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

Wednesday, September 17, 2014


Last month I suggested that Australian SAS forces were already in Iraq. I suggested this based on the assertion by an American neoconservative writers indiscreet wording in an article that said, “Western commandos such as Seal Team Six, Delta Force and the British and Australian SAS should also expand operations to carry out the kind of intelligence-driven leadership targeting that was an important part of the 2007-2008 surge”. The use of the word ‘expand’ and the tone of the narrative hinted that Australian SAS, together with other Special Forces, were already deployed to the region.

Today, Mark Kenny, the Sydney Morning Herald’s chief political editor writes: “While a contingent of SAS commandos departed for the Middle East on Monday, Fairfax Media understands several SAS commandos have been in the region on standby for weeks.” What ‘standby’ means is anybody’s guess but I can’t imagine for one moment that they’ve been idle but, regardless of whatever they have been up to, their presence earlier on and long before any formal announcements made by Abbott regarding Australia’s involvement in the region indicates that Abbott had committed Australia to enjoin the US long before there was any debate on the matter.

Kenny also goes on to write: “Mr Abbott said the fact that the legitimate government of Iraq had invited Australia to assist in defeating an insurgent force, made Australia's participation in the air and ground war legal”. While Abbott concedes there are legal problems associated with operating with allies inside Syria, he doesn’t rule entirely rule out the possibility saying, “I’m not ruling some action is Syria but it is not part of the government current intentions because, as I’ve said quite frequently over the past few days, the legalities of operations in Syria are quite different from the legalities of operations in Iraq”. However, when he was telling Australians and the parliament a few weeks ago that he’d made no decision about Australia becoming involved in Iraq, it’s obvious that he clearly had already decided what Australia’s role would be in Iraq. Why, then should he be believed when he says that going into Syria is not part of the Australian government’s intentions? And can we not question weather or not Australian SAS forces aren’t already in Syria as well as Iraq?

Thursday, September 11, 2014


The Dutch Safety Board has released a preliminary report of the shootdown of Malaysian Airline flight MH17 on 17 July 2014. The report states that the cockpit area of the Boeing 777 airliner was hit with “a large number of high energy objects”. The report does not identify nor speculate what these objects were. However, a close examination of evidence available on the internet, including photographs of the wreckage coupled with information from the preliminary report, all but confirms that the aircraft was shot down by another aircraft using rapid fire machine cannon of some 30mm calibre. This contradicts earlier speculation that the aircraft was downed by a surface to air missile (SAM). 

Some experts who have said the airliner was brought down by a SAM have pointed out that the BUK anti-aircraft missile system is a radar guided weapon that can be fitted with a proximity fuse that detonates the warhead as the missile closes in on its target. While the BUK missile system does indeed have this capability, it does not account for the uniform size of the round holes that are shown on the cockpit skin debris which are consistent with 30mm diameter cannon shells. The BUK system warhead is a conventional fragmentation high explosive device that would have peppered the target with irregular sized and jagged holes and not the round holes that can clearly be seen in the films and photographs of the wreckage.

Some earlier reports suggested that a Ukrainian Sukhoi Su25 may have been responsible for the shootdown. This scenario was refuted by the Ukrainian government and its Western allies who argued that the Su25 was incapable of reaching the 33,000 feet altitude that MH17 was cruising at. Wikipedia’s article on the Su25 states that the service ceiling at best for this aircraft is just under 23,000 feet. However, the authoritative Military Today website states that the SU25’s service ceiling is 10kms which, oddly, is almost 33,000 feet. The upshot is that it is well within the realms of reality for the Su25 to have shot down MH17.

The next consideration is; why was the airliner shot down? It is generally agreed that, regardless of who was responsible for shooting it down, it almost certainly was a tragic case of misidentification. Once realised it was a terrible mistake, every effort was made by whoever did it to cover up their responsibility with all sides then blaming each other for the deed.

The Ukrainian-Russian separatists who have been widely blamed for the shootdown certainly have had a recent history of shooting down Ukrainian military aircraft and helicopters but there is no explanation from the Ukrainians or their Western allies as to why separatists would have shot it down apart from the possibility that the separatists mistook it for a Ukrainian troop transport. But then why would the separatists assume that when the aircraft was flying high over the disputed area of the eastern Ukraine and heading toward Russia. The separatists would have had no reason to assume it was a Ukrainian aircraft. The Russians certainly wouldn’t have shot down a civilian aircraft no matter where it was from. The Ukrainians too would not have shot down any aircraft flying in that direction and at that height even if they believed it was carrying the Russian president Vladimir Putin – or at least the Ukrainian government wouldn’t have attempted to shoot down the Russian president. But what about the Ukrainian ultra-nationalist neo-Nazis in the military? Would they have unilaterally attempted it or even committed the crime with an understanding from the government that they would be disowned and the government’s role in the affair denied if they were caught out?

The Russians, no matter how much the West is trying to stir things up against them, would never have left themselves exposed to such a heinous crime. Nor would the Russian separatists, who have no access to the Ukraine Air Force’s Su25’s, have any reason to shoot down any aircraft under these particular circumstances. That leaves only the Ukrainian nationalists. And, since the US and Europe are their allies, there’s no reason for them to dig too deeply either. 

Tuesday, September 02, 2014


Neoconservative propagandist and Israeli apologist, Jonathan Tobin writing in Commentary yesterday, attempted to justify Israel’s latest grab of some 400 hectares of West Bank land. Tobin attempts justify the grab by saying that the land in question is ‘state land’ adjacent to one of Israel’s earliest settlements in the West Bank which was built after the 1967 war. He argues that in the event of Palestine being given statehood, the land and the settlement would become a part of Israel under an arrangement whereby Israel accede some other lands to Palestine in exchange.

There’s a number of problems with this piece nonsense, not least of which is the fact that Israel and the ultra right-wing Zionists have no intention of ever allowing the Palestinians to have a state of their own and therefore there will never be any kind ‘land swap’.

Tobin goes on to write:

Let’s be clear about this. Neither the ownership nor the future of Gush Etzion is up for debate in any peace talks. In every peace plan, whether put forward by Israel’s government or its left-wing opponents, the bloc remains part of Israel, a reality that most sensible Palestinians accept.

Tobin and his fellow Zionists both in Israel and throughout the world might be in for a rather rude awakening sooner or later at some time in the future.

It is very presumptuous to believe that the Palestinians will accept anything other than full control of all of the West Bank including removal of all of the settlements and a return of all of their lands swallowed up by the meandering Israeli ‘security’ wall and fence.

Israel is beginning to realise that worldwide support for the Palestinian cause is growing rapidly and at the expense of support for Israel. People around the world can now see through Israel’s lies and propaganda. The recent wars against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip and Israel’s oppression of Palestinians in the West Bank has shown the world that that real ‘terrorists’ all along have been the Israelis with their relentless bombardment and killings of civilians of the Gaza Strip and their shootings of Palestinian protestors in the West Bank. Israel’s credibility is crumbling rapidly and, in the end, it’s likely to be the demands of the peoples of the world that will ultimately allow the Palestinians to prevail in their quest for statehood – without conceding any of their lands to the Israelis. 

Thursday, August 28, 2014


Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Defence Minister, David Johnston, are deliberately misleading the Australian people and more than likely the Australian parliament, by telling us that the government hasn’t been asked to commit to helping the US again in Iraq.

Tony Abbott is following in almost the same footsteps as John Howard did in March 2003 when he kept telling the Australian people and parliament that he hadn’t been asked by Bush to commit to the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ just before the invasion and destruction of Iraq, an event which has led directly to the current crisis in Iraq today.

One would be extremely naïve to believe that Abbott has not already been invited to participate in action against Islamic State forces in Iraq and that invitation was made and accepted when US Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel both visited Australia earlier this month. One would also be extremely naïve to believe the outgoing director of the Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) David Irvine when he says that Australia’s involvement with the US in Iraq would not further radicalise young Australian Muslims thereby increasing the likelihood of terrorist acts being committed in Australia. Given the history of Australian Muslims participation in the current war in Iraq, it is far more likely that radicalised Muslims will consider committing terrorist acts in Australia when Abbott does join with the US in the fight against Islamists in Iraq.

While as yet no scientific polls regarding Australians opinions about going to war in Iraq again have been released, however, at least one online poll shows that a strong majority, some 75% of Australians, would be against any such action.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014


In an extraordinary and surprising move, Netanyahu has all but unilaterally agreed to a ceasefire in his war against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip. By ‘unilateral’ I mean without the support of the extreme right–wing of his cabinet including Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Minister of the Economy Naftali Bennett, Minister of Internal Security Yitzhak Aharonovich and Minister of Communications Gilad Erdan; all of whom were intent on destroying Hamas completely and fully occupying the Gaza Strip permanently and ultimately annexing the territory to Israel.

Hamas and the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are, of course, delighted – as is Abbas and the Palestine Authority, who are now enthusiastic about the prospect of having a seaport and maybe even an airport with which to rebuild their country.

But what happens when Netanyahu is gone and the real right-wing Zionists who are in the ‘don’t care what the rest of the world thinks’ camp take over?

The war against Hamas was extremely popular amongst Israelis who wholeheartedly supported bombing the Gaza into submission with a view to full occupation. It begs the question: What next? Will the extreme right bring Netanyahu down and will they then renew hostilities by once more provoking the Palestinians in the Gaza into launching more rockets into Israel by randomly shooting dead Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip and West Bank as they did to get this latest round of carnage going?

I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t believe this is the end of it. I have no idea what Netanyahu has in mind at this stage. I can only suggest that Netanyahu, always sensitive to public opinion despite seemingly able to push affairs right up to the very edge, has backed off due to overwhelming and growing worldwide public support for the Palestinians; or possibly having been threatened by the US who would support a push for the Palestinians to enjoin the ICC if Netanyahu didn’t make peace.

Netanyahu may well have something else up his sleeve but, if he hasn’t, then this could well be the beginning of the end for Netanyahu. And, if that happens sooner rather than later, then it may be a case of ‘out of the frying pan and into the fire’ for both the Palestinian people and the Israeli people if the extreme right replace him.

Saturday, August 23, 2014


It seems that a full-on invasion of the Gaza Strip, Israel’s ultimate endgame plan for the Palestinian enclave, is moving inexorably closer to realisation.

Israel again has called up thousands of reservists and Israel’s Communications Minister and security cabinet member, Gilad Erdan, has announced that Israel is close to being in a position to launch a full invasion. Erdan asked that Israelis be patient.  

Erdan also made it clear that Israel will not be conceding to any of Hamas’s demands inferring that Israel had no even considered any of Hamas’s demands which were put forward for discussion during the ceasefire.

Since it was obvious that Israel was never going to entertain any of Hamas’s demands, Hamas had little choice other than to resume hostilities in order to force the issue. The alternative would be to submit to eternal ghettoisation, oppression and persecution at the hands of the Israelis. Both sides now seem intent on pushing the matter to an ultimate conclusion once and for all.

For the Israelis, the reoccupation of the Gaza Strip and the transfer of the population into the Sinai, Jordan or Lebanon have always been part of the ultimate Zionist endgame. It has never been anything else. Talk of living peacefully side by side with the Palestinians has only ever been an illusion for the benefit of Israel’s Western supporters who continue to plough money into Israel. But the reality is that Israel has never ever had any intention of allowing a Palestinian state to exist. Israel has skilfully manipulated affairs in such a way as to completely fool the West – and particularly the US – for years into believing they only want peace with the Palestinians when all the while they were merely waiting for an opportunity to grab the occupied territories for themselves on the pretext of defending themselves against ‘terrorism’.

For the Palestinian resistance in the Gaza Strip there is now little to lose. They will likely fight on and they will pin their hopes on world opinion and outrage against Israeli atrocities influencing the world’s Western leaders into forcing the Israelis into stopping their war and accepting Hamas’s demands.

There will be no peace for either side any time soon. 

Friday, August 22, 2014


ISIS, or just IS (Islamic State) as they now call themselves, as well as al-Qaeda are, of course, Israel’s arch enemy – as well as much of the rest of the world. But is Israel any better than their arch enemies when it comes to committing crimes against humanity? And, just because Hamas also happens to be an Islamic organisation, can it really be compared with IS or al-Qaeda?

Neocon propagandist Jonathan Tobin, writing today in Commentary magazine, would have you believe that Israel are, as usual, the victims, while Hamas and the other Palestinians in the Gaza Strip fighting for their freedom are terrorists who need to be treated with the same contempt as IS and al-Qaeda.

The reality, as anyone with even an iota of a sense of logic and compassion can see, is that Israel that also behaves in such a way that the carnage and death they bring to civilians in the Gaza Strip has the same result that the carnage and death that IS and al-Qaeda bring down upon the peoples they choose to ravage. The only difference between them is the weapons and methods they choose to commit their crimes. IS and al-Qaeda us small arms and knives to kill their victims whereas Israel use aircraft and tanks to pump bombs and shells into their hapless victims.

Zionist propagandists and their neocon allies attempt to equate Hamas with IS and al-Qaeda are plainly falling on deaf ears in the West as the enormous protest rallies and marches in support of the Palestinian cause demonstrate.