Sunday, February 17, 2013



Why do we have the following

that supports the corporate welfare system

of the warfare corporations and institutions ?

(1) The United States is the world's largest contributor of military aid.

In 1996, for instance, over 160 countries received military equipment or training from the U.S.


(2) The New America Foundation, a nonprofit research group, has called on Obama to consider multilateral efforts to curb "destructive and destabilizing" weapons exports.

More than half of the top 25 U.S. arms purchasers in the developing world were "undemocratic governments or regimes that engaged in major human rights abuses," in 2006 and 2007, the foundation said in a report


(3) As of 2004, according to Fox News, the U.S. had more than 700 military bases in 130 different countries

(4) 68 cents of every tax dollar goes towards "defense":

The 2009 U.S. military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world's defense spending combined

and is over nine times larger than the military budget of China (compared at the nominal US dollar / Renminbi rate).

Senator Coburn of Oklahoma agrees :

(5) The US battle fleet is still larger than the next 13 navies combined—and 11 of those 13 navies are U.S. allies or partners." :

(6) Why are there literally trillions of dollars of hard earned taxpayers money in the military/industrial complex that is missing or not accounted for ?:

(7) Why is reforming the military/industrial complex so hard and any reform is superficial in its scope ? :

Republican Alan Simpson, Co-Chairman of the National Commision on fiscal responsibility gives us an idea of what really goes on in government

 and that is government is capable of

feckless or irresponsible exercise,

 partisan trickery or deception,

posturing (assuming an artificial or pretended attitude ),




sandbox play (pretending to listen ),


food fights ( childish fights ),

demagoguery (making use of popular prejudices

and false claims and promises in order to gain power )

and fake press conferences instead of truly trying to reform.


(8) Why did the US government not save 5.5 trillion dollars

( five hundred thousand million dollars of hard earned taxpayer dollars plus 10 times the same amount of five hundred thousand million dollars of hard earned taxpayer dollars )

 during the cold war by co-opting the dictators in the Soviet Union ? :

(9) Why is US foreign policy described as

supporting dictators,

 opposing independent nationalism,


supporting state terrorism,





undermining human rights,



violating international law,

minimal when it comes to foreign aid,






power hungry,






and instigating more terrorism ? :

(10) On May 8, 2010, why did the Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates state that the military/industrial complex is not being patriotic when he made the statement quoting Eisenhower :

"“I say the patriot today is the fellow who can do the job with less money.” :

Sec Def goes on to say :

" Does the number of warships we have and are building really put America at risk when the U.S. battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined, 11 of which belong to allies and partners?

Is it a dire threat that by 2020 the United States will have only 20 times more advanced stealth fighters than China?

These are the kinds of questions Eisenhower asked as commander-in-chief." (end of quote )

The US government needs "enemies" in order to

 justify spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year on its friends and supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions:

In order to have enemies, the US government either

 creates the conditions for conflicts to develop or 


prolongs or

allows a conflict to develop even though

 the US government knows that conflicts take years or even decades to develop,

the US government is not interested in preventing a conflict from developing

and that is why the state department's diplomatic budget is minuscule compared to

 the US government's military budget.

And because of the US government's tendency to allow conflicts to develop or

 the tendency to engage in conflicts,

 the US government has had a long list of enemies during its history

( here is a list of enemies that is not comprehensive ):

Native Americans,

the British,








Dominican Republic,






North Korea,

North Vietnam,


Soviet Union,










El Salvador,








Tribal areas of Pakistan


( the above list is not comprehensive ) :

and presently, the US government is allowing conflicts to develop against Iran and North Korea.

If the world governments did to the US government, the same thing what the US government is doing to North Korea and Iran

how would the US government have felt if

the governments of the world sanctioned the US government during the US government's imperial expansion across

 the North American continent,

its cruelty against American natives and slaves,

its imperial expansion across the Caribbean and the Pacific

and its cruelty to the Filipinos during the US goverment's imperial expansion across the Pacific.

So instead of working with the Iranians and North Koreans to eradicate the world of all nuclear "terror" weapons and to improve their human rights record, 

 the US government chooses to sanction Iran and North Korea

and thus keeping Iran and North Korea as "enemies" in order to

keep the American people in fear of the "enemy" so that the American public does not question

 the 1.4 trillion dollars of hard earned taxpayers money going every year to the friends and supporters of the US government in the warfare corporations and institutions.

The very presence of the US government's extremely strong military empire poses a grave danger to both Americans inside and outside the country.

Why would the US government's military empire pose such a grave danger ?

Because up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year is being spent by the US government in order to maintain the US government's military empire:

 which in turn poses a grave danger to both Americans and those abroad, due to

 spending cuts in basic research in health care,



air and

 environmental safety

and cancer research funding,

and also the physical safety of Americans is in jeopardy as seen in the attacks on 9/11 when thousands of Americans died horrifying deaths and the Benghazi attacks.

Cancer alone kills over a million Americans every two years and yet the government is cutting cancer research funding :

even though

Senator Tom Coburn is impressed by the research done by the National Institutes of Health.

The US government will tell you that it is at war with  terrorists, meaning,

according to the Geneva conventions, war gives the US government the

 authority to target terrorists with lethal force

and at the same time,

war always collaterally kills  or sacrifices the lives of one group of  innocent people ( usually the poorest in society )  in order to

save the lives of another group of people ( usually the richest in society who are allied with the US government )

But if a local radical American group declared war against the US government,

 the government will never declare war against a local American terrrorist group

 but rather use law enforcement to bring down a local terrorist group

because declaring war against a local terrorist group would mean the use of weapons of mass terror or destruction

( example: drone missiles )

 which will result in innocent Americans losing their lives due to collateral damage.

So what does this mean;

 its means the US government cares more about American lives due to

the fact that Americans can vote the government out of office

rather than caring about the lives of those in foreign countries

when the US government can easily co-opt the authorities in foreign countries

( example; at one time the Taliban was co-opted by the US government resulting in a Taliban delegation visiting the White House : )

and in coopting the foreign government ( even governments not allied with the US government)

the US government can  use law enforcement ( local and the FBI) to go after terrorists, rather than using weapons of war to go after terrorists in foreign countries.

The US government gives the impression that its military empire is necessary by

 pointing to all the examples from the past that

made it necessary for the US government to act

but if you look at each example from the past,

 the US government was active in either

allowing a conflict to flourish





or prolonging a conflict

which resulted in the US government convincing the American people that 

the government was totally innocent

and the enemy acted adversely without any provocation

and the need to act

into either going to  war or

 increased expenditure on the warfare corporations and institutions.

The US government knows the easiest way to create enemies is to radicalize a population, just as the British radicalized the American colonists by treating the American rebels harshly which in turn led to the American Revolution.

By creating enemies, its easy for the  US government to keep the gullible American public in constant fear so that

 the American public does not question the looting of the US treasury of hard earned taxpayers money

which goes to supporting the profit agenda of the friends and supporters of the US government in the warfare corporations and institutions.

Three examples of the US government purposely allowing a conflict to flourish in order to support the profit agenda of the warfare corporations and institutions :

Example One :

Way before the attacks on Pearl Harbor on December 7th 1941,

 The US government,

instead of being a peacemaker between China and Japan,

started the war with Japan as early as 1940  through

massive U.S. supplies, arms, fuel and 10,000 tons per month of supplies going to the Chinese mililtary against Japan during 1940 :

even though the Japanese government never interfered with

the US government's imperial expansion

across the North American continent,

the Caribbean

and the Pacific (right up to the Philippines )

and the Japanese government never interfered even when reports were received in Japan that

the US government allowed blacks to be enslaved and tortured on slave ships,

Native Americans were massacred

and atrocities committed against the Filipinos.

Example 2 of allowing a conflict to flourish :

Al-Qaeda is such a tiny organization and its influence only increases in proportion to the US government and its allies bombings of muslim areas.

Stop the bombings and the occupation of muslim lands and the influence of Al-Qaeda will disappear overnight.

Even with adverse US government policies,

 Bin Laden on 9/11/01 was able to recruit only 19 muslims to attack the US

and was not able to recruit any American muslims to cause havoc on 9/11/01

showing that its extremely hard to get muslims to kill innocent Americans.

But that knowledge does not prevent the Pentagon from continuing to instigate radical muslims.

More drone attacks on the Taliban in Pakistan and Al-Qaeda in Yemen,

results in the collateral deaths of civilians,

 which in turn results in more attacks from terrorists,

which in turn results in the "bogeyman " propaganda from US politicians,

which in turn results in fear from the American public,

which in turn results in more spending on the warfare corporations and institutions

and which in turn results in the rich and powerful in the warfare corporations and institutions "laughing all the way to the bank ".

Al-Qaeda did not exist before the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

If the west stops interfering in muslim lands, militarily speaking,

Al-Qaeda will disappear overnight since

muslims will not give in to Al-Qaeda's objectives of starting theocracies in the muslim world.

Example 3 of allowing a conflict to flourish :

The CIA knows what is going on in every country of the world

and yet it did not try to prevent the Syrian civil conflict.

Conflicts take years or even decades to develop

and the CIA has plenty of time to be a peacemaker between  the parties involved

and yet the CIA allows a conflict to flourish to the point of violence

because the US government's prime objective is to secure the interests of those who profit from conflict and war

and it does not spend much money on preventing conflict or war.

The US government knows that the best way to expand the US government's power

and to further the interests of those who profit from war or conflict  is to

control the people by

constantly keeping the people in fear of an exaggerated "existential" threat

whether it be the exaggerated "existential" threat of the British "enemy" which gave birth to the revolution and an expanded government and much higher taxes compared to the tiny tea tax imposed by the British:

whether it be the"exaggerated existential threat" of the Southern Confederate States "enemy" which gave birth to the civil war and an expanded government,

whether it be the "exaggerated existential threat" of the Native American, Mexican or Spanish "enemy" which gave birth to an imperial empire and a Pacific/Caribbean power and an expanded government or

whether it be the "exaggerated existential threat" of the German, Japanese, North Korean, Chinese, North Vietnamese and Soviet "enemy"

which gave birth to the military/industrial complex

and an expanded government that does not mind draining or bankrupting the US treasury

which will eventually lead to the bankruptcy of our government in the next 10-20 years.

The theme of the "enemy" and the corresponding exaggerated existential threat is even found in the national anthem.

The US government chooses its national anthem around the theme of the "enemy" instead of choosing the song "God bless America" as its national anthem

because the song, "God bless America" does not keep reminding people of the "enemy".


War should be avoided or prevented

and every war the US government has ever been engaged in was avoidable or preventable

because conflicts take years or even decades to develop

and any true Peacemaker government ( that is not interested in advancing the profiteering agenda of their friends in the warfare corporations and institutions )

would have laid the groundwork years in advance to prevent or avoid war through covert/sting operations,


and getting the right people on the CIA payroll in order to prevent bloodshed/war.


So the main reason the US government does not need a military empire is because

since conflicts take years or decades to develop, the US government has the time to

avoid or prevent the conflict or war


But sadly, the US government is not in the business of avoiding or preventing conflicts

and in fact instigates the conflict by its bloody interventions and here is one example:

Because of the US government's involvement in WWI, three major events took place:

(a) the destruction of Germany which enabled Hitler to exploit the humiliation experienced by Germany due to the Treaty of Versailles which in turn enabled Hitler to rise to power

(b) the expansion of the power of the communists and communism since Germany was destroyed and was not able to keep the communists in check

(c) The destruction and the break up of the Ottoman Empire which

shattered the relative peace shared between the Arabs and Jews

and the relative peace shared between Arabs under the Ottoman Empire.


The destruction of the Ottoman Empire was not only destructive to Arabs,

it enabled the growth of radical elements within Arab society who exploited the collateral death of Muslims and their loved ones who died at the hands of the western colonial powers.

Below are other examples of instigation policies by the US government in order to

provoke the enemy to act adversely so that

the US government can justify to the American people why

trillions of hard earned taxpayer dollars are going to the corporate welfare system of the warfare corporations and institutions in the military/industrial complex :

(1) Stimson, the Secretary of War confided in his diary after a meeting of the war cabinet on November 25, 1941 :

“The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves".

After the Pearl Harbor attack, Stimson confessed :
“my first feeling was of relief ... that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people."

(Quoted in Morgenstern, "The Actual Road to Pearl Harbor," pg. 343, 384.)

If the US government never forced Japan to sign unequal treaties "at the point of a gun" in the late 1800s which in turn led to some Japanese pushing for militarism because they never wanted to be humiliated again by the US government,
If the US government had never invaded and had a atrocious occupation of the Philippines where numerous atrocities were committed,

If  the US government did not start the war with Japan by supporting the Chinese military through

massive U.S. supplies, arms, fuel and 10,000 tons per month of supplies going to the Chinese mililtary against Japan during 1940 :

If the US government had a non-interventionist policy, just as

the Japanese government had a non-interventionist policy regarding the US government

(example: the Japanese government did not

interfere with the imperial expansion of the US government across

North America,

the Caribbean

and the Pacific

and the Japanese government did not interfere in the Philippines even when

the US government was committing atrocities in the Philippines)

the US government had never planned to have a war with Japan called the War Plan Orange,

If the US government never invaded and occupied the Spanish colonies in the Pacific,
If the US government had never invaded and annexed Hawaii,
If the US government did not support the Chinese military against the Japanese government

( since the Chinese were also committing atrocities ;

Rummel estimates that Chiang Kai-Shek committed a total of 10,214,000 democides from 1921 to 1948):
If the US government never imposed embargoes on Japan,

in July 1941, FDR did not freeze Japanese assets in the United States,
If the US government did not instigate the Japanese as Henry L. Stimson and the McCollum Memo confessed ( Victor, Pearl Harbor Myth, p. 105.)

If the US government heeded to the wishes of Admiral Richardson, commander of the U.S. fleet, and not moved the American fleet to Pearl Harbor,
the Pearl Harbor attack would never have happened

which also resulted in Japan taking most of the western possessions in South East Asia in order to serve as "bargaining chips" in a future peace agreement :


The US government instigated Japan by

freezing Japanese assets,

imposing embargoes,

helping the Chinese military against Japan

and as the McCollum Memo from US naval intelligence and Stimson, the Secretary of War admitted that

the US government did everything short of all out war, to

instigate the Japanese government to attack,

giving the reason that if the Japanese attacked first,

that would unite the American people for war, since

the American people did not want another world war since WW1.


(2) The link below is another example of an instigation policy by the US government :

How the CIA and the terrorists work together  in order to keep the American public in perpetual fear so that the looting of the treasury can continue :


(3) Another example of an instigation policy by the US government and the Israeli government :

Both the Israeli government and the US government tried to instigate Saddam Hussein which might have resulted in

Saddam giving chemical WMD to the terrorists in the West Bank and Gaza.

In wanting to help the profit agenda of the corporate welfare system of the warfare corporations and institutions in the military/industrial complex,

the US and/or Israeli governments instigated Saddam by doing the following :

Israel destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactors in the 80s

(2) Through the Iran-Contra scandal, the US government supplied arms to Iran in the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s
(3) In the 90s, the US government ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait

(4) In the 90s, The US government openly encouraged the Iraqi Kurds and Shittes to rebel against Saddam Hussein

and overthrow him from power

and in this case in the 90s Saddam did not even use his weapons of mass destruction against the rebellious Kurds and Shiites.

(5) In the 90s, Saddam Hussein's palaces were destroyed by the US government
(6) In the 90s, the US government made assassination attempts on Saddam Hussein starting with the bombardment of Saddam's palaces during the gulf war
(7) In the 90s, the US government prevented Saddam Hussein's planes from flying in the no-fly zone

In the 90s, the US government had crippling economic sanctions on Iraq which affected the most vulnerable who were the Iraqi children and babies

(9) Throughout the 90s, the US government periodically bombed Iraq which resulted in massive property damage and the deaths of thousands of Iraqis including relatives of Saddam Hussein
(10) Throughout the 90s, the US government systematically decimated almost the entire air defense systems of Saddam Hussein

When the above instigation policies by the Israeli government and/or the US government made Saddam only use conventional weapons against Israel during the gulf war

but did not make Saddam use chemical WMD against Israel or

make Saddam hand over chemical WMD to the terrorists in the west bank or Gaza,

the US government gave up on its instigation policies and decided to just invade Iraq in 2003

with the excuse that

Saddam in the future might be instigated enough to use WMD or

hand them over to the terrorists in the West Bank or Gaza

even though over almost a 25 year period when Saddam had at least chemical WMD,

Saddam never once gave those WMD to the terrorists in the west bank or Gaza.

Even though the rich and powerful are clamoring and persuading their politician friends to eventually spend trillions of dollars

 like they spent wastefully on the 5.5 trillion dollar Cold War in order to

enrich their political supporters who are owners of the warfare/industrial/security corporations,

 but the wasteful spending cannot adequately protect

 every mile of railroad,

 power station,

every mile of the power grid,

every mile of pipeline,

every nuclear reactor,

 every cargo container,




 every mile of bridges,

 tunnels ,

dams ,

every air plane,

ship ,

multi-storey building,

 theme park,

 locations where thousands of people gather or

 locations with huge tanks with explosive gas/chemicals/oil stored.

On 4/16/07 at Virginia Tech University, 32 people died from gun shot wounds suffered at the hands of one gun man.

 Can we protect the thousands of colleges in the US if terrorists targeted US colleges ?

 or did having a military empire protect 3000 Americans on 9/11/01 ?

The solution to solving the problem of terrorism or conflict is not

  a gigantic, unnecessary military empire that is

more catered to helping the rich and powerful in the warfare corporations then

helping the average American, as evidenced by the killing of 3000 Americans by

19 hijackers on 9/11/01 armed with box-cutters on a half million dollar budget.

The only way to keep Americans safe is by giving up the US government's military empire.

Right now, sexual assaults in the military is a symptom of an unmanageable world wide military empire

and 40% of its maintenance is borrowed from places like China.

Giving up the US government's extremely expensive

and unaffordable worldwide military empire will result in

a dramatic reduction in sexual assaults since

a US government that gives up its worldwide empire will result in

a military that is confined within the borders of the US resulting in a dramatically smaller military

that is able to maintain ethical standards regarding sexual propriety:

Instead of catering to the Pentagon

and its allies among "defense" contractors

and the profit agenda of the warfare corporations and institutions

in starting budget busting trillion dollar wars

(40% of which has to be borrowed from places like China)


instead of war and deliberately sending our poor soldiers deliberately into harm’s way,


(1) Make peace and declare ceasefire with all enemies following the peace making policies of Switzerland that does not experience any religious terrorism.

Also be the Peacemaker between parties that are in conflict with each other in other countries.

Conflicts take years or even decades to develop so the CIA should be in every country, especially in potential conflict zones,  being a Peacemaker between opposing parties.

(2) Restore full diplomatic relations with all enemies.

The US government went to war with a long list of enemies who eventually became friends with the US government ( example : the British, Canadians, Mexicans, Spanish etc )

so if people are capable of being friends, why not be friends to begin with, without the horror of war ?

(3) Restore full trade relations with all enemies.

Psychology Professor Steven Pinker of Harvard University agrees with Dr Ron Paul who says that

friendly trade with the “enemy” will reap beneficial results since

 the “enemy” has a vested interest in your success when  you trade with him:

(4) Bringing all our troops home ( from the entire world ) after adequately compensating all the families  of victims of US government bombings

and the families of the victims of terrorism not related to US government collateral actions.

Why compensate the families of victims of terrorism when the US government was not directly involved in those deaths or injury ?

Same reason why the US government compensated the families of the victims of the 9/11/01 attacks

because the US government could have prevented the attacks on 9/11/01 if

 it had the same non-interventionist policies of Switzerland that never experiences religious terrorism on such a large scale,

so even though the US government was not directly responsible for the attacks on 9/11/01,

in a way,

it was indirectly responsible due to  creating the conditions for terrorism to flourish

and that is why the US government felt guilty enough to compensate the families of the victims on 9/11/01.


 compensation to families of all victims of terrorism will

 lessen the likelihood of revenge killings, once US government troops leave the country.

When the Soviets gave into the demands of
the Afghan terrorists

and withdrew Soviet troops from Afghanistan,

the Afghan terrorists did not follow the Soviet troops back to the Soviet Union.

When President Reagan gave into the demands of

the Lebanese terrorists and withdrew US troops from Lebanon,

the Lebanese terrorists did not follow US troops back to the US.

When President Clinton gave into the demands of

the Somali terrorists and withdrew US troops from Somalia,

the Somali terrorists did not follow US troops back to the US.

When President Bush gave into the demands of Bin Laden and Saudi terrorists

and withdrew US troops from Saudi Arabia,

Saudi terrorists did not follow US troops back to the US.

When the Spanish government gave into the demands of the Iraqi terrorists

and withdrew Spanish troops from Iraq, the Iraqi terrorists did not follow the Spanish troops back to Spain.

So one can imagine, the "war on terror" will completely end if

all US government troops and allies left muslim lands,

terrorists will not be following US government troops and their allies back to their homeland.

So, the simple solution to ending the "war on terror" is to

follow the Swiss model that does not instigate terrorists

because the Swiss make sure they are not using their military to occupy or invade/drone attack muslim lands

because invasions or drone attacks always cause collateral damage and the collateral deaths of innocent muslims

but sadly, the US government is instigating terrorists through short-sighted, profit driven policies while the US government does not follow the Swiss "non-instigation" model.

(5) Co-opt the enemy by having them on the CIA payroll

( in the history of the US,

no dictator on the CIA payroll has ever posed a danger to the US as evidenced by

 CIA reports during that time period)

example : President Reagan co-opting Saddam Hussein during the 80s resulting in

not a single CIA report stating that Saddam was a threat to the US even when

Saddam was at his worst in the 80s and actually using WMD.

Second example: The Haqqani terror network was co-opted by the CIA in order to

drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan resulting in

 not a single CIA report during that time period stating that

the Haqqani terror network was a danger to the US.

(6) All human rights violations by dictators on the CIA payroll should be dealt with  along the same steps that were taken when

the US government was accused of  human rights violations against the Native Americans and Filipinos during

 the US government's imperial expansion across North America, the Caribbean and the Pacific

and Peacemakers during that time did not call for violence against the US government but

 rather tried to solve the human rights violations of the US government through



psychological therapies,

financial incentives,


and comprehensive conversations that tried to convince the US government that

human rights violations will only create an atmosphere of rebellion in the area they are trying to control

 which in the long run will result in tragedy to the US government's rule.

And (7) covertly prevent power hungry individuals from acquiring power :

For example : The holocaust could have been prevented if

(a) The US government was not involved in WW1 (which resulted in WW2)

(b) the US government had covert sting operations against Hitler when Hitler was planning to overthrow the German government

(c) the US government had covert sting operations against Hitler when Hitler was planning to gain power by killing off his enemies in the “night of long knives” massacre

(d) Britain did not declare war against Germany when Germany invaded Poland because the holocaust only started after Britain declared war against Germany

(Britain knew about Hitler's early warning since Hitler warned before the transport of Jews to concentration camps that if another war was declared on Germany, the Jews would pay )

(e) Two wrongs do not make a right;

 the US government being involved in WW1 was one wrong but

 at the same time the Treaty of Versailles that did not have an Allied police force making sure Germany disarmed after the war and was kept disarmed after WW1, was the second wrong.

If the disarmament of Germany was maintained by the Allies after WW1, Hitler could not have started WW2.

(So as usual,

 preventing war is not a priority of Allied governments but

 rather the priority is meeting the profit agenda of the government's supporters in the warfare complex, corporations and institutions )

Bottom line: wars create terrorists

and WW1 and its tragic results for Germany created the terrorist Hitler.

Any of the points (a)  through (d) above, would have prevented the holocaust without the US government’s military involved.

Also, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has to be resolved

We are afraid that as long as the growth rate of Arabs (Christians/Muslims) is at 2.2% and the growth rate of Jews is at 1.7%, the ethnic cleansing operations (detailed below) will continue in the Occupied Territories.

Israeli Arabs within Israel and almost all Arab nations do want Israel to exist

and even if a tiny minority do not want Israel to exist, they cannot do anything about it

and that is why Hamas proposed a 10 year truce but

  the Israeli government rejected it because

the Israeli government wants to keep the conflict going so that

it hopes to wear down the Palestinians since

the Israeli government is in a position of power and wealth compared to the Palestinians.

By taking as much as possible and giving as little as possible,

the Israeli government hopes that the Palestinians would be resigned to "reservations" eventually (as the Native Americans are in this country)

while providing cheap labor to the Israeli economy.

Since American mobs terrorized and tortured by tarring innocent American loyalists over a tiny tea tax, a tax which mostly affected rich Americans :

so is it surprising that palestianians who are living under duress :

due to

 the Israeli government's occupation of their lands would resort to throwing rocks ?

In the history of mankind, the stronger group usually engages in "ethnic cleansing" ( example: forceful removal of Indian tribes from their homes by the US government) and

the weaker group usually engages in terrorism ( example: terrorism committed by Native Americans against the families of American settlers ).

Terrorism by Native Americans lasted almost 300 years from 1622 through 1911.

Here is one American historian's narrative in 1832 on terrorism committed by Native Americans on the families of civilian settlers: 

"The men and children were chopped to pieces," wrote historian Kerry Trask, "and the dead women were hung up by their feet and

their bodies mutilated in ways too gruesome for contemporary observers to record in writing " (end of quote ).

The reason Native Americans committed terrorism against American settlers is because

the US government never made a comprehensive peace deal with the Native Americans, till the Native American nations were reduced to nothing.

So similarly, a tiny minority of the Palestinians resort to terrorism because

the Israeli government has a stranglehold on the Palestinians through various collective punishment and ethnic cleansing methods.

We know that ethnic cleansing operations by the Israeli government is a much more powerful force than terrorism, by looking at the female life expectancy in Israel, compared to the UN designated Occupied Territories:

Israeli female life expectancy : 83.49 years.

Palestinian female life expectancy : 77.17 years.

Has there been a democratic government ( other than the Israeli government ) that does not allow non-militant ( law abiding ) residents (of another religion) to return to their own homes  ?

Neturei Karta is an anti-Zionist Jewish organization (made up of Orthodox Jews and Rabbis) who oppose the collective punishment methods of the Israeli government.

Due to the "Present Absentee" Israeli law, Christians/Muslims who have already been given Israeli citizenship are not even allowed to return to their homes within Israel due to their refugee status within Israel.

Due to collective punishment by the Israeli government,

the Christians in Israel decreased from 21% in 1949 to 13% in 1990, and to less than 10% at the end of 1998 but

in the Palestinian territories, Christian representatives constitute more than double their proportion in Palestinian society.

This disproportional representation is a further indication of the Palestinian Authority's desire to allow the Christians a sense of security.

Official Hamas statement in 2007: "(Hamas) would not allow anyone (in Gaza) to sabotage Muslim-Christian relations."

Alex Awad, Dean of students at Bethlehem Bible College and Pastor of a Baptist Church in Jerusalem, says that in 34 years , almost all Christians have not been attacked, insulted or humiliated by Muslim neighbors. "That’s a very long time”, Pastor Awad says and

Pastor Awad blames many persecution stories on Christians who seek sympathy and money from Christian Zionists in Western nations. “That’s sad,” he says.

Since non-Jewish Israeli citizens are treated as second class citizens due to the Israeli "Present Absentee" law, you can imagine what rights Palestinians have in the UN designated Occupied Territories.

Miko Peled is a Jewish Israeli who grew up in a well known Zionist family.

Miko, whose father was an Israeli General, finally became an anti-Zionist activist when he realized that "Zionism is a racist, colonial idea" (end of quote).

 Watch the free docudrama, " The Promise " on Hulu (not Hulu Plus), to see an accurate depiction of life in Israel from the viewpoints of both sides in this tragic conflict.

Open a new window to watch the youtube videos below while you are reading the post and

please repost this post at least once a day and tell your friends to do the same, thanks.

Jewish Israeli filmmaker Guy Davidi shows his documentary " 5 Broken Cameras" to Israeli school children who are visibly affected by the brutality of Israeli soldiers. 

The israeli school children voice their concerns in the youtube video titled :

""Five Broken Cameras" screened to Israeli youth ".

684 Israeli combatants/officers from all units of the IDF have so far signed the January 2002 "Combat Troops' Letter" in which 

they declared their refusal "to fight... in order to



 starve and

 humiliate an entire people" (end of quote).

In a booklet published by Breaking the Silence, 30 Israeli soldiers who served in the West Bank have described the army's day-to-day actions with descriptions of




verbal abuse, 

night-time arrests and 

injury" of children, who are handcuffed and blindfolded and

denied recourse to lawyers, either on suspicions of stone-throwing or arrested in order to gather information on their relatives and neighbors.

B'TSELEM is a Israeli Human Rights Organization that was established by a group of prominent Israeli academics, attorneys, journalists, and Knesset members.

Watch the B'TSELEM Youtube video titled : 

" Orthodox Jewish woman harasses Palestinian mother ", 

where a Palestinian family has to literally live in a cage and the children cannot play outside.

Watch the Youtube video titled : " Kalandia - A Checkpoint Story ",

its a video recorded by a Jewish woman about the kind of abusive and humiliating lives Palestinians go through in Israel.

Another youtube video ( 2003 documentary film by Israeli filmmaker Yoav Shamir) titled :

" Checkpoint - Israel Defence Forces Documentary ".

One can imagine what happens when the camera is turned off and there are no jewish observers.

Even in America, cops are known to beat up their own citizens when there are no cameras around, so one can imagine what happens to innocent palestinians who are considered as enemies by a minority of Israeli checkpoint guards.

Why is the Israeli government in the business of instigation ? so that

the subsequent adverse reactions by a tiny number of palestinian militants will give the Israel government the excuse to not make peace through a comprehensive peace deal as outlined in Brian's blog ( link at the end of this post ).

Remember, its the muslims (Ottoman Turks) who allowed Jews to immigrate to Palestine in the 1800s, so good relations between Jews and Muslims would go back to what it was during the 1800s, once a comprehensive peace deal is agreed to.

Facebook has a page titled " Arabs and Jews refuse to be Enemies".

Once a comprehensive peace deal is agreed to, we can see many more people joining organizations like 

Combatants for Peace, a Bi-national movement of Israelis and Palestinians who dropped their arms in order to lead a non-violent struggle against the occupation of palestinian territories (as designated by the UN).

In 1850, Jews were 4% of the total population of Palestine since

most Jews had converted to Islam and had become Muslim Palestinians since 7th century Muslim rule.

The remaining Jews were treated relatively well and that is why the Jews fled the persecution of Europe to Palestine (name given to the area by the Romans ).

If the majority muslims in Palestine (during the 1800s) treated the Jewish immigrants like how the US government treated Native Americans and Blacks, the Jews would not have left Europe for Palestine in the 1800s.

Even though historically, the Jewish military acquired Palestine through genocide, killing all non-jewish civilian men, women, children and babies ( Deuteronomy 20:16) the muslims during the 1800s still welcomed the Jews back into Palestine.

But it turned out that nationalist Zionists were not grateful to the generosity of the muslims.

Rabbi Jon-Jay Tilsen of Beth El-Keser Israel states that

the rightful owners of Palestinian lands were forced to become tenant farmers due to

The (Muslim) Ottoman Land Code and Registration Laws of 1858 and 1859 which had the effect of 

fraudulently transferring Christian/Muslim farmers ownership of Palestinian lands to powerful Arabs who in turn sold those lands to Jews.

The first "stone" was thrown in 1908 when Zionists encouraged Jews to forcefully push Arab tenant farmers off their lands and homes (ethnic cleansing) and

to only employ Jews and not to employ non-Jews.

Christian and Muslim farmers suddenly found themselves forced out of their homes and land that had been in their family for centuries.

As soon as the first "stone" was thrown by the Zionists,

Najib Nassar a Palestinian Christian published Al-Karmil, warning Palestinians about Zionism which in turn led to the anti-Zionist Muslim-Christian Associations.

Would Americans riot if there were unrestricted Mexican immigration into this country ? likewise, some Arabs rioted because

the Zionists wanted unrestricted Jewish immigration and so

the Jews who only comprised 4% of the total population of Palestine in 1850,

by 1947, Jewish immigrants grew to over 30% of the total population of Palestine.

By 1945, the Jews had purchased only 6% of the total area of Palestine but

the 1947 U.N. Resolution 181(II) gave the Jews, 56 % of Palestine ( over a 400% increase in Jewish agricultural lands ) and even though

the Christians/Muslims were twice the population of the Jews, the Palestinians got 44% of Palestine ( a 59% reduction in Palestinian agricultural lands ).

In their 1947 report to the UN General Assembly, the UN Special Committee on Palestine stated that:

"The Arab (Christian/Muslim) population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land (Palestine)" (end of quote ).

What if the UN came to you and said an Indian wants 56% of your land (because 1800 years ago his ancestors owned your land) and 

the Indian wants most of your best agricultural lands and

you get 44% your land even though there are two of your family and only one of the Native American ,

what would you say to the UN ? and

that is what the UN did to Palestine in the 1940s which lead to decades of conflict.

In his book "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine", Jewish Israeli historian Ilan Pappé of Haifa University, asserts that Plan Dalet was a "blueprint for ethnic cleansing":

"... this ... blueprint spelled it out clearly and unambiguously:

the Palestinians had to go ... The aim of the plan was in fact the destruction of both rural and 

urban areas of Palestine........and their inhabitants expelled" (end of quote).

Aharon Zisling, the minister of agriculture, told the Israeli cabinet on 17 November 1948:

"... Jews have behaved like Nazis and my entire being has been shaken " (end of quote).

Arab governments had to interfere militarily in 1948 because

before the Israeli government declared independence in 1948,

the Israeli military and well organized Zionist terror groups had already penetrated deep into the UN designated Palestinian State encountering

little opposition from unorganized Palestinian militants.

Sadly, for hundreds of thousands of Christian/Muslim Palestinians who fled from their homes in fear (1947-1948) due to hearing about 24 reported massacres (example: Deir Yassin massacre) by Zionist terror groups,

the Israeli government did not just take 56% as designated by the UN but rather

the Israeli government took 100% of Christian/Muslim Palestinian homes

(In effect, the Zionist leadership went back on their 1940s promise of giving all palestinians within Israel, permanent residency).

Even though palestinians were promised legal residence by Jewish leaders in the 1940s, they were not allowed back into Palestine (today's Israel) even though

the UN passed UN Resolution 194 in December 11, 1948, calling for the return of refugees back to their legal residency in Israel.

All property rights should be addressed comprehensively, whether it be Jewish property rights in Arab countries or Arab property rights in Palestine.

If there is no evidence of terrorism, those Palestinians with legal residency promised by both the UN and Jewish leaders during the 1940s should be allowed to return. 

The UN would never have given statehood to Israel if the UN knew that the legal residency of Palestinians could be changed at anytime and for any reason against the wishes of the legal Palestinian residents of Israel.

If the Israeli government was truly a Peacemaker,

it would have stipulated in the 1949 Armistice Agreements that it would work closely with the border patrol of Arab countries to monitor their borders to make sure

the PLO does not cross the borders into Israel since

the Arab countries had limited resources and manpower to monitor the movement of hundreds of thousands of palestinian refugees of which

a tiny minority ( the PLO) was seeking revenge for the killings and expulsions of Palestinians from Israel during the 1947-1948 period.

Before 1967, the Israeli government always had the intention of taking Gaza and the West Bank and the way they did it is by provoking small attacks from the Arab states and then

following up with a huge bombing campaign as listed below:

(1) Incursion by the Israeli government into the Syrian territory of al-Hamma in 1951

(2) Invasion of Egypt by the Israeli government in 1956

(3) In 1966, the Israeli government attacked Jordan's West Bank. 

(4) April 1967, Israeli government invaded Syria.

(5) Surprise first strike by the israeli government against Egypt in June 1967 which started the Six-Day War.

Yitzhak Rabin, who served as the Chief of the General Staff for Israel during the Six Day war stated:

"I do not believe that Egypt wanted war" (end of quote ).

In 1967, when the Israeli government had total control of the West Bank and Gaza,

the Israeli government could have annexed the West Bank and Gaza and those Palestinians who did not accept Israeli citizenship or residency, would have been subject to deportation.

Israeli Arabs (20% of the Israeli population ) have accepted Israeli citizenship.

The period after 1967 ( when the Israeli government had full control of Gaza and the West Bank) was described by 

Jewish Israeli Professor Benny Morris as an "all-pervading element of humiliation", caused by

the protracted occupation which Dr. Morris says was "always a brutal and mortifying experience for the occupied" and

was "founded on brute force, 

repression and fear, 

collaboration and treachery,

beatings and torture chambers, and

daily intimidation, humiliation, and manipulation" (end of quote ).

Jewish Israeli Professor Jeff Halper founded the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions.

According to Professor Halper, since 1967, Israel demolished over 18,000 Palestinian homes, a process now routine, and nearly always for no security reason.

Dr. Halper calls it "a national obsession, collective punishment, in defiance of international law that Israel disdains. 

For Palestinians, it's traumatic and devastating.

It renders men powerless and emasculating for being unable to provide a family home" (end of quote).

In 1967, why didn't the Israeli government annex both the West Bank and Gaza and give Christian/Muslim Palestinians full residency or citizenship rights ? 

because then the Israeli government would not have been able to do the following ethnic cleansing operations

( because the following would have been illegal if the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza were given full residency or citizenship rights after 1967) :

extrajudicial assassinations of suspected militants, 

mass detentions without trials of suspected militants,

forced migrations of non-militant civilians,

forced relocations of non-militant civilians,

forced deportations of non-militant civilians, 

confiscation of lands belonging to non-militant civilians, 

severely restricting non-militant civilians from building,

severely restricting non-militant civilians from expanding agricultural lands,

severely restricting college educated, non-militant civilians from finding work ( resulting in only one in eight college-educated non-militant Palestinians finding degree-related work) ,

unrestricted Jewish settler migration into the West Bank and Gaza.

As long as the ethnic cleansing operations were not complete, the Likud Party of Israel stated the following in their 1999 charter : 

“The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river" (end of quote ).

While the Zionists were in the business of instigation ever since 1908, 

Hamas in 2004 promised a 10 year truce and using President Reagan's "trust but verify" program, we could have determined whether Hamas was following the truce agreement but

as usual the Israeli government was not interested in the 10 year truce.

Today, the Israeli government subjects the Palestinian moms/dads to numerous humiliating and abusive checkpoints where kids see their parents being humiliated and abused by checkpoint guards and

after seeing the regular humiliating treatment of their parents, a very tiny number of palestinian kids grow up to be terrorists. 

Would it be ok with you if you had to wait for hours to get through all the checkpoints in the West Bank ?

In 2008, an Israeli soldier in command of a checkpoint outside Nablus was relieved from duty after he refused to allow a Palestinian woman in labor to pass through.

Jewish Author Yehudit Kirstein-Keshet says the border crossings, checkpoints and closures demonstrates "Israel's imprisonment of an entire population in a web of closures and checkpoints".

The US has an average of 10,000 gun murders every year, while over a 19 year period (1989-2008), 

the average annual deaths due to terrorist suicides in Israel was 47, 

does that mean since there are 212 times more murders in America due to mostly illegal guns (compared to suicide bombings in Israel ),

we need 200 times more checkpoints in the US to check for illegal guns ? but

even though the US has about 10,000 gun murders per year ( mostly by illegal guns) , we do not have checkpoints looking for illegal guns because

checkpoints would mean collective punishment of the innocent.

Since the Israeli government refused to have a comprehensive peace deal decades ago, Hamas came into existence in 1987, due to human nature.

Its human nature to rebel against the aggressor (the Israeli government), as the Native Americans rebelled in horrific ways against the US government.

In light of the 1988 report by the UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices,

the UN condemned the Israeli government in 1989 for "war crimes and an affront to humanity".

While the UN was condemning the Israeli government in 1989, 

Hamas carried out its first attack against Israel in 1989, abducting and killing two soldiers because 

in the Gaza Strip in 1988, once every two weeks a Palestinian child would suffer from a shot to the head due to the collateral actions by Israeli government personnel.

Hamas was founded in 1987 in the midst of the Israeli government's hatred towards the Palestinians for not conforming to the Israeli government's colonial ambitions (details in the second half of this post ).

Hamas returned the Israeli government's hatred by writing the Hamas Charter.

The Hamas Charter welcomes good relations with Jews, but they want the Zionists out of power and Israel to cease to exist.

According to Hamas Charter Article Thirty-One:

"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a humanistic movement.

It takes care of human rights and is guided by Islamic tolerance when dealing with the followers of other religions. 

Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other.

Islam prevents the incursion on other people's rights" (end of quote ).

The other quotes from the Charter are in reference to the 7th century conflict between the Medina Muslims and the pro-Meccan Jews. 

When hatred meets with hatred, the resulting conclusion is that both the Israeli government and Hamas want the other side out of power.

Does that mean the US government should not negotiate with Hamas ?

Britain only recognized the existence of the US government, decades after 1776

(The British even burned down our capital in the war of 1812) so similarly,

Hamas will recognize Israel if the Israeli government makes a comprehensive peace deal with Hamas and the Hamas Charter of 1988 will become void.

In fact, in 2010 Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal stated that the Charter is "a piece of history and no longer relevant".

According to the 2010 Amnesty International Report:

" Israeli government often stopped international aid and humanitarian assistance from entering Gaza, 

Israeli government personnel targeted and killed Palestinian medical staff, 

used Palestinian civilians as "human shields",

and indiscriminately fired white phosphorus over densely populated residential areas.

Allegations of ill-treatment against Palestinian detainees continued and were rarely investigated.

Hundreds of Palestinians were administratively detained without charge;

others were serving sentences imposed after unfair military trials.

Israeli government personnel and settlers who committed serious human rights abuses against Palestinians enjoyed virtual impunity.

Permission to leave Gaza to receive medical treatment was denied or delayed for hundreds of seriously ill Palestinians and at least 28 individuals died while waiting for permission to travel ". (end of quote).

Today, The Israeli government is in the business of instigation by carrying out extrajudicial assassinations,

blockading Gaza [resulting in the health, nutrition and longevity of kids (45% of Gaza residents) being adversely affected ] and

Gaza is subject to rolling blackouts and unhealthy water quality while the Israeli government controls Gaza's airspace, coastal sea and access to the West Bank,

in order to make sure that the Gaza inhabitants rely on the Israeli government for all their basic necessities.

A 40% increase in poverty among Gaza fishermen between 2008 and 2011 due to restrictions by the Israeli government on the Gaza fish industry, while

the poor Gaza fishermen are subject to random firings from the Israeli government navy.

There is no piped water going into Gaza homes because

most of Gaza's groundwater is taken by Israel and

in the West Bank,

its called collective punishment,

where Palestinians have two hours of running water per week due to jewish settlers and Israel using 80-85% of the groundwater, 

Palestinian students are not able to attend classes on time or miss classes altogether if the West Bank checkpoints are closed for days.

Watch the Youtube video:

" THEY WANT US TO BE SILENT - Checkpoints In the West Bank " 

and you will see how inconvenient, abusive and humiliating checkpoints in the west bank are, 

even when Jewish observers are around. 

All major roads are basically off-limits to Palestinians, making it impossible to do normal business 

(constantly keeping Palestinians at an economic disadvantage) ,

Amnesty international accuses the Israeli government of abusing and torturing palestinian prisoners, 

pervasive closures resulting in cutting off palestinians from their work,

the slow annexation and confiscation of privately held palestinian lands through settlements and settlement expansions while

the Israeli government keeps the palestinians in poverty by not allowing palestinians to expand and create settlements

and the Israeli government prevents palestinians from expanding and creating agricultural lands.

Watch the Youtube video titled : 

" Occupation 101 - the truth about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict "

where a Palestinian mother of several children had to move twice into tents from her homes because 

the Israeli government wanted her family's productive agricultural lands for settlement expansion.

The most desirable, privately held Palestinian lands in the West Bank are confiscated (without compensation ) under a 'military firing zone' classification, and then

the Israeli government issues orders for the evacuation of Palestinians from the villages in that range, while allowing contiguous Jewish settlements to remain unaffected.

 When humans perceive that certain actions are just, there is no outcry even though they are atrocities to others (example: the terror bombing of Japan by Truman ).

 Truman's terror bomb even resulted in nuns being burned alive when the bomb exploded right above a church in Nagasaki (Nagasaki was the center of Christianity in Japan ).

 Is collective punishment the right thing to do ?

Was it right to sacrifice the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese kids through the atom bombing of two Japanese cities and the incendiary bombing of scores of Japanese cities because

 Japan asked for a conditional surrender since they did not want their homeland being occupied by the US government ?

Instead of treating the Gazan rockets as a criminal act, the Israeli government chooses to see every rocket attack as an opportunity for collective punishment instead of 

working with the Hamas authorities to bring the rocket squads to justice since Hamas had already promised in 2004 that they were ready for a 10 year truce.

The 10 year truce would stipulate that Hamas and Israeli authorities would work together to make sure no rockets are fired from Gaza.

The Gaza rocket squads ( who have killed 28 Israelis from 2001 through 7/18/14 ) are made up of members who have the same mentality as school shooters in the US 

( remember, school shooters in the US have killed many more people compared to the Gaza rocket squads during the same time period ).

School shooters in the US grow up feeling unloved by their community and 

in the case of the Gaza rocket squads, they grow up feeling unloved by the Israeli government when they see and experience the following :

(1) Missile attacks from the Israeli government collaterally killing, horribly dismembering or maiming their kids or parents.

Israeli Human Rights organization B'Tselem, states a ratio of civilians to targets of 1:1.44, meaning

for every extrajudicial assassination of an accused militant, there is a collateral death of a civilian adult or kid

(2) seeing the regular humiliations, strip searches and abuse faced by their parents and loved ones at border crossings.

(3) Blockade of Gaza causing shortages of medical supplies and food, adversely affecting the health and longevity of kids who comprise 45% of the Gaza population.

(4) Destruction of infrastructure (example: utilities and sewer systems) by the Israeli government causing very unhealthy and unsanitary conditions 

(5) not allowed to visit their mosque in Jerusalem

(6) not allowed or severe restrictions in visiting other palestinians in the west bank.

The Israeli government knows that in every war, war crimes are committed by both sides ( example: US government personnel suffering from PTSD were involved in shooting unarmed Iraqi civilians ).

Amnesty International, in the past, has accused Israeli government personnel of using Palestinians as human shields even though

the Israeli government has adequate shielding using tanks, planes and other sophisticated hardware.

Knowing for decades that Israeli government personnel are capable of using human shields and

Hamas is capable of using human shields, 

why do you think the Israeli government has no problems going to war in Gaza knowing that

45% of the residents in Gaza are kids under the age of 14 and potential human shields ?

and why does the Israeli government not want to accept the 10 year truce offered by Hamas in 2004 which can be verified through President Reagan's "trust but verify" program ?

and why does the Israeli government not meet Hamas request to stop the blockade of Gaza that is affecting the health and longevity of the kids in Gaza ?

Because as long as the kids in Gaza are not related to the pro-war politicians in the Israeli government, the cease fire has come only after

hundreds of children in Gaza have been collaterally killed.

The present cycle of violence started in 2000 when (as usual) the Israeli government overreacted by killing stone throwing israeli-arabs in Jerusalem.

The Israeli government does not overreact to stone throwing jewish settlers who throw stones at Palestinians.

The Youtube video titled:

" Settlers throw stones at woman and baby "

shows Israeli soldiers not overreacting to Israeli settler's children throwing stones at a Palestinian woman carrying a baby.

Stone throwers in America would have been subject to tasers, tear gas and shields but in the case of the Israeli government, 

the Israeli government has no problems using lethal force against stone throwers. 

Amnesty International stated that approximately 80% of the Palestinians killed during the first month of the 2000 Palestinian uprising were in demonstrations where

Israeli security services lives were not in danger. 

Do you think pro-war politicians in the Israeli government will negotiate with terrorists if those terrorists are holding the loved ones of pro-war politicians as hostages ? or

do you think the pro-war politicians will bomb the places in which the terrorists are holding their loved ones as hostages ? so

the bottom line is,

because pro-war Israeli politicians' children are not held as hostages or

"human shields",

the Israeli government does not care about the well being of the Palestinian children "hostages" or "human shields" in Gaza as seen in the youtube documentary titled

" Blood and tears of Gaza ".

Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict :

(1) the complete withdrawal by Israel from all occupied territories including East Jerusalem

(2) compensate all Israelis for settlements vacated or the fair thing to do is to let non-militant palestinians build homes next to settler homes and also build palestinian homes wherever they want to. 

In other words, a two state solution in which there are both Jews and Muslim/Christian Palestinians living side by side in both states.

(3) compensate all Israeli victims of terrorism as the US government compensated the families of the victims on 9/11/01 due to guilt in not preventing the attacks

and/or creating the conditions for terrorism to flourish

(4) compensate all Palestinian victims of collateral damage

(5) compensate all Palestinian refugees for land confiscated by Israel as a result of previous wars

(6) Give a gift to the Palestinians by building them a four lane expressway that connects the Gaza strip to the West Bank........underpasses will connect the north side of Israel to the south side of Israel on either side of the expressway

(7) build an all encompassing electronic fence that completely separates Israel from the West Bank, the Gaza strip and the GS-WB Expressway

(8) directly aid the Palestinians to improve their economy.....aid should not go through the Palestinian government

(9) give incentives to American and Israeli corporations to help the Palestinian economy by creating jobs in Palestine

(10) the leaders of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the political leaders of Hamas, Al-Aqsa Brigade and Islamic Jihad should be financially compensated in order to expedite the Israeli-Palestinian solution as soon as possible

( all leaders directly responsible for terrorism will be apprehended covertly at a later date unless they prove to be truly interested in peace in a post solutions era ).

Al-Qaeda was formed due to the instigation policies of the Soviets in Afghanistan, so it is clear that the formation of Al-Qaeda was due to the occupation of muslims lands by a foreign military.

So the simple solution to ending the "war on terror" is to follow the Swiss model that does not instigate terrorists

because the Swiss make sure they are not using their military to occupy or invade/drone attack  muslim lands

because invasions or drone attacks always cause collateral damage and the collateral deaths of innocent muslims

but sadly, the US government is instigating terrorists through short-sighted, profit driven policies while the US government does not follow the Swiss "non-instigation" model.

Below is another example of why the US government’s military empire is not necessary

and we could have saved trillions in preventing wars :

The unnecessary cold war cost the US government about 5.5 trillion dollars

while the beneficiaries of the Cold War expenditures,

the warfare corporations and institutions were “laughing all the way to the bank”

and the money was being either wasted or stolen or wasted on building up unnecessary nuclear weapons of terror.

To this day, the pentagon cannot account for all the money spent on the Cold War and because of that the Pentagon has never passed a financial audit :



The US government could have paid a billion dollars each to a thousand Soviet leaders in order to prevent the Cold War

and even with a trillion dollars going to the Soviet leadership,

the US government could have still saved 4.5 trillion dollars

which could have been used to

raise the standard of living and health standards of every American

and could have been used to have the best infrastructure in the world

plus we could have found the ultimate cure for cancer

(cancer alone kills over a million Americans every two years ).


Why do the Swiss live in peace from religious terrorism ?

Could it be because the Swiss have a non-interventionist, non-military foreign policy ?

The US government should adopt the Swiss foreign policy.

We can have a $100 billion dollar yearly military budget ( still much bigger than Russia's defense budgets even though Russia is twice the size of the US )

if we adopt a non-war, non-instigation foreign policy

following the self defense policies of Switzerland

since Switzerland with a extremely tiny defense budget never experiences terrorism

and even when Switzerland was helping the allies,

Switzerland was never invaded by Hitler due to its formidable defenses and neutrality.

In addition to adopting the self defense policies of Switzerland,

we can still maintain world peace for a total military/security budget of $100 billion a year.

Having a pragmatic foreign policy means certain operations are done relatively inexpensively and covertly

as when Osama Bin Laden was targeted in 2011

and thus avoiding budget busting trillion dollar wars.

The relatively inexpensive covert rendition program ( with proper oversight ) should be expanded

to prevent future “hitlers” from acquiring power

and additionally, dictators and Ayatollahs would be covertly co-opted

by putting them on the CIA payroll which is relatively inexpensive

compared to budget busting trillion dollar wars.

In the history of the US, since the CIA was created,

you will never find a single CIA report stating a dictator/terrorist on the CIA payroll was a danger to the US government or Americans

(example : Saddam in the 80s was co-opted by President Reagan, even when Saddam was at his most dangerous and actually using WDM

and the Haqqani terror network on the CIA payroll that drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan ).

Covertly apprehending future "hitlers" and terrorists

and covertly co-opting dictators and Ayatollahs would cost about $50 billion a year

which would be part of the total yearly military/security budget of $100 billion a year.

Spending $50 billion a year to maintain the US government's "empire",

influence, interests and peace around the world

is a lot cheaper than

budget busting trillion dollar wars or maintaining a

very expensive budget busting nuclear and non-nuclear missile shield system

that is unproven

and subject to malfunction or accidents

and incapable of protecting American cities if the enemy launches hundreds of missiles at a time.

All the above (with proper oversight) can be done

humanely and covertly,

without assassinating anybody

and without torturing anybody

and with the ultimate goal of spreading democratic principles around the world

and rehabilitating truly dangerous individuals

and in the process, we avoid plunging our government into dangerous debt and bankruptcy.


We do not believe that a program of assassinations furthers either a peaceful resolution or is moral

due to the fact that the use of heavy weaponry results in bystanders, women, children and babies either dying or being terrorized (requiring even years of psychological therapy).

We do not believe that the government is always right when it indicts people because

 if the government is always right, why do we have trials in a court of law ?

We do not believe in capital punishment for any crime since people change over time ( example: "Son of Sam" who was a serial murderer but is now a christian preacher in prison ) .

and that is why we believe Bin Laden should have been captured for the purposes of gathering intelligence instead of the extra-judicial killing of Bin Laden.

According to Vice-President Joe Biden " We never had more than a 48 percent probability that he ( Bin Laden ) was there."

From Mark Bowden’s research, he concurs that there was a range of possibilities, from 20-80%  that Bin Laden was there :

Comment :

Is shooting first and then asking questions later, moral ? since capital punishment is never the solution even in this country.

The US government was prepared to raid a private home in the middle of the night, not knowing for sure, who exactly was there.

Can you imagine cops raiding your home without any warning or knocking on the door ?

If you used your gun against unknown raiders, you would be within your rights to shoot.

So the fact that at least one person in the " Bin Laden" compound shot at the "kill" team

should not come as a surprise considering the fact that the occupants of the compound were not given any notice of who it was that was entering.

The democratic and humane thing that could have been done

to the poor children who were in danger of being killed and terrorized in the cross fire,

was to have the financially compensated President of Pakistan order the Bin Laden compound to be surrounded

while drones flew overhead to make sure nobody escaped

and had the occupants of the compound surrender without the unnecessary raid and the subsequent killing of Bin Laden

who could have given valuable intelligence if he was captured alive if the compound was surrounded

and Bin Laden given a chance to surrender.

The well compensated President of Pakistan could have ordered the soldiers of the Pakistani military to be taken to the location without giving them any prior notice of where they were going to be taken

to avoid Bin Laden being tipped off regarding the raid.

Pakistani military members who themselves or their families were victims of terrorism would have comprised the raid team in order to ensure that they were on the side of the US government.

Why assassinate Bin Laden ?

Could it be because the US government did not want Bin Laden in court revealing to the American public that the 9/11 attacks could easily have been prevented

without costly trillion dollar wars that only benefited the friends and supporters of the government in the  warfare corporations and institutions

as the owners of the warfare corporations and institutions "laughed all the way to the bank" while millions suffered through the horror that people call war ,

suffered either has refugees fleeing in terror or

 being horribly killed or




blinded and/or

 paralyzed and spoon-fed for life,

while others suffered a slow death due to suffering the radiation from depleted uranium used in ammunitions.

Was the government afraid that Bin Laden would have revealed in court that

the attacks on 9/11/01 could have been prevented if  only the government  heeded to

 almost a decade of warnings to the government to pull US government troops out of Saudi Arabia that

were stationed there after the US government was involved in a devastating and cruel war in ousting Iraq from Kuwait causing unnecessary pain and suffering to millions of muslims.

The US government knows that Al-Qaeda is a tiny group of terrorists who tried to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia in a 9 year terror campaign in  the 1990s  when US government troops  were stationed in Saudi Arabia after the devastating and cruel war against Iraq

but Al-Qaeda being tiny, failed for 9 years to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia

and so Al-Qaeda decided to attack the US homeland on 9/11/01.

The US government eventually gave in to the demands of Al-Qaeda and withdrew its troops from Saudi Arabia in 2003.

But to support the profit agenda of the government's supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions as they "laugh all the way to the bank",

the US government needs to keep Al-Qaeda "alive"

and the only way to do that is to keep instigating Al-Qaeda through drone attacks in various countries which some times collaterally kills women and children

which in turn serves as recruiting propaganda for Al-Qaeda and by keeping Al-Qaeda "alive",

 the US government hopes to keep Americans in fear so that

 the draining of the treasury would continue without any questioning from the American public.

But instead of catering to the profit agenda of the warfare corporations and institutions,

 the government should instead be a Peacemaker which is the right and moral thing to do.

Since conflicts take years or even decades to develop,

people like Hitler, Bin Laden and other terrorists can be covertly apprehended through

sting operations

and financially co-opting those in leadership who can help in the covert operation.


We believe the Pentagon has a very dangerous, short sighted and profit driven view of the world

and is more concerned about helping its friends in the defense contractor establishment

than truly caring about

the safetly,


and well being of the average American


and that is why the Pentagon was not able to prevent the attacks on 9/11/01


even though it had ample warning from Al-Qaeda to remove troops from Saudi Arabia in the 90s:

and finally the Bush Administration gave into the demands of Al-Qaeda

and removed US government troops from Saudi Arabia in 2003,

almost 13 years after the Pentagon found out that the religious leadership in Saudi Arabia wanted US government troops out of Saudi Arabia:

The Pentagon's push for war or conflict is dangerous to the well being of every American

(example : the push for the unnecessary gulf war created the monster Bin Laden )

People say  that "war is hell"

and if people truly believe that,

 then should the US government do everything within its power to either avoid or prevent war ?

War is never the solution to the problem since the blowback from war creates terrorists.

Blowback from WW1 created  the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,

blowback from WW1 also created Hitler,

blowback from WW1 also created the "monster" of communism,

blowback from WW1 also created Stalin,

blowback from both WW1 and WW2 created the "monster" of the 5.5 trillion dollar Cold War,

blowback from the US government's military support of the Chinese war/insurgency against Japan

resulted in the attacks on Pearl Harbor,

blowback from WW2 created Mao,

blowback from the Vietnam War created Pol Pot ,

blowback from the 90s gulf war created Timothy McVeigh

and blowback from the 90s gulf war also created Osama Bin Laden.

For a definition of blowback :

All wars need to be avoided or prevented by employing the non-war, non-instigation policies outlined above.

Without the above budget busting wars, its highly unlikely the above monsters could have been created

and its also highly unlikely our present debt situation would be so dire

since the cause of the enormous expansion of debt can be traced back to past unnecessary trillion dollar wars and the Cold War

and the subsequent expansion of government to satisfy the profit agenda of the government's financial supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions.

The government definitely does not need a world wide military empire and its activities that creates the conditions for terrorism, conflict and even war.

Also, what we need is greater funding for mental health treatment for neglected and abused children who grow up to be home-grown terrorists like Timothy McVeigh who obviously suffered from PTSD after the gulf war.

People who commit atrocities are not mentally sound, just as Hitler suffering from PTSD from WW1 committed the atrocities in WW2.

PTSD does not have to be suffered only in war, it can occur in childhood abuse and neglect which results in adult criminal activity.

The day the government stops building its military empire (by presently spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year) :

will be the day when we will have enough funds to help all the

troubled children in this country

and thus preventing mass terror killings.

Maintaining a military empire will also eventually lead to the government declaring bankruptcy in the next 10 to 20 years since

the government is spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars of hard earned taxpayers money every year on the warfare corporation and institutions,

40% of which is being borrowed from places like China:


The US government and its world wide allies including Russia and China spend about 2-3 trillion dollars  a year on defense ( baseline budget plus other security programs and interest on the debt from wars )

while the only remaining  enemies that the US government is willing to go to war against is North Korea and Iran who have a combined defense budget of about 13 billion dollars.

The US government can never afford to go to war with either Russia or China since

 the war with Iraq war alone is ending up  costing the US up to 6 trillion dollars

so with the only viable enemies ( North Korea and Iran) who have a combined military budget of 13 billion dollars,

 how can the US  government justify spending on its world wide military empire that

 is costing hard working American taxpayers as much as 1.4 trillion dollars a year  ( that is , five hundred thousand million dollars plus nearly two times the same amount of five hundred thousands million dollars ) ?

The only way to keep justifying spending up to  1.4 trillion dollars of hard earned tax dollars every year, is to keep reminding Americans about the enemy as an existential threat.(the only viable enemies are  now down to North Korea and Iran ).

Since the US government is spending annually up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year on its military empire,

 the government lacks the funds to prevent troubled children from growing up to be mass killers or home-grown terrorists.

The day the US government gives up its military empire ( by presently spending yearly up to 1.4 trillion dollars on the warfare corporations and institutions )

will be the day when there will be sufficient funds to help all troubled children,

preventing them from growing up into mass killers or home-grown terrorists.


THE FUTURE OF THE US GOVERNMENT!/2013/02/part-seven-future-of-us-government.html

No comments:

Post a Comment