, even in the face of the fact that the Rwandan government several times asked the RPF for cease-fires so that civilian attacks on civilians could be stopped, and the fact that Rwanda, then a member of the Security Council, demanded that 5,000 more UN troops be sent to assist in controlling the situation a request refused at the instigation of the US.
They stepped up this campaign as the war progressed. On April 13, 1994 the RPF demanded the trial of the Rwandan government and army for “genocide” before an international tribunal, echoing the threat made to President Habyarimana by Herman Cohen[2] on behalf of the US in the fall of 1993 that unless Habyarimana ceded all power to the RPF his body would be dragged through the streets of Kigali and his government tried by an international tribunal. This demand at one and the same time:

• criminalized the Rwandan government,


• justified the RPF and American refusal to negotiate terms with “criminals”, 


• prevented the government from obtaining support and assistance from its major western ally, France, 


• destroyed any support it had in the international community and public opinion, and finally, 


• justified the brutal RPF military dictatorship over the people of Rwanda and the refusal to allow Hutus any power in Rwanda. 

The RPF and its allies succeeded in all these objectives and continue their propaganda campaign today with continuous show trials both in Rwanda, through the Gacaca “trial” system and through the show trials of Hutus taking place at the American and British controlled Rwanda War Crimes Tribunal in Arusha, Tanzania.
Two major problems with RPF claims of genocide
However, there are two major problems with the RPF claims. Firstly, there is a surprising lack of evidence of a genocide of Tutsis. In fact, the only independent study of those killed in Rwanda in 1994, being conducted by a team of researchers at the University of Maryland indicates that there were approximately 250,000 people killed, not the 800,000 plus advanced by the RPF and that for every Tutsi killed two Hutus were killed and those mainly by the RPF. This is confirmed in the recently released book, Rwanda, Histoire Secrete (2005, Edition du Panama) written by a former RPF officer named Abdul who states that the RPF shot down the plane [for further sources on this key issue see APPENDIX below] and that there was a genocide not of Tutsis by Hutus but of Hutus by the RPF.
Secondly, there is a stunning lack of documentary evidence of a government plan to commit genocide. There are no orders, minutes of meetings, notes, cables, faxes, radio intercepts or any other type of documentation that such a plan ever existed. In fact, the documentary evidence establishes just the opposite.
The "genocide" fax
This lack of documentation is the Achilles Heel of the RPF-western claims of genocide. Something was needed to fill this void. That something is the so-called “genocide” fax supposedly sent to New York UN HQ on the night of January 10th-11th 1994 and which first made its appearance in public on November 28th, 1995 when it was placed in the UN files in New York and contemporaneously leaked to a journalist in Belgium and the London Observer.
This fax is the single document upon which the claims of a planned genocide rest. It was supposedly sent by General Dallaire to General Baril, another Canadian general at the Dept of Peace Keeping Operations in New York. It sets out the claims of a UN informant named Jean Pierre Turatsinze that the ruling government party planned to exterminate Tutsis, was training civilians for that purpose and that there was a plan to kill Belgian soldiers to provoke the withdrawal of UN forces. This fax has been trumpeted by the ICTR prosecution as the key to the plan to commit genocide. However, all the evidence presented at the Tribunal and elsewhere establishes that, in fact, the fax is a fabrication.
On November 5th, 1995 the RPF organized a conference in Kigali to amplify support for their claims of genocide and for the trial and punishment of those responsible. This conference failed to provide any documentary evidence of such a claim. At the same time a UNAMIR commission was created by its new head, Mr. S Khan and which included several UN officers who went through all the UNAMIR cables, faxes and reports to determine whether there had been any prior indication of such a plan. Not one document was found, especially the “genocide” fax. That report is dated November 20th , 1995.
Fax on the fast track
Then, mysteriously, a few days after the release of the UN report, on November 28th, 1995 a fax machine at the UN offices in New York received a fax of a copy of a code cable dated January 11th 1994 sent by Dallaire to General Baril. The problem is that the person who sent the fax to New York that day was a Colonel R. M. Connaughton of the British Army, based at Camberly, Surrey, England, the home of the British Military Academy, Sandhurst as well as several other British Army establishments. His name and fax number appear at the top of the document. There was no cover letter explaining who sent it, why it was sent, nor is there anything indicating why this document was accepted by the UN in New York and placed in the DPKO files.
This document has typed on its face, “This cable was not found in DPKO files. The present copy was placed in the files on November 28th, 1995.” It is signed by Lamin J. Sise, a UN official. The document contains other handwritten notes made on it after its receipt that day.
However, the copy of this document presented by the Prosecutor at the ICTR for the last ten years has had the name and fax number of the sender, Sise’s note and other notes removed. It is this doctored version of the cable that the Prosecutor tried to present as an exhibit in the Military II in October, 2005, through a prosecution witness, Lt. Col. Claeys, an officer of the Belgian Army and one of the men who claims to have drafted and sent the original cable. But the prosecution suffered a major setback and embarrassment when defence counsel objected to the attempt to make this doctored version an exhibit and entered into the record the copy of the fax contained in the DPKO files bearing the name of the British Army source.
Conflicting testimony
Both General Dallaire and Lt. Col. Claeys have testified that the contents of the fax as set out in the fax presented by the prosecution are identical to the contents of the fax or cable sent the night of January 10th-11th, though interestingly Dallaire states that Claeys was not involved in drafting the fax, whereas Claeys insists he was. It is clear that Dallaire testified to the contrary when he was faced on cross-examination in the Military I trial with statements made by Claeys in 1995 to Belgian investigators and in 1997 to the Belgian Senate, that the fax sent that night dealt only with weapons caches and seeking protection for the informant and contained nothing about killing Tutsis or killing Belgian soldiers. In order to eliminate this embarrassing fact, Dallaire simply erased Claeys from the picture.
It is clear from the the fax itself and the surrounding circumstances, that there was a fax sent that night but it was not the one now presented to the ICTR and the world as the one sent by Dallaire.
The informant was presented to Dallaire by Faustin Twagiramungu , a Rwandan opposition candidate for Prime Minister and an opponent of the Rwandan government and a sympathizer of the RPF. He has since stated that he told Dallaire and his staff that the informant claimed to have information only about weapons caches and he was surprised to hear years later that the informant had information about the killing of Tutsis and Belgians.
General Dallaire does not mention such a fax before November 1995. There is no mention of plans to kill Tutsis or Belgians contained in notes of meetings between the informant and Claeys which followed the first meeting with the informant described in the fax. Again, the principal subject mentioned in those meetings is weapons caches. Neither Dallaire nor any of the Belgian commanders acted as if they had received any such information. There was no action taken by them to put their men on alert or to take precautions. There was no response from New York to such a fax. There exist only responses to a fax concerning weapons caches, but this original fax is nowhere to be found.
It is clear that Dallaire sent a fax that night and that it concerned only weapons caches and seeking advice from New York regarding the protection of the informant. In fact, the subject heading of the “genocide” fax is not “genocide” or “killing” but an innocuous “Request For Protection of Informant”. The present fax was fabricated using the original fax which dealt with weapons caches only by cutting out some of the paragraphs of that fax and pasting in new paragraphs about killing Tutsis and Belgians. This is supported by the fact that the paragraphs are numbered 1 through 13 but there is no paragraph 12. Further the only reply to a fax sent that night from Kigali refers to a paragraph 7 as the action paragraph. But in the fax as presented by the prosecution the action paragraph is paragraph 9, the paragraph seeking advice on protection of the informant. Also Paragraph 11 states that Dallaire will meet with Faustin Twagiramungu to brief him on events but as we know that man states that he was never told of such information coming from the informant. Lastly, paragraph 2 states that the killing of Belgians would “guarantee Belgian withdrawal from Rwanda” something that could only be known after the fact.
Nobody told Booh-Booh 
One last curious fact is that Dallaire states he bypassed protocol by sending the fax without the signature of his boss, Booh-Booh or his seeing it. He states that this is the only occasion when this happened. This only makes sense if, in fact, he did not violate protocol as he never sent this fax in the first place. His version is a way of getting around the fact that Booh-Booh never saw what is now called the “genocide” fax. Booh-Booh testified at the Rwanda War Crimes Tribunal the week of November 21, 2005 that he never saw the fax Dallaire says he sent and that further that General Dallaire never mentioned to him in their meeting of January 12, 1994 that the informant mentioned the killing of Belgians or Tutsis. Booh-Booh also testified that when he and Dallaire met with several western ambassadors, including the Belgian ambassador, Dallaire never mentioned the killing of Belgians or Tutsis to them either nor in their meeting with President Habyarimana. In those meetings Dallaire spoke only about allegations of weapons caches.
New colonialism masquerading as “international justice”
All these circumstances can lead to one conclusion only; that the fax is a fabrication after the fact and that a fraud is being committed on the people of Rwanda and the world and the judges of the Rwanda war crimes tribunal. This fabricated fax is being used to try to condemn the accused on trial before the ICTR and to support the now discredited idea that a genocide was planned by the former Rwandan government against the Tutsi population of that tragic country. However it is becoming increasingly clear that General Dallaire worked with the RPF throughout the period of his mandate in Rwanda in violation of the UN mandate. Booh-Booh states that he provided military intelligence to the RPF as well as covering up their preparation for their final offensive and through his false testimony at the Rwanda War Crimes Tribunal and his book continues to act on behalf of powerful interests in his own government and that of the United States and Britain.
The fabrication of the “genocide” fax is one more nail in the coffin of the Rwanda war crimes tribunal, ready to be buried under the weight of accusations of selective prosecution, political bias, unfair procedures, trial by hearsay, perjured testimony and the cover-up of the murder of two African heads of state and all in the name of a new colonialism masquerading as “international justice”.

Appendix
1) In his book, Abdul Ruzibiza states that he was one of the men involved in the shootdown as part of the shootdown team. He was an officer in the RPF. He is dues to testify at the ICTR in the coming weeks if his security can be assured. He is presently in hiding in Norway.
2) The Hourigan Report This report (a copy of which is in the author's possesion) was written by an Australian lawyer acting as the head of the investigative team at the ICTR assigned by then prosecutor Louise Arbour to determine who shot down the plane. She was acting under the theory that "extremist" Hutus in the Rwandan government shot down the plane. Hourigan and his team were successful in finding three members of the shootdown team who stated they were RPF and that they were assisted by a foreign power (unnamed) and that they had the documents to prove it. They asked for protection. When Arbour was presented with these facts she ordered the investigation closed. The author was informed by a former FBI agent who worked at the ICTR that she did so on the instructions of the US ambassador in Rwanda. (Which would make her guilty of being an accessory to a war crime as the murder of a head of state in a war is a war crime and it is evident that the murder of the president and army chief of staff was the first action of the RPF offensive.) This report was first published in the National Post in Canada by a reporter named Stephen Edwards in 2001.
The UN at first denied this report existed. But several defence counsel demanded its production so it was then "found" and sent under seal to the judges at the ICTR. They then released it to several defence teams.
Hourigan wrote this report to the oversight office for some reason and is a summary of the complete file. Several requests have been made to have the complete investigative file released, without success. Hourigan is now said to be working as a lawyer in Atlanta, Georgia.
3. Jean Piere Mugabe the former head of RPF intelligence who also fled the regime also stated in 2001 that Kagame and the RPF shot down the plane.
4. French investigative judge Brugiere investigating the shootdown on behalf of the families of the French crew leaked (or someone in his office did) a copy of the report to a French journalist with the English name Steven Smith last year who published its findings in Le Monde that it was the RPF who shot it down with the assistance of others.
5. Former Secratery General Boutros-Boutros Ghali stated this year that he had met Brugiere at a conference and was told by the French judge that the CIA was "heavily implicated" in the shootdown.
6. The RPF was the only force in Rwanda which had anti-aircraft missiles to the knowledge of the Force Commander Dallaire. Dallaire arranged for the closure of the western approach to the runway at the request of the RPF. This made it easier for the RPF and others to track the plane as it came in from the east. The Belgian contingent of the UN force was in control of the airport area and the area from which the missiles were fired. A Belgian unit (later killed at Camp Kigali) were the only people caught by the army coming out of the firing area after the shootdown when the army threw up a cordon to try to catch the culprits.
7. Wayne Madsen a former US intel officer who wrote, CIA Covert Operations in the Great Lakes Area, 1990-93, states that (and testified to this before the US Congress in 2001 when hearings were held by Cynthia McKinney into the Rwanda and Congo wars) that the CIA, using a Swiss front company used that company to rent a hangar at the Kigali airport in which they assembled the missiles. He also states that the US hoped to kill at the same time Mobutu of Zaire and Daniel Arap Moi of Kenya all in in one fell swoop (they were supposed to attend the same meeting and be on the same flight) in order to seize control of all central and east Africa. At that time the US 6th fleet was cruising off Mombasa and there were 600 US Rangers on stand-by to assist the RPF in Burundi.
8. Charles Onana a well-know journalist writing on this subject wrote about his investigations and that it was the RPF, as did Canadian author Robin Philpot in his book It Didn't Happen That Way In Kigali (loose translation of the French title).
7. Honore Ngambo, Mobutu's former chief of security published a book earlier this year in France in which he recounts the last meeting between Mobut and the Hutu president two days before he was killed in which the President stated that he was told by Herman Cohen he was basically a dead man and that he heard from his agents in the RPF camp that they were going to shootdown the plane. He confronted Dallaire with this and that he knew Dallaire was involved and Dallaire just replied "No one will believe you".
8. The author possesses a radio intercept of a message sent by Kagame to his forces in the field the night of the shootdown stating that the "Target is hit" and encouraging his forces to take to the field and that they would be in Kigali and were receiving support from their friends in the south, that is from Burundi—US and Burundian forces the latter of which actually invaded Rwanda in May to link up with the RPF coming form the north. Other radio messages were intercepted referring to the fact the RPF had the assistance of the Belgians in the UN forces who were fighting alongside them. The Belgians deny this of course.

Footnotes:
[1]For an earlier essay entitled “ Persecution not Prosecution” (October 2004) see http://www.sandersresearch.com/Sanders/NewsManager/ShowNewsGen.aspx?NewsID=747
[2] Herman Cohen is a former US Secretary of State for African affairs who served under the elder George Bush. He is a consultant to American business firms operating and trading in Africa. He also provides strategic advice to African governments.

© 2003-5. Sanders Research Associates. All rights reserved.

ENDS

St. Trinian's

St. Trinian's is a school for assassins, mind control terrorist training camp operating on a variation of the Jonestown model.

"All sounds frightfully exciting, doesn't it?

As for the explosives, girls, I'd go for RDX rather than Trinitrotoluene."

"The people there knew that this was a slave labor camp, a concentration camp. They were drugged day in and day out. There were enough drugs found on site, after the massacre, to drug the entire population of Georgetown, Guyana, a city of over 100000 people, for more than a year. Being used on a population of 1200 people. In one foot locker alone, there were 11,000 doses of Thorazine. The other drugs that were named on the site were the exact drugs that I have been following all through my research of CIA MK/ULTRA and MK/DELTA and MK/NAOMI. They were the mind control drugs.

They had the drugs, they worked them 16-18 hours a day, they fed them poorly, they disoriented them, they kept them up all night yelling at them with lectures, lack of sleep, classic conditioning techniques.

They also abused them physically: they had sensory deprivation cells, live burials, wells for the children, electric prods to torture them with, public rape, sexual humiliation in public, and any combination of techniques they could think of.

They kept extensive notes. All those notes disappeared. I believe Schacht disappeared. His name wasn't in the first list of the dead; it only showed up later in the second list.

There were, by all accounts, 1100-1200 people there. Original press report: 400 dead, 700 flee into the woods. Evaluation of the number of people there: 800 adults with passports, 300 children. These add to 1100. How many dead in the final count? 915 How many official survivors returned to the United States? 16. Where are the rest? Who were they?

They were the trained guards. The sadistic torturers. The programmed killers. The ones who came to Port Kaituma and were described as acting mechanically, moving without emotion in their face, picking certain people to kill, not bothering with others; zombies was the word used to describe them. Programmed killers. Mind controlled killers.

Phillip Blakey was putting them on boats and shipping them to Angola, for use by Joseph Savimibi in the CIA-controlled UNITA forces, as mercenaries. Afterwards, they moved to the Honduran camps of the Contras, and for mercenary work in Central America.

The main leadership (Blakey, Stephen Jones, the son of Jim Jones, the people that were at the top, the White lieutenants), went to Trinidad briefly, stopped off in Panama and drained a Swiss bank account under the name Associacion Religioso do San Pedro, the Religious Association of Saint Peter, which I believe was one of the Vatican money front companies for Roberto Calvi, in the Panama shell companies. In a bank account there, under that name, took 5,000,000 dollars out of it, and went where? Where did they set up shop?

Grenada. Who did they work with? Dr. Peter Borne and Sir Jeffrey Borne, the two MK/ULTRA experts from the Vietnam period. Who tested methadone in Vietnam. Who worked at the Yerkes Primate Research Center on monkeys. Who know the drugs and the techniques. Dr. Peter Borne was responsible for setting up the the methadone programs in the Black communities all over the United States. He finally got chased out of the Carter White House, briefly, because of a drug scandal.

They were the ones that set up the medical school. They were the ones that set up the hospitals there. And the mental hospital, which was the only building bombed in Grenada. And I have the Air Force magazine reports bragging about the accuracy. It wasn't a mistake. It was the only building bombed. 

They even talked about pumping 40,000,000 dollars back in there to build a new one. "

- John Judge

The first thing to make clear about this film - about both these films - is that there are real children in it.

Even for the sexy bits, and the low-intensity warfare terrorist training.

 

 

Geek, Emo, Head Girl, Annabelle, and the three Posh Totties

"A dissociated part of the mind which has a separate identity and is given cue codes by the mind-control programmers to trigger that dissociated part of the mind to come to the front of the mind."

"The alter’s identity may be a gem, rock, a tape recorder, a poodle, a white kitten, a dove, a horse, or even think of itself as a person or a demon."

"Kelly wouldn't have got possessed..."

The safe of AD1 includes files on or pictures of various famous women: 

Sylvia Plath (marked terminated), Indira Gandhi, Jacqueline Kennedy (as Jackie Onassis, terminated), Rosa Parks, Janis Joplin, Mother Teresa (terminated), Princess Margaret (terminated), Katharine Hepburn, Margaret Thatcher (neutralized) and Marilyn Monroe (terminated).

She Lies Like a 9/11 Widow

"There is an old German saying : 'He Lies Like a Witness'. "

"There was a policeman at my house that they had they had--they had sent over to stay with me, and he saw it first. 

And he turned around and he said, 'I think I have bad news for you.' 

And when he said that, I--I just turned toward the television, I ran to the television, and I said, 'Is this Tom's flight?' He said yes. 

And I was still holding to the telephone. 

I held onto the telephone for three hours until the battery ran down."

Gilad Atzmon on the Anti-Zionist Zionists

Gilad Atzmon on Jewish Power - As with 9/11, It's the Left-Liberals Who Are the Problem 

from Spike EP on Vimeo.

Chased by a Klezmer

By Gilad Atzmon

I am amused that as the Zionist smear campaign against me and my work has faded, the so called Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists, A.K.A AZZ (anti Zionist Zionists), are ever more infuriated by my thoughts.  They are desperate to silence me. They don’t have a chance, but, let’s face it, they have some really good reasons. 

The recent events in Palestine have proved beyond any doubt my interpretation of Jewish nationalism and Jewish identity politics. It is not a coincidence that I was the only one to predict the Israeli defeat even before the first Israeli soldier entered Gaza. Since Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, its actions and atrocities must be understood within the context of Jewish culture and heritage. This is my line of thought and this is what I am known for.  

Leading commentator, Jeff Blankfort, argued recently that the Jewish Left is not the solution, it is actually a continuation of the problem. I believe that the Jewish Left is not merely a continuation of the problem, it is actually at the heart of the problem. Jewish power, as I see it, is the capacity to silence criticism of Jewish power. In that regard, AIPAC and the Jewish Lobby are not ‘Jewish power,’ they are symptoms of Jewish power. The institutional attempt to silence any debate about Jewish power is provided by the Jewish Left and the so called Jewish anti Zionist network (JVP, Mondowiess, Chomsky, Blumenthal, etc.). It is the Jewish Left that attempts to set the boundaries of the discussion and dictates what can and cannot be said. 

For instance, we may talk about Zionism and Israel but we must never elaborate on the Jewishness of the Jewish state. Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, it attests to its affinity to Jewish history, and it draws its vile inception from the Old Testament, yet, the Jewish pro Palestinian outlet Mondoweiss, changed its comment policy to ban discussion of Jewish culture in the context of criticizing Israel.  To sum it all up, I am not just an anti Zionist, I am actually critical of all forms of Jewish politics, both Zionist and Anti. I contend that all forms of Jewish politics are ethno-centric and to a certain extent, racially driven. And in my latest book The Wandering Who I substantiate this point and yet to see any attempt to prove me wrong.   

In the last few days I have came across several attempts to defame me. I am cheered by each of them. I tend to see these attempts as an acknowledgment of the importance of my contribution to the discourse. 

Earlier today I read a clumsy diatribe  written by Nick Cooper, a Jewish ethnic campaigner as well as a Klezmer artist from Texas. In his article,Why Other Critics of Israel Won’t Work With Gilad Atzmon Anymore, Klezmer Cooper engages in a Dershowitz like cherry-picking exercise but, instead of exposing me, he conveniently provides us with an example of morbid Jewish Left ideology and tactics.  

Ali Abunimah Did Ask Me To Lie

Cooper is convinced that my words are too often “defamatory, inaccurate, and self-aggrandizing.” He accuses me of “fabricating” a statement by Ali Abunimah. Cooper quotes a line of mine from an email exchange.  “Abunimah,” I wrote,  “calls Israelis Zionists because he needs the so called Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists to support his operation. The last time I communicated with Ali Abunimah he wrote to me, ‘Just refer to Zionism instead of Jewish identity and everything would be fine’. He basically asked me to lie.. I obviously refused’…”

If Cooper bothered with even minimal research he would find out that Mr Abunimah admitted that he sent me a message along this exact line. The email is available on Ali Abuimah’s web site:

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/response-recent-efforts-cast-me-racist

From: Ali Abunimah

November 30, 2010 at 5:16 pm

Dear Gilad, I appreciate your note… What you describe as “Jewish” might perhaps be more accurately described as “Zionist,”- and then we might find grounds for a lot of agreement..

Rather than ‘fabricating’ Abunimah’s words, I described his embarrassing non- ethical offer pretty accurately.

Jewish Exclusivity

Klezmer Cooper is correct in claiming that in our correspondence I told him that he wasn’t intelligent enough to grasp the relatively simple argument that Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist organizations are exclusive to Jews. No doubt, Jewish organizations are happy to collect subscription fees from Goyim (gentiles). But can a Goy become the secretary of Jewish Voice for Peace or the spokesperson for the Jewish Anti-Zionist Network? Not really, and why? Is it because the Goyim aren’t racially qualified or is it because they are ethnically unfit for the job?  The answer should be embarrassing to the Jewish Left, as it seems even the Israeli Knesset is more tolerant than Western Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist organizations.

Truthfulness

Cooper is also correct that I see “Jewish exclusivity everywhere.” And I further contend that Jewish anti-Zionists are a ‘racially oriented exclusivist culture driven by chosenness.’ But in order to prove me wrong  Cooper argues that  “Anti-Zionist Jews often have non-Jewish partners.”  If Cooper were familiar with Jewish heritage and culture he would know that those ‘partners’ are tagged within the tribal discourse as ‘Sabbos Goyim’- Gentiles who toadie to the every wish and whim of the Jews, especially in politics. Cooper is even kind enough to provide us with a list of his favourite Sabbos Goyim. They are all there at the bottom of his article. Arab sounding names first, English names later, for Sabbos Goyim are set in a hierarchic manner based on the primacy of Jewish interests.   

Killing Christ on a daily Basis

Cooper accuses me of racism, but there is one thing he forgets to do; produce a single reference made by me in which I criticize Jews as a race or ethnicity.

“Gilad compared the Israeli attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla to the killing of Jesus,” Cooper writes. I did and would do it again! But is this racism? In the last 5 weeks I have interpreted Israeli crimes in Gaza in the light of Christ killing. Is it racist? Not at all! The murder of Christ symbolizes the killing of the innocent. As far as I am aware this is exactly what the Jewish State has done in turning Gaza into a pile or rubble and murdering children, women, elders and medical workers.

But Chirst Killing also embodies the killing of the messenger. Isn’t that exactly what Nick Cooper attempts to do in struggling to silence me in such a transparently deceitful fashion?

Cooper writes, “Invoking the Christ Killer slur invokes past centuries of anti-Jewish racism and violence in Europe and the US.” I would suggest to Cooper and other Hasbara merchants  that if Israel were to stop killing innocent people in Palestine in the name of the Jewish people, that would be a very useful tactic in combating the ‘Christ Killer’ slur.

Distortion of truth 

Klezmer Cooper writes at the end of his piece, “Several years ago, I collaborated with Gilad Atzmon on the Klezmer Musicians Against the Wall Compilation CD”

This is simply not true. I have never collaborated with Cooper. His playing wasn’t in line with my standards (Cooper owns a drum set). I allowed Cooper to use a few tunes from my parody album “Artie Fishel and The Promised Band” - a comical musical project that mocks Klezmer music and Jewish identity politics, on his Klezmer compilation. Cooper was obviously too dim to grasp that Artie Fishel was a spoof character mocking the Coopers of this world.  

Watch Artie Fishel (on Jazz in my Jihad)  http://youtu.be/oCJ4De0POGs