Rhoda Wilson

The Expose

Imperial socialism has always been at the heart of 20th-century fascism, writes Matthew Ehret. Without the force of numerous anti-Semitic fascists throughout the last two centuries, Zionism would have never been possible.

“The role of British intelligence’s hidden hand in shaping the state of Israel, as well as international fascism more broadly, is often ignored,” he said.

Ehret recently wrote an essay titled ‘Sir Henry Kissinger: Midwife to New Babylon’ describing how Henry Kissinger’s 2012 prophecy that “in 10 years, there will be no more Israel” is linked to mystical Babylon.

As his essay is more than most would read in one sitting, we are republishing it in sections over a series of articles, you can read Part 1 HERE.  The following is the section of Ehret’s essay with the same title.  You can read his full essay HERE.

‘Greater Israel’ as a British Imperial Project

By Matthew Ehret

In 1914, the man who later became Israel’s first president, Chaim Weizman, stated:

“Should Palestine fall within the British sphere of influence, and should Britain encourage a Jewish settlement there, as a British dependency, we could have in 20 to 30 years a million Jews there-perhaps more; they would. . . form a very effective guard for the Suez/Canal.”

These words indicated a deeply underappreciated value that leading Jewish Zionists had for the British empire’s plans for global control over a century ago; these Zionists believed the empire could further their own plans for a Jewish state. Lord Shaftesbury’s Zionist project was launched in 1839, the British Empire created the Palestinian Exploration Fund in 1865, and the founder of modern Zionism, Theodor Herzl, joined the cause of convincing the world’s Jews to live in the desert, but the role of British intelligence’s hidden hand in shaping the state of Israel, as well as international fascism more broadly, is often ignored. ^[1]

It wasn’t ignored by Sir Winston Churchill, then Lord of the British Admiralty during WWI. He wrote forcefully about the international Jewish conspiracy to take over the world on one hand, but he also spoke proudly of Zionism, saying in 1917: “If, as it may well happen, there should be created in our own lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish state under the protection of the British crown … [it] would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire.”

While Churchill could not be said to be a supporter of Hitler’s National Socialism, up until 1935, he loudly proclaimed his admiration for Hitler and also spoke fondly of Mussolini’s Black Shirts. Churchill was also a rampant racist who presided over the mass extermination of “lower races” as displayed in the controlled Bengal famine (killing three million Indians) in 1943. Like most other dominant Round Table leaders of Britain at this time, Churchill was an “imperial socialist,” which has always been at the heart of 20th-century fascism.

Without the force of numerous anti-Semitic fascists throughout the last two centuries, Zionism would have never been possible.

Take as an example the case of Lord Arthur Balfour, a leading strategist of the Rhodes-Milner Round Table Group. Balfour co-authored the Balfour Accords in 1917 alongside Leo Amery, Lord Milner, and Walter Rothschild. It shouldn’t surprise anyone to learn that, like Churchill, Lord Balfour was also a devoted white supremacist, Zionist, and supporter of fascism. Prime Minister Lloyd George, who oversaw the project at this time, was an ardent social imperialist (aka international fascist) who openly praised Nazism alongside another pro-Nazi royal named King Edward VIII.

While Leo Amery was not openly anti-Semitic, his son John was a devoted supporter of British Nazism and Adolph Hitler. His other son, Julian Amery, worked closely with unreconstructed Nazis after World War II as part of Operation Gladio. It was under Julian Amery ^[2] that Nazis like Otto Skorzeny, Walter Rauft, and Alois Brunner were transplanted to the Middle East and even worked for the Mossad after the CIA played a direct role in establishing that organisation in 1951.

Additionally, Leo Amery was a close collaborator of pro-fascist Zionist leader Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky during the former’s management of British Mandate Palestine (1925-1929) and co-founder of the Jewish Legion, which Jabotinsky went on to control. More than a Zionist, Amery was a believer in Cecil Rhodes’ vision for “a Church of the British Empire.”

Amery stated of his peculiar religion: “The Empire is not external to any of the British nation. It is something like the Kingdom of Heaven within ourselves.” (Take note that the term “Kingdom of Heaven” was the name of the Templar Kingdom of Jerusalem, which will play a larger role in this story).

After leading the passage of anti-Jewish immigration laws in England in 1905 that prevented persecuted Russian Jews from coming to the UK, Balfour wrote in 1919 that Zionism would “mitigate the age-long miseries created for Western civilisation by the presence in its midst of a Body which it too long regarded as alien and even hostile, but which it was equally unable to expel or to absorb.”

Balfour saw the creation of Israel as one stone that could kill two birds by 1) providing an excuse to purge the Jews from Europe and 2) creating a perfect weapon for destabilisation in the geopolitical pivot of Halford Mackinder’s Heartland and the cross-section of all major civilisational forces on the earth.

[…]

Via https://expose-news.com/2023/12/26/without-numerous-anti-semitic-fascists-zionism/

Episode 21 The Etruscan World Falls Apart

The Mysterious Etruscans

Dr Steven L Tuck (2016)

Film Review

Rome conquered Etruria in gradual steps:

• 396 BC – Rome conquers Veiji
• 358-51 BC – brutal war between Rome an the other major Etruscan cities, followed by 40-year truce.
• 311 BC – Central Italy’s Samnites, Umbreites and Celts assist the Etruscan cities in resisting Roman military aggression.
• 294 BC – Rome defeats Tarquinia
• 293 BC – Rome defeats Orvieto
• 280 BC – Rome defeats Vulchi
• 273 BC – Rome elects to occupy Cheveteri, Vulchi and Orvieto instead of relying on treaties and puppet Etruscan aristocrats to subdue hostile lower class Etruscans and pay duty.
• 264 BC – Rome forcibly exiles the resident of Orvieto to Bulsenna and razed it to the ground.* Opposition to Roman rule prompt a cultural renaissance in the other  Etruscan league cities who continue to thrive in their trade with Greek colonies.
• 218-204 During Rome’s wars with Carthage, the Etruscan cities ally with Hannibal during his invasion of Italy.
• 211 BC – Rome conquers Capua and executes all Etruscan rebels who supported Hannibal. Roman aristocrats create vast estates of conquered Etruscan land and worked it with (Greek and Etruscan) slave labor. Unable to compete, the Etruscan rural poor are forced to move into the cities.
• 91-88 BC – Rome’s refusal to grant their Soqui allies Roman citizenship leads to the Social War. Some of these Soqui cities (like Pompei) were old Etruscan communities.
• 83-82 BC During his coup against the Roman consul Marus, the Roman general Sulla occupies and sacks the remaining Etruscan league cities.
• 41 BC – During the Perusian War, Octavia (the future Augustus) besieges and sacks the Etruscan City of Perusia, which was occupied by his adversary Mark Antony.

Etruscan religious, cultural and (some) political institutions continued long after Roman conquest. The Etruscan league continued to elect annually a judicial officer known as the Praeter Etruriae until the Goth invasion in the 4th century AD. Etruscan divination schools also continued until 410 AD. The emperor Claudius, known for lecturing the Roman senate about the Etruscans, restored the Harupuces, the Etruscan college of divination.

The Etruscan language persisted in Tunisia where it was used for boundary stones until the first century AD. There is also evidence of an Etruscan colony in Thebes (in Egypt), where an ancient Etruscan linen document was used to wrap a mummy. Tuck believes Rome may have exiled Etruscans to North Africa when it resettled their cities.

*During the period 327 -218 BC, Rome also conquered and occupied all the Greek colonies in southern Italy.

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/239710/239651

Tim Anderson

Internationalist 360°

Washington and the Israelis understand that the fig leaf of ‘two states’ hides apartheid and prevents the construction of a broad anti-apartheid movement.

The popular but fallacious touchstone of a political resolution in Palestine has been a ‘two-state solution’. Washington constantly reverts to this and, more disturbingly, so too do many of Palestine’s international friends. Yet, faced with an apartheid regime, the idea is outdated and irrelevant, South African leader Mandla Mandela pointed out at the 5th Global Convention of Solidarity with Palestine, over 3-5 December in Johannesburg.

Mandla Mandela, the grandson of Nelson, head of the Mandela Foundation, clan chief, and an ANC member of Parliament, called for a global anti-apartheid campaign aimed at dismantling the Israeli regime, rejecting the Bantustan-like ‘two-state solution’, and calling for a single democratic state in Palestine.

South Africans know about Bantustans: these were the so-called native ‘homelands’ – small enclaves set up to help enforce apartheid and prevent democracy in South Africa. The most recent ‘two-state’ proposal, put up by the Trump administration in 2020, shares many features with these Bantustans. But few outside South Africa remember this history in detail.

The ‘two-state solution’ seems to have support in UNSC resolutions since 1967 (#242 and its successors), but the right “to sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries” was conditional on Israeli withdrawal “from territories occupied in the recent conflict.” The Israeli regime never met that condition. The Oslo Accords of the 1990s saw the PLO recognizing an “Israeli state”, on the basis that the colonization of the West Bank would end and a Palestinian state would emerge. Those conditions were never met.

Veteran analyst Rashid Khalidi, a leading US scholar on Palestine, says there was never a serious attempt by the Israelis or Washington to create an Arab state that would be “sovereign, contiguous and viable.” Further, the entrenchment of second-class citizenship for Arab Israelis (in ‘1948 Palestine’), the emergence of an open apartheid regime on the West Bank, and the periodic massacres in Gaza have imposed a new reality.

Yet, the pretext of ‘two states’ and the myth of a “return to 1967 borders” (a fantasy destroyed by constant Israeli colonization of the occupied territories) is maintained to obscure the reality of a predatory apartheid Israeli regime that can never co-exist with an independent Palestine. Washington and the Israelis understand that the fig leaf of ‘two states’ hides apartheid and prevents the construction of a broad anti-apartheid movement.

That path is obscured by the ‘two states’ myth, as two former Israeli prime ministers have pointed out. In 2017, former PM Ehud Barak warned that the regime was “on a slippery slope” toward apartheid. Similarly, former PM Ehud Olmert (2007) said, “If the day comes when the [idea of a] two-state solution collapses and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights,” then we will face an “apartheid-like struggle … [and] the State of Israel is finished.”

The Trump ‘peace plan’ of 2020 is the most recent, detailed version of the deceptive ‘two-state’ idea. It supported the illegal West Bank, Syrian Golan, and eastern part of al-Quds annexations, trying to ‘normalize’ those breaches of earlier international agreements and offering some desert land in ‘compensation’. In recent years these ‘settlements’ have grown so that there are more than 700,000 Israeli colonists on the West Bank. Despite muted international protests, “Tel Aviv’s” backing for this process makes it unlikely that the ‘settlers’ might (as was done in Gaza) simply be persuaded to pack up and go home. Under the Trump ‘peace plan’, total Israeli control over borders, security, and even education would be maintained. That is a close parallel to the Bantustan policy of apartheid South Africa, as Mandla Mandela observed.

The Palestinian struggle can and should draw important lessons from South Africa’s anti-apartheid campaigns and draw on the political capital it built, including in international resolutions. First of all, in 1973, the United Nations declared apartheid a crime against humanity, punishable under the 1988 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Systematic racial discrimination is a crime that should not be aided and abetted, and the Israeli entity has been declared an apartheid regime by six independent reports. As jurists Richard Falk and Virginia Tilley (2017) point out, “States have a collective duty: (a) not to recognize an apartheid regime as lawful; (b) not to aid or assist a state in maintaining an apartheid regime; and (c) to cooperate with the United Nations and other States in bringing apartheid regimes to an end.” That duty militates against recognition of or support for the apartheid regime as a ‘state’.

Second, while the South African apartheid regime tried to present the Bantustan enclaves as some form of ‘self-determination’, this was rejected both by black South Africans and the United Nations. Archbishop Desmond Tutu said tribal enclaves had nothing to do with the South African reality, “we are thoroughly detribalized, it is the government of South Africa that has sought to exacerbate tribal feelings.” The Bantustan policy and practice aimed at reinforcing apartheid by forcing the majority black African population into 13% of the country’s land, with few resources and basic services. Yet collaborating chiefs like Gatsha Buthelezi of KwaZulu were relied on to present a veneer of tribal ‘independence’. This Bantustan policy, including the third class ‘Bantu education’ system which began in the 1950s and catalyzed huge protests, was said to be “the logical territorial extension of apartheid as both a general policy and a way of life for whites as a single preferred tribe over blacks as an inferior collection of tribes.”

In the 1970s, three UN resolutions were passed, which condemned the Bantustan policy. In 1971, General Assembly Resolution 2775 E (XXVI) on the Establishment of Bantustans condemned the practice as “in pursuance of apartheid,” “violating the right to self-determination,” and “prejudicial to territorial integrity.” In 1975, General Assembly Resolution 3411 D (XXX) on Apartheid again condemned the Bantustan policy, and in 1976, the General Assembly unanimously (with the USA abstaining) passed Resolution 31/6 which condemned the designation of an “independent” Transkei Bantustan as “sham independence”, calling on all governments to not recognize it and to prohibit dealings with the artificial entity. The UN, thus, authoritatively condemned the creation of small subordinate enclaves in place of national self-determination for black South Africans.

Just as Apartheid South Africa tried to force the majority Black population into 13% of the country’s land, so the Israelis have forced Palestinians into increasingly restricted enclaves, all of which are controlled by the Israeli regime.

While the Palestinian Arab population today, according to Israeli officials, is about the same as the Jewish, the Israeli population’s control of land and resources is massively unequal. The so-called Palestinian Territories comprise about 22% of historic Palestine and, of that, more than half is zoned to be under exclusive Israeli control Anera.

Zionist apologists try to justify the steady land theft by saying, first of all, that the Israelis acquired that land by military conquest (in the post-colonial era, UNSC 242 declared such claims null and void) and second, that Palestinians somehow acquired control over land for “the first time” under the Oslo Accords. In fact, Palestinians lost even more land to Israeli “annexation” after the Oslo Accords.

The Israeli lobby has relentlessly abused Chief Mandla Mandela. Responding to his accusations that “Israel” had “committed genocide and crimes against humanity,” Tali Feinberg claimed that Mandla’s “anti-Israel vitriol contrasts with his grandfather’s legacy.” Indeed, Nelson Mandela met Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and President Ezer Weizman and said, in 1999, “I cannot conceive of Israel withdrawing if Arab states do not recognise Israel within secure borders.” Feinberg blames Mandla’s anti-“Israel” stance on his conversion to Islam.

However, Nelson Mandla was responding to the circumstances of the early 1990s, when his friend Yasser Arafat was engaged in the Oslo Accords, and no reports on the Apartheid character of the Israeli colonial regime had yet emerged. After the failure of the Oslo agreements to produce any benefit, and after six independent reports branding “Israel” as apartheid regime, Chief Mandla is justified in adjusting his response.

Support for the armed, as well as civil resistance in Palestine, has been a feature of Chief Mandla Mandela’s advocacy. It was his grandfather, after all, who created uMkhonto we Siswe (MK, the spear of the nation), the armed wing of the ANC, when all other avenues had failed. So, at a time when Western regimes try to brand all Palestinian Resistance as ‘terrorism’, Chief Mandela has urged the factions “to come together and have joint operations” to defend their land. He also backed the call for boycotts, divestment and sanctions on the Israeli regime.

After the December 2023 conference in Johannesburg, Mandla Mandela stood alongside leaders of various Palestinian Resistance factions at Government House in Pretoria. Recalling his grandfather’s famous quote, “We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians,” Mandla Mandela recognized that Palestinians had the “absolute right” to the land of their forefathers using all available means, including armed resistance.

Chief Mandela made it very clear that the call for a true and meaningful liberation for Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea was one that means a one-state solution for indigenous Palestinians including the inalienable right of return for over seven million refugees and their descendants, displaced since 1948.

Mandla Mandela called on South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to abandon the “two-state delusion” in favor of a single democratic state for all indigenous peoples of Palestine, abandoning separate development, racism, and apartheid in occupied Palestine.

South African veterans and leaders have a unique experience and moral authority to denounce Bantustan-like proposals that divert the Palestinian struggle from its emancipatory goals.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/12/23/rejecting-the-bantustan-two-state-solution-mandla-mandela-calls-for-a-single-democratic-state-in-palestine/

Dr Eddy Betterman

New research out of Southern California has found that persistent exposure to “forever chemicals” like perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) increases one’s risk of bone deterioration.

In young children, PFOS exposure can impede healthy bone development. In adults, PFOS exposure can degrade bone structure over time, eventually leading to more serious bone problems like osteoporosis.

Published on December 6 in the journal Environmental Research, the study was uniquely structured in that it tracked associations between bone density and blood serum levels of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which include PFOS.

“Existing research had established associations between PFAS and bone health, but previous studies, most of them only collected information at one time point from participants,” commented Emily Beglarian, a PhD student at the University of Southern California‘s (USC) Keck School of Medicine and lead author of the study.

“Additionally, many existing studies were focused on non-Hispanic, white participants and many focused on older adults.”

According to Beglarian, Hispanics are often not included in this kind of research on bone health, even though they, too, have a high risk of developing osteoporosis as adults.

(Related: Another concern worth paying attention to involves mRNA-contaminated meat – make sure your food is clean and mRNA-free!)

Research into forever chemicals a new concept

Up until now, very little research has been done period on forever chemicals and their impact on human health. Beglarian further commented that evaluating the safety of forever chemicals in conjunction with bone development and health is “a pretty new area of study.”

For her team’s research, Beglarian looked at data on a cohort of children aged eight through 13 who were recruited between 2001 and 2012. For about a year and a half, these children received follow-up appointments to keep tabs on their bone health in relation to their forever chemical exposure.

Over time, Beglarian et al. calculated the participants’ bone density in conjunction with measurements of five common PFAS chemicals. A young adult group was recruited later on after more PFAS regulations were put in place, resulting in this group having lower overall blood serum levels of PFAS.

Even with less PFAS inside their bodies, the young adults group still showed concerning signs of bone problems, said Jesse Goodrich, an assistant professor of population and public health sciences at the Keck School of Medicine. Goodrich is also one of the new study’s lead authors.

“Even though we saw lower levels in the young adults that were measured more recently, we still saw very similar results, very consistent results between the two cohorts,” Goodrich commented.

“Even though there are some regulations that are lowering [PFAS] levels, we really need larger policies to fully eradicate these, if possible.”

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2023/12/25/children-bones-development-deteriorating-forever-chemicals/

Jeremy Kuzmarov

Covert Action Magazine

The Sixties era officially ended just before 11:00 p.m. EST on December 8, 1980.

That is when former Beatles member John Lennon, a major voice of the era’s social movement who wrote the peace anthems “Imagine” and “Give Peace a Chance,” was shot and killed just outside the Manhattan apartment that he shared with his wife, Yoko Ono, and five-year-old son Sean.

Mark David Chapman, a 25-year-old from Fort Worth, Texas, was arrested yards from where the murder took place holding a copy of J. D. Salinger’s book, The Catcher in the Rye.

Chapman told police that he had acted alone. Subsequently, Chapman pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to a prison term of 20 years to life, with a stipulation that mental health treatment would be provided.

Over the decades, Chapman has given conflicting reasons for why he killed Lennon, citing his spiritual beliefs, his own desire to become famous, and even that killing Lennon would help promote The Catcher in the Rye.^[1]

Problem with the Official Story—and a CIA Connection

There is one major problem with the story of Chapman as Lennon’s lone assassin: Lennon was struck by four bullets on the left side of his body when Chapman was on his right side.^[2]

There was a man who was standing on Lennon’s left when Lennon was shot: the doorman.

He was identified in 1987 by People magazine’s James Gaines as José Sanjenís Perdomo, an anti-Castro sniper who was part of the CIA’s Cuban exile invasion of Cuba in April 1961.

In pre-Castro Cuba, Perdomo had been a Chief of Police under the regime of Carlos Prios and dictator Fulgencio Batista.^[3]

Allegedly, he helped coordinate a CIA assassination squad in Cuba and was the control officer that CIA assigned to Frank Sturgis when Sturgis joined the CIA in 1958 (Sturgis was involved in both the JFK assassination and Watergate break-in).

If the CIA were behind Lennon’s death, its motive was clear: Lennon was an icon of the 1960s peace movement who was planning to revitalize his musical career and could inspire a regeneration of peace and progressive activism in the 1980s to counter the Reagan revolution.^[4]

In the 1970s, the FBI had carried out a large-scale surveillance operation against Lennon, who was also targeted by the CIA’s Operation CHAOS.

Lennon was feared because he funded financially troubled underground newspapers, sang songs for social justice and supported radical causes, including an organization that registered young voters opposed to the Vietnam War.

The FBI attempted to get municipal police to arrest Lennon on drug charges. British MI5 also targeted him because of his support for the Irish Republican Army (IRA).

The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) tried to have Lennon deported in a campaign spearheaded by former Dixiecrat Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC).^[5]

On the evening of Lennon’s death, once John and Yoko left for John’s last recording session at about 4 p.m., Perdomo spent the next six and a half hours chatting with Chapman.^[6] What about one can only surmise.

Typically, it is crucial to the establishment of guilt or innocence that the police conduct forensic tests of the gun or bullets—which in the case of Lennon’s murder they did not do.^[7]

After Chapman dropped his gun, Perdomo ordered elevator operator Joseph Many to pick up the gun and bring it to a storage room downstairs. It was then removed but no fingerprint tests were taken by the police—though care was taken to preserve the fingerprints from the copy of The Catcher in the Rye that Chapman had been holding and dropped when the police arrived.

One of the first police officers at the murder scene, Peter Cullen, believed that a handy-man had pulled the trigger but Perdomo convinced him otherwise. A witness pointed to the left side of Lennon, saying “he’s the one that did the shooting,” referring to Perdomo.^[8]

British author David Whelan who spent three years researching Lennon’s death emphasized that in the official story Chapman shot Lennon from 25 feet away when the medical reports made clear that the bullets entered Lennon from close quarters.

25 feet is a vast distance for an untrained marksman like Chapman. Dr. David Halleran, who treated Lennon, stated: “not even a Navy SEAL could pull it off at that distance.”^[9]

Lt. Arthur O’Connor, who grilled Chapman in the police precinct, said that Chapman clearly had not committed the murder to make himself famous as he “didn’t want to talk to the press from the very start” and was “apprehensive about his wife finding out from the media.”

O’Connor said that Chapman “did not want the notoriety. He did not want the glory of a trial either,” adding significantly that “it’s possible Mark could have been used by somebody. I saw him the night of the murder. I studied him intensely. He looked as if he could have been programmed.”^[10]

Was Chapman a Manchurian Candidate?

According to author Fenton Bresler, Mark David Chapman resembled Sirhan Sirhan, the patsy in the RFK assassination, in meeting all the criteria for having been pre-programmed and brainwashed.^[11]

After Lennon’s killing, Chapman was found calmly reading J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye and surrendered to the NYPD meekly when there was a subway 75 feet away and he could have easily escaped. Chapman had become obsessed with The Catcher in the Rye, casting himself as the book’s lead character, Holden Caulfield, inscribing a note in his copy of the book: “To Holden Caulfield from Holden Caulfield.”^[12]

Chapman’s manufactured obsession with The Catcher in the Rye was clearly crucial to the whole operation. Not only was the goal to kill a leading icon of the 1960s movement, which the CIA wanted crushed, but it was also to try to associate Lennon with the phoniness of the adult world that Holden Caulfield, another icon of the 1960s movement, disdained.

Chapman directly referred to Lennon as a phony, stating: “He told us to imagine no possessions [in his 1971 song Imagine] and there he was, with millions of dollars and yachts and farms and country estates, laughing at people like me who had believed the lies and bought the records and built a big part of their lives around his music.”

Chapman’s denigration of Lennon fit well with a campaign in popular culture to portray hippies as hypocritical narcissists and antiwar activists as having spat upon Vietnam veterans when few if any such incidents actually took place. The effect was to help shift American political culture to the right and prevent the reemergence of youthful rebellion in the 1980s—as C. Wright Mills’ “power elite” desired.

In Attica Prison, Chapman received the best accommodations of any prisoner, suggesting that there were powerful people protecting him. He was visited by ministers of the fundamentalist Christian Church to which he belonged who doubled as U.S. military intelligence officers.

Chapman had converted to evangelical Christianity in 1971 after a period of heavy use of mind-altering drugs. He had rebelled against his abusive father, David Curtis Chapman, a Staff Sergeant in the U.S. Air Force who worked for the American Oil Corporation (AMOCO). In his book Careless Genius: John Lennon and His Maternal Demon, Anthony Gronowicz emphasizes that Chapman’s conversion from drug abuse to Christian fundamentalism made him a suitable target for the command hallucination he may have experienced. New religious converts are considered easy to manipulate because their conversion is associated with a heightened emotional state.

According to UC Berkeley Professor Richard Ofshe, after the formal termination of the CIA’s Operation MK-ULTRA in 1973, the operation continued to be carried out secretly through religious cults.

MK-ULTRA involved mind-control and brainwashing experiments that the CIA carried out in an attempt to manipulate, condition and control people.

RFK’s assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, is believed to have been hypnotized under MK-ULTRA and programmed into an assassin who was set up as a patsy. His trigger appeared to be a woman in a polka-dot dress, and he appeared, like Chapman, to be calm after the killing and dissociated from the evil in which he had participated.^[13]

A person linking Sirhan Sirhan and Chapman is Bernard Diamond, a forensic psychiatrist who hypnotized Sirhan and testified at his trial and also visited Chapman in prison. Chapman was also visited by Milton Kline, another expert hypnotist and CIA consultant who once said he could “create a patsy in three months” and “an assassin in 6 [months].”^[14]

In 1975, Chapman worked for the YMCA in Beirut. In Inside the Company: A CIA Diary, Philip Agee recounts how, when he worked for the CIA in Ecuador in 1962, his cover was as manager of the Quito YMCA where he managed the YMCA basketball team.

Lebanon at the time Chapman was there was the first Middle Eastern nation to request U.S. troops under its rightist Christian president to crush a mostly leftist Muslim uprising.^[15]

After his return to the U.S., Chapman was flown to Fort Chaffee, Arkansas, to assist David C. Moore, the new Director for the re-education and re-settlement of anti-Communist Vietnamese refugees.^[16]

After a trip around the world, he settled in Hawaii, a place with a strong U.S. military presence. He joined a small music club in which John W. Hinckley Jr., who tried to assassinate President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981, was already a member.^[17]

Hinckley Jr. was connected with the Bush family; he had helped George W. Bush in an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 1978 and his brother Scott, President of Vanderbilt Energy Corp., a company bailed out by Vice President George H.W. Bush’s Zapata Oil, was scheduled to have dinner with Neil Bush, Bush’s son, the night after the assassination attempt.

John Hinckley, Sr., the founder of Vanderbilt Energy Corp., had also raised funds for George H.W. Bush’s political campaigns, and financed an evangelical charity, World Vision International, that served as a cover for CIA operations.^[18]

All these latter coincidences are just too much. Chapman’s ties to Hinckley and Hinckley’s ties to Bush—CIA Director in 1975 who worked as an undercover CIA asset in the 1960s—point to the likelihood of their involvement in a conspiracy that connects the murder of John Lennon and Reagan assassination attempt and was designed to shift the political landscape during the 1980s.

Suspicion Cast on Yoko Ono

According to Gronowicz, Lennon’s widow Yoko Ono’s behavior was very suspicious around the time of the assassination. She had his body cremated on December 10, a mere 36 hours after Lennon was shot.

In Careless Genius, Anthony Gronowicz depicts Ono as a manipulative woman who cashed in on Lennon’s death by taking charge of his estate and forcing family members to buy back some of Lennon’s artifacts.^[19] By 2022, Ono’s fortune had grown to $700 million.

An upper-class heiress, Ono was the great-granddaughter of the founder of the Bank of Tokyo, Zenjiro Yasuda. Her father was appointed president of the Bank of Tokyo in New York and she attended Sarah Lawrence College, among the most expensive U.S. colleges.

Prior to John’s death, the marriage with Yoko was heading to divorce, according to Gronowicz. Yoko was eight years older than John and cast a maternal spell on him that was beginning to dissipate. The two began living separately and Yoko was using heroin.

Gronowicz writes that Ono, unable to compete musically with her famous and talented husband, grew jealous and resentful.

[…]

If Yoko was involved in the plot to kill Lennon, Gronowicz suggests that it would have been through Samuel Havadtoy, an antique dealer and Ono’s interior decorator and landlord, who had moved in with her, particularly through his attorney Leon Dicker, who had been arrested in 1986 for gun-running on behalf of the CIA-backed dictator of the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos, who had been plotting a comeback coup after he was overthrown by a popular revolution.^[21]

[…]

Via https://covertactionmagazine.com/2023/12/08/what-three-letters-of-the-alphabet-link-john-lennons-murder-to-the-murders-of-john-f-kennedy-and-robert-kennedy/

Alan MacLeod

MintPress News

[…]

#1 Joe Biden, $4,346,264

The largest recipient of Israel lobby money is President Joe Biden. From the beginning of his political career, Biden, according to his biographer Branko Marcetic, “established himself as an implacable friend of Israel,” spending his Senate career “showering Israel with unquestioning support, even when its behavior elicited bipartisan outrage.” The future president was a key figure in securing record sums of U.S. aid to the Jewish state and helped block a 1998 peace proposal with Palestine.

The support for Israeli policies has continued into the present, with his administration insisting that there are “no red lines” that it could cross that would cause it to lose American support. In essence, Biden has given Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a carte blanche to break any rules, norms or laws he wishes to.

This has included ethnic cleansing and war crimes such as the bombing of schools, hospitals and places of worship using banned weapons like white phosphorous munitions. The arms Israel is using come supplied directly by the U.S. In November, the Biden administration rubber-stamped another $14.5 billion military aid package to Israel, ensuring the carnage would continue.

For his staunch support, Biden has received more than $4.3 million from pro-Israel groups since 1990.

#2 Robert Menéndez, $2,483,205

The New Jersey senator has received nearly $2.5 million in contributions and, in the wake of the Hamas attack on October 7, has been a key figure in drumming up support for Israel. Describing Operation Al-Aqsa Flood as “barbaric atrocities” that were an “affront to humankind itself,” Menéndez gave an impassioned speech on the Senate floor where he addressed Biden directly, stating:

Mr. President, in the face of unspeakable evil, we must not mince words. We must not waver in our resolve. Every single one of us in this chamber has a moral responsibility to speak out — unequivocally and unapologetically — as we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel and her people. I’ve been staunchly devoted to this cause for 31 years in Congress.”

[…]

He went on to claim that Israel and the United States are intrinsically linked and were founded on the same principles.

Menéndez also courted controversy after he demanded that the U.S. help Israel “wipe Hamas from the face of the Earth,” even as Israel was leveling Gaza by carpet bombing it.

In October, he co-sponsored a Senate resolution “standing with Israel against terrorism” that passed unanimously, without dissent.

#3 Mitch McConnell, $1,953,160

The Senate Minority Leader is one of the most powerful politicians in America and has used his influence to attempt to force through legislation criminalizing BDS. He has described the peaceful tactic as “an economic form of anti-Semitism that targets Israel.”

McConnell is known to be very close to Prime Minister Netanyahu and supported a bill condemning the United Nations and calling on the U.S. to continue to veto any U.N. resolution critical of Israel. Last month, he strongly opposed steps taken towards applying basic U.S. and international law on weapons shipments to Israel.

Under current U.S. law, Washington is duty-bound to stop supplying arms to nations committing serious human rights violations. McConnell, however, said that applying these standards to Israel would be “ridiculous,” explaining that:

Our relationship with Israel is the closest national security relationship we have with any country in the world, and to condition, in effect, our assistance to Israel to their meeting our standards it seems to me is totally unnecessary… This is a democracy, a great ally of ours, and I do not think we need to condition the support that hopefully we will give to Israel very soon.”

McConnell has received nearly $2 million from pro-Israel groups.

#4 Chuck Schumer, $1,725,324

Next on the list is McConnell’s Democratic opponent, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who had taken over $1.7 million from Israel lobbying groups. In recent weeks, Schumer has taken the lead in steering the public conversation away from Israel’s crimes and towards a supposed rise in anti-Semitism across America. “To us, the Jewish people, the rise in anti-semitism is a crisis. A five-alarm fire that must be extinguished,” the New York Senator said, adding that “Jewish-Americans are feeling singled out, targeted and isolated. In many ways, we feel alone.”

The idea that anti-Semitic hate is exploding across the United States comes largely from a report published by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which claims that anti-Semitic incidents have risen by 337% since October 7. Buried in the small print, however, is the fact that 45% of these “anti-Semitic” incidents the ADL has tallied are pro-Palestine, pro-peace marches calling for ceasefires, including ones led by Jewish groups like If Not Now or Jewish Voice for Peace. (MintPress recently published an investigation into the ADL’s fudged numbers and its history of working for Israel and spying on progressive American groups.)

Schumer, however, has deliberately tried to conflate opposition to Israel’s bombardment of its neighbors with anti-Jewish racism, writing:

Today, too many Americans are exploiting arguments against Israel and leaping toward a virulent antisemitism. The normalization and intensifying of this rise in hate is the danger many Jewish people fear most.”

He has even gone so far as to label Dave Zirin – a Jewish journalist who supports justice for Palestinians – as an anti-Semite.

As Senate Majority Leader, Schumer has used his influence to push through military aid packages to Israel, even as it carries out actions many have labeled war crimes, writing that:

One of the most important tasks we must finish is taking up and passing a funding bill to ensure we, as well as our friends and partners in Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific region, have the necessary military capabilities to confront and deter our adversaries and competitors.”

He added that “Senators should be prepared to stay in Washington until we finish our work” and that they should expect to work “long days and nights, and potentially weekends in December,” until the deal was done.

#5 Steny Hoyer, $1,620,294

The former House Majority Leader is one of Israel’s most vocal supporters in the House of Representatives. Hoyer has demanded that “Congress must immediately and unconditionally fund Israel,” thereby giving the Netanyahu administration the green light to do whatever it pleases.

An ardent Zionist, the Maryland native explained that he believes it is:

…[T]he world’s duty that set aside a land, a land that Israel has occupied for millennia, and said: this is your place of security, this is your place of sovereignty, this is your place of safety.”

Earlier this month, Hoyer also voted in favor of a bill stating that anti-Zionism is inherently anti-Semitic, thereby declaring all criticism of Israel to be invalid and racist.

Hoyer has received more than $1.6 million in donations from pro-Israel lobbying groups.

#6 Ted Cruz, $1,299,194

Over his career, the Texas Republican has received $1.3 million from the Israel lobby. After October 7, Cruz sprang into action, announcing that it was “critical” that every American supports Israel “100 percent.” “Israel is going to be demonized by Democrats in the current corrupt corporate media. We need to make clear that Hamas is using human shields and Israel has a right to defend itself,” Cruz said, hitting many of the classic pro-Israel talking points.

Cruz also went above and beyond in his defense of Israeli crimes in a bizarre interview with Breaking Points’ Ryan Grim. When asked if he opposes Israeli officials suggesting a nuclear attack on Gaza, Cruz replied:

I condemn nothing that the Israeli government is doing. The Israeli government does not target civilians; they target military targets… There is no military on the face of the planet, including the U.S. military, that goes to the lengths that the Israeli military goes to avoid civilian casualties.”

When confronted with statements from the IDF directly refuting his point, noting that their focus is on damage, not precision, Cruz flipped his answer around, replying, “Yes, damage to Hamas, to terrorists.” And when Grim gave him more statements from senior IDF officials explicitly contradicting his previous statement, Cruz retorted, “That’s simply not true. They are targeting the terrorists,” thereby defending the IDF even from itself.

#7 Ron Wyden, $1,279,376

Senator Ron Wyden (D—OR) has long been one of Israel’s staunchest advocates in Washington, supporting President Trump’s decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and opposing BDS in all its forms.

In 2017, he co-sponsored a bill that made it a federal crime, punishable by a maximum prison sentence of 20 years, for Americans to participate in or even encourage boycotts against Israel and illegal Israeli settlements.

On the settlements, he was one of the most vigorous opponents of UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which describes them as a “flagrant violation” of international law.

For his troubles, Wyden has received $1,279,376 from pro-Israel groups.

#8 Dick Durbin, $1,126,020

In some ways, Dick Durbin owes his political career to the Israel lobby. In 1982, the then-obscure college professor benefitted enormously from AIPAC money to defeat incumbent Paul Findley, a strong proponent of the Palestinian people.

The Illinois Democrat has called for immediate military aid to Israel and co-signed a Senate resolution reaffirming Washington’s support for Israel’s “right to self-defense” in the wake of October 7.

Despite this, he has angered some in the pro-Israel crowd by supporting President Obama’s initiatives to reduce tensions with Iran and has now come out in favor of a ceasefire in Gaza.

#9 Josh Gottheimer, $1,109,370

Despite only being in office since 2017, Gottheimer has already received more than $1.1 million from pro-Israel lobbying groups. The New Jersey Congressman has served as a pro-Israeli attack dog in Washington, co-sponsoring the bill equating opposition to Israeli government policy with anti-Semitism and introducing legislation to block and criminalize boycotting the state of Israel.

In the wake of October 7, Gottheimer has attempted to cancel a number of public figures. Earlier this month, for instance, he tried to pressure Rutgers University into calling off an event on Palestine featuring former CNN anchor Marc Lamont Hill and organizer and journalist Nick Estes, both of whom support Palestinian rights and statehood.

Gottheimer has even caused rifts within his own party, attacking the small, progressive wing of Democrats who have failed to toe the line on Israel and Hamas. “Last night, 15 of my Democratic colleagues voted AGAINST standing with our ally Israel and condemning Hamas terrorists who brutally murdered, raped, and kidnapped babies, children, men, women, and elderly, including Americans. They are despicable and do not speak for our party,” he wrote, making a number of highly incendiary and questionable assertions.

#10 Shontel Brown, $1,028,686

Perhaps no other political case reveals the power of the Israel lobby than Shontel Brown. In 2021, Nina Turner, a democratic socialist, national co-chair of Bernie Sanders’ 2020 election campaign, and an outspoken advocate for justice in Palestine, ran for election in Ohio’s 11th congressional district. Her opponent was the little-known but strongly pro-Israel Brown.

Brown received more pro-Israel money than any other politician nationwide during that two-year election cycle, helping her overcome a double-digit polling deficit to defeat Turner. Over $1 million was spent plastering Cleveland with attack ads against Turner. In her acceptance speech, Brown praised Israel and later thanked the Jewish community for “help[ing] me get over the finish line”

Since then, she has supported Israeli actions in Gaza and rejected the idea of Israel as an apartheid state, writing:

Let’s be clear: Israel is not an apartheid state. Any mischaracterizations otherwise attempt to delegitimize Israel, a robust democracy, and will only serve to fuel rising antisemitism. I will always advocate for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship founded on our shared values.”

[…]

Via https://www.mintpressnews.com/blood-money-top-ten-politicians-taking-most-israel-money-israel-lobby/286491/