ZIONIST’S POWER: muscling scientists to tell the untruth

If there is anything the Jewish people will continue to deny for eternity, it is the truth that Ishmael was the chosen one, not Isaac, the forefather of the Jews. The scientific paper in the following article proved beyond any shadow of doubt that Jews and Palestinians originated from an identical gene pool, meaning the Biblical story is correct; they are cousins, but Jews will not accept it. Zionists are demanding that the science journal remove the scientific paper :-) or else…

Journal axes gene research on Jews and Palestinians

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/25/medicalscience.genetics?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

A keynote research paper showing that Middle Eastern Jews and Palestinians are genetically almost identical has been pulled from a leading journal.

Academics who have already received copies of Human Immunology have been advised to remove the offending pages and discard them.

Such a drastic act of self-censorship is unprecedented in the field of research publishing. It has created widespread disquiet, generating fears that it may involve the suppression of scientific work that questions Biblical dogma.

SNIP:

The paper, 'The Origin of Palestinians and their Genetic Relatedness with other Mediterranean Populations', involved studying genetic variations in immune system genes among people in the Middle East.

In common with earlier studies, the team found no evidence to support the notion that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other individuals in the region. In doing so, the team's research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be inherited.

Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is therefore based 'in cultural and religious, but not in genetic differences', they conclude.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/25/medicalscience.genetics?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

ARIEL SHARON: Zionist giant is a living dead

I remember that before Ariel Sharon slipped into a coma; the West’s anti-Iran rhetoric was at a fever-pitch height. Instead of the rest of the world telling Sharon to tone down his attacks; USA was busy shipping to Sharon bunker busting bombs. I was almost sure that USA was encouraging Sharon to do it or was already at an understanding for Israel to bomb Iran and USA will stand by her come-what-may. Fortunately for Iran and the rest humanity; the lumbering Zionist giant suddenly dropped ‘not’ dead but a “living dead.” He is more of a vegetable than a zombie six years hence…

Ariel Sharon’s Son Says His Father Would Have Kept Israel From Iran

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/28/ariel-sharon-s-son-says-his-father-would-have-kept-israel-from-iran.html

Gilad Sharon, son of the former Israeli prime minister, says his father would have kept Israel safe from Iran and was a 'much better prime minister' than Benjamin Netanyahu.

SNIP:

Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli prime minister who remains incapacitated since suffering a stroke six years ago, would have done “everything in his power” to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons if he were still prime minister, his son Gilad Sharon has told The Daily Beast.

He said he’s sure Israel would be better off today had his father never left the political stage because Sharon “was a much better prime minister” than current leader Benjamin Netanyahu.

“I cannot point out a specific decision he would take, but I can tell you he would do everything in his power—and his power was always something you cannot underestimate—to prevent that from happening [Iran developing nuclear weapons],” Sharon said in an interview to promote the biography he’s written about his father, Sharon: The Life of a Leader.

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/28/ariel-sharon-s-son-says-his-father-would-have-kept-israel-from-iran.html

SEX SEGREGATION (Israel): I won’t sit at the back of the bus…

In the 80s, when I first arrived in Saudi Arabia, women sat in the back of the bus via a door at the rear. Surprisingly, segregation was abolished by the 1990s, likely due to the influx of foreign women workers who found such a practice inconvenient. However, I don’t recall any issues or complaints among expatriates. Sometimes, in the late 90s, to my chagrin, or early 2000s, segregation in public transport back in the Philippines was instituted where the first 2 boxcars of the light rail transit were reserved for women and the elderly, the reason being that some women complained of molestation in the crowded trains.

I read some days ago that some Jewish groups in Israel are demanding the segregation of sexes in public places, but I never thought it was serious till I read this article/story :-)

I won’t sit at the back of the bus!

Ynet special: Tanya Rosenblit recounts clash of civilizations she experienced on Israeli bus; ‘until yesterday, I was sure that I live in a free country,’ she says

Tanya Rosenblit

SNIP:

Until yesterday, I was sure that I live in a free country. I was certain that a person’s dignity and freedom are supreme values in our diverse society. Indeed, there are calls against one group or another, but people, whoever they are, regardless of religion, creed or gender, will be respected, because this is the kind of society I grew up in. These are the values I learned.

The driver, who saw he cannot continue, called the police. When the police officer arrived, he traded a few words with the driver, spoke at length with the organizer of the spontaneous protest, and then boarded the bus in order to ask me whether I am willing to respect them and move to the back of the bus. He repeated the question twice. He was also the first to turn to me and speak to me all that time.

I replied that I showed enough respect for them with my modest dress and that I cannot humiliate myself in order to respect someone else. They must ask themselves how it could be that humiliating a woman shows respect to them. How could it be that a man in this day and age feels that a woman is not worthy of sitting before him? How would he feel if his mother, sister or daughter encountered such contempt?

PLEASE READ FULL INTERESTING STORY:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0%2C7340%2CL-4163399%2C00.html

https://www.amazon.com/Nosca-Khalid/e/B01NA7APYQ

USA'S DIRTY DOZEN LIES OF 2011

Days before I read this article, I wrote in my blog that one of the USA’s big lies is creating the false impression in the minds of the American public that AFGHANISTAN is the USA’s longest war. I said, “Wrong” because IRAQ, not Afghanistan, is the USA’s longest war that began in 1990/1991, eleven years longer than Afghanistan. What had been labeled as Gulf War I is deceptive because that war never ended. The Iraq War could be ending in a significant way for the USA, but is it for the Iraqis? The USA has created an endless war for the people of Iraq. 

Twelve biggest US lies of 2011

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/216444.html

As 2011 draws to a close, an award-winning US magazine has handpicked a dozen of the most outrageous lies that Washington has told the world over the past year.

Snip:

“They are the big lies that have defined our times,” he says, proceeding to catalogue those fibs. 

1. “The war in Iraq is finally over after nine years.” 

Rothkopf notes the US has been militarily engaged in Iraq since the early 1990s, and this will likely be just the end of another installment in the long-running series of US warmongering policies in the region.

2. “America's mission in Iraq was a success.” 

He expresses astonishment at such a claim while Iraq is divided, undemocratic, corrupt, and the US invasion has cost USD1 trillion, thousands of US lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, and its national reputation. US war in Iraq bears greater semblance to a full-scale “fiasco”, he says. 

3. “We are winning in Afghanistan.” 

Rothkopf describes this one as a hot-from-the-oven “howler” by the US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. Washington has strengthened the region's extremists, and the threat of instability in nuclear Pakistan is now actually higher than it was when the US went in, he says. 

4. Tie: “Pakistan is America's ally” and “Afghanistan is America's partner.” 

Neither Pakistan nor Afghanistan can, by any “credible definition,” be called a US ally. This is attested to by Islamabad's animosity towards Washington and Kabul's belittling of the US on the world stage, Rothkopf says. 

5. “America is unthreatened by China's growth.” 

A “prayer” by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Rothkopf says. “It should be true. But it's not,” he adds. 

6. Tie: “Republicans are the problem” and “Democrats are the problem.” 

Rothkopf dubs this one as “the great lie of American politics.” He says the problem with US politics is not the parties, but the money. “The system is so resolutely corrupt that recent scandals have only resulted in more money flowing into the system and past reforms being undone,” he notes. 

7. “Cutting the taxes of millionaires helps create US jobs.” 

There is not even one single solitary shred of evidence to support this “idiotic” suggestion, Rothkopf notes. 

8. “This next summit of European leaders will be decisive …” 

Rothkopf says despite the fact that this claim has been made every few weeks for the past months, the “supposedly sophisticated financial markets” of the United States continue to fall for it. 

9. “The Obama administration is committed to serious financial services reform.” 

The US financial system remains plagued by the same threats that triggered the 2008 recession. “Not an inch of progress,” Rothkopf says. 

10. “Only nine percent of Americans approve of Congress.” 

“This can't possibly be true. There can't possibly be that many,” Rothkopf says in a stinging sarcastic tone. 

11. “The operation in Libya will be over in a matter of days or weeks.” 

Rothkopf says the operation was wrong to begin with, “and then wrong and then wrong again for months.” 

12. “I love Israel.” 

Even though everyone in US politics makes such an assertion, nobody really means it, Rothkopf notes. What the politicians really mean, however, is that “I want American Jews to think I love Israel enough to vote for me and give me money,” he says. 

“Those are just a few of a bumper year for duplicity, mendacity, and craven misstatements,”

Rothkopf concludes.

FULL ARTICLE:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/216444.html

FIRESTORM MR. BARAK; NOT POLITICAL QUAKE

I am trying to grasp what Barak meant by “political earthquake” shaking the Israeli establishment.  He seems to be misreading the signs of the times. A political earthquake is already rocking the Middle East, which so far has not yet reached the doorsteps of the Israeli establishment. Zionists are a bunch of fanatics that is hardened to the core, whose solid foundation is unlikely to be rocked by any political earthquake; it will be swept away by the wave of discontent rocking their surroundings' nations and kingdoms. You cannot build fortifications around a racist and evil ideology; it will be swept away by the firestorm building momentum in the region. His adherence, like any Zionist of his kind, to “peace only on our terms” will bring that firestorm he mistook for an earthquake right at her borders. Firestorm Mr. Barak: Islamist’s fire not “stormy Islamist Winter” to quote your metaphor. 

Barak warns of political quake in Israel

Israeli Minister for Military Affairs Ehud Barak has warned that Tel Aviv is on the verge of a historic political earthquake amid the recent developments in the Middle East.

SNIP:

"Israel is in close proximity to what has been described as a historic political earthquake," he said during a speech at a Washington conference organized by the pro-Israeli Jewish group, Union for Reform Judaism. 

"Across the Middle East -- in under a year -- regimes have fallen and dictators continue to be disposed of. Are we looking at the beginning of a democratic Middle East? Or will the Arab spring turn into a stormy Islamist winter?" he said. 

FULL ARTICLE:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/216362.html

SIGNS OF THE TIMES: Jesus’ 2nd Coming and Visions of the Prophet

SIGNS OF THE TIMES: Jesus’ 2^nd Coming and Visions of the Prophet

Jesus’ return is mentioned in the Qur’an only in passing. The Prophet, however, had more detailed visions of Jesus’ second coming. 

BY HIM WHO’S HAND MY SOUL IS, THE SON OF MARY WILL SOON DESCEND AMONG YOU AS A JUST JUDGE. HE WILL BREAK CROSSES, KILL SWINE, AND ABOLISH THE JYZYA (Tax).

WEALTH WILL POUR OUT TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT ONE WILL OFFER A ZAKA’T ON HIS WEALTH AND NO ONE WILL ACCEPT IT, AND ONE “SAJDA” (laillah’a illallah) WILL BE BETTER THAN THE WORLD AND WHAT IT CONTAINS. (Never in the history of the (original) Arabs had they amassed so much wealth compared to our time.)

JESUS, SON OF MARY, WILL MARRY, HAVE CHILDREN, AND REMAIN 45 YEARS, AFTER WHICH HE WILL DIE AND BE BURIED ALONG WITH ME IN MY GRAVE. THEN JESUS, SON OF MARY AND I, WILL ARISE FROM THE GRAVE (RESURRECTION) BETWEEN ABU BAKR AND OMAR.

(NOSTRADAMUS X.75)

“THE LONG-AWAITED ONE WILL NEVER COME INTO EUROPE;
INSTEAD, HE WILL APPEAR IN ASIA.
ONE ISSUED FROM THE GREAT LEAGUES OF HERMES
HE WILL DOMINATE OVER ALL THE RULERS OF THE ORIENT.”
(Christians consider the above prophecy as referring to the anti-Christ for the simple reason that, according to Nostradamus, he will unite the Muslims of Asia and Africa and invade Christian Europe.) 

ANOTHER LIE: IRAQ NOT AFGHANISTAN IS USA’S LONGEST WAR …

To further deceive the American public, Uncle Sam rarely speaks, if ever, of the Gulf War of 1991. To fool the American Public, the government twisted public perception to make it look like the present war is separate from the war of 1991, which is wrong.

The war of 1991 never ended.

Iraq from 1991 to 2003, aside from the crippling embargo, was bombed regularly every week; sometimes in a matter of days. Some of those bombings were major hits on Baghdad and other cities.

Days before the invasion, if I remember correctly, the USA launched major bombings of Iraq at the pretext of Saddam’s violation of the No-Fly-Zone of 1991. It is not counted as part of what has become known as Gulf War II: funny :-)

From January 1991 to December 2011, there were 21 years of war and destruction, much longer than the war in Afghanistan, deceptively referred to as the USA’s longest war.

The statistic, therefore, in the following article is deceptive because it doesn’t include the war from 1991 to 2003 when Iraq was invaded. It is a half-truth. 

Iraq war ends with a $4 trillion IOU

Veterans’ health care costs to rise sharply over the next 40 years

 

By Christopher Hinton, MarketWatch

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The nine-year-old Iraq war came to an official end on Thursday, but paying for it will continue for decades until U.S. taxpayers have shelled out an estimated $4 trillion.

Over 50 years, that comes to $80 billion annually.

Although that only represents about 1% of the nation’s gross domestic product, it’s more than half of the national budget deficit. It’s also roughly equal to what the U.S. spends on the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, and the Environmental Protection Agency combined each year.

 “The direct costs for the war were about $800 billion, but the indirect costs, the costs you can’t easily see, that payoff will outlast you and me,” said Lawrence Korb.

Caring for veterans, more than 2 million of them, could alone reach $1 trillion, according to Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, in Congressional testimony in July.

More than 32,000 soldiers were wounded in Iraq, according to the U.S. Department of Defense. Add Afghanistan to the mix, and that number jumps to 47,000.

Altogether, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost the U.S. between $4 trillion and $6 trillion, more than half of which would be due to the fighting in Iraq, said Neta Crawford, a political science professor at Brown University.

The annual budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs has more than doubled since 2003 to a requested $132.2 billion for fiscal 2012. That amount is expected to rise sharply over the next four decades as lingering health problems for veterans become more serious as they grow older.

Costs for Vietnam veterans did not peak until 30 or 40 years after the end of the war, according to Todd Harrison, a defense budget analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

“We will have a vast overhang in domestic costs for caring for the wounded and covering retirement expenditure of the war fighters,” said Loren Thompson, a policy expert with the Lexington Institute. “The U.S. will continue to incur major costs for decades to come.” 

FULL ARTICLE:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/iraq-war-ends-with-a-4-trillion-iou-2011-12-15