Tuesday, 31 October 2017

**Guardian Headline: "Michael Fallon right to apologise for hand-on-knee incident, says PM."


My guess is that some Jiggery-pokery involved here.

Julia Hartley-Brewer is the person to reveal that Michael Fallon repeatedly touched her knee in 2002.

It is reported that the Prime Minister thinks it right that he has admitted the incident and apologised, though she singularly failed - the BBC reported - to give fulsome backing to the Minister's position, technically in the the gift of Her Majesty the Queen but on the recommendation of the PM.

Fallon may or may not be on borrowed time, especially if similar incidents were to emerge?
Hartley-Brewer has been a chat show host and journalist perhaps best, and most ironically remembered for her programme "Every Prime Minister Needs a Willie". (An examination of the relationship between Margaret Thatcher and Willie Whitelaw of course!)

She considers herself to be "an atheist and staunch and long-standing republican", besides of course a self publicist of some stature, who I have noticed finds it very difficult to remain silent when someone else is talking; presumably because she regards her own opinion to be so much better.

Wikipedia recounts all the media outlets she has starred in besides her own regular "Talk Radio" slot. Here are some of them:
Have I Got News for You;  BBC One's Question Time;  Radio 4's Any Questions;  Sky News;  BBC News Channel; BBC One's The One Show; ITV's Tonight show; Lorraine on ITV; This Morning on ITV; The Agenda on ITV; Sunday Politics on BBC1; BBC Radio 5 Live;  BBC Radio 4's Today and PM programmes;  Pointless Celebrities; LBC.

Image result for julia hartley brewer images

Such universal access to the media makes me rather nervous, not to say suspicious, as it demands something more than talent and expertise to be so widely used - as the rest of the population willing to share their opinions may have discovered.

What that ingredient is, is hard to pin down - shall we call it, for want of a better word, celebrity? A combination of good looks and charisma? Or is it possible more questionable facilitation is at work?

It would appear belatedly, she feels it necessary on a wave of opprobrium for inappropriate sexual behaviour - Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and apparently no less than "forty" MP's now in the firing line - to reveal how she was propositioned by the current Minister of Defence Michael Fallon some fifteen years ago.

We all know the practical consequences of such revelations for Weinstein and Spacey, not to mention previous notables in the world of politics and entertainment, and must wonder if the same will follow for Fallon?

Given Hartley-Brewer's profile, she can hardly claim naivety as to what the consequences might be, which rather raises the question, was she put up to it? Was she in fact used for some darker strategic purpose of dislodging Fallon from his role?

If she is in fact naive, informed opinion isn't, particularly in the light of revelations that foreign agencies, let alone domestic ones, are up to such tricks all the time. Examples in Trump's administration have recently come thick and fast. Mrs Clinton claims it was the Russian dirty tricks that did it for her, though others might think differently.


In Britain we had the notorious case of Mossad agent Shai Masot aiming to 'take down' British Foreign Office Minister, Alan Duncan MP so similar in the case of Fallon is not implausible. Indeed no less than Mrs May was reported to have thrown herself on the mercy of her counterparts in Europe on the grounds she was surrounded by potentially fatal intrigue.

In passing it was said to be Michael Fallon's personal protection officers who fortuitously appeared just at the right moment to deliver the fatal shots to Khalid Masood - the "terror maniac" as one paper called him - this despite issues of being dressed differently and questions of why they were in the location they were at just the right moment.

Of course the hero of the hour on that occasion was MP Tobias Ellwood, who's military experience took precedence over ambulance crews and doctors in the resuscitation efforts applied to PC Keith Palmer.  Subsequently and quite properly he was appointed Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence People and Veterans.


At the same time we have been assailed by grievous warnings of terrorist threats, particularly from those returning from Syria and related areas of conflict, from no less than Sue Hemming, head of the Crown Prosecution Service's (CPS) counter-terror division AND Andrew Parker, the director general of MI5. Such warnings can only be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, Rory Stewart, an international development minister a former Chair of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee, has been widely quoted as saying,  "the only way of dealing with British ISIS fighters in Syria "in almost every case" is to kill them," it must be assumed without trial or any due process.  Yet if the Question Time audience is anything to go by (on the 26th October, 2017) with hardly a whimper of dissent!

Incidentally, it may not be widely known, that Stewart's father was second-most senior officer in the British Secret Intelligence Service who died in 2015, after a long and distinguished career in the Diplomatic Service. Rory's 'apple' has not fallen far from the tree.

So to come full circle, can we treat Hartley-Brewer's delicate revelation at face, or is it indicative of something deeper and darker?


If I was a betting man - which I hasten to add I am not - I might be prepared to put a fiver on a Cabinet re-shuffle in the not too far far distant future, in which Mr Fallon is found a more suitable position, and we discover that a certain Mssrs Elwood or Stewart become available to take his place.

Meanwhile "Dame Julia Hartley-Brewer" has a certain ring to it - for services to journalism of course.

We shall have to wait and see.

New: CIA Agent Whistleblower Risks All To Expose The Shadow Government

Proof the Shadow Government exists - Unacknowledged and Sirius Documentary

Monday, 30 October 2017

    (Mossad Director Yossi Cohen recently stated: “We carry out hundreds and thousands of operations every year, some of them are complicated and daring in the heart of the enemy countries, which are the target countries.”  Was Fukushima one of them?) Source: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20171003-director-of-mossad-we-carry-out-thousands-of-operations-in-the-enemy-countries-every-year/

User Rating: 5 / 5
Yet another 22/11!

Fukushima Was Sabotaged By Israel
Former NSA analyst, Jim Stone, argues that there was no mag 9.0 earthquake. The tsunami was caused by nuclear bombs in the sea and the Fukushima explosion and meltdown was caused by mini-nukes hidden in cameras installed by an Israeli security firm. The motive: punish Japan for offering to enrich Iranian uranium and straying from Illuminati diktat.
When we compare the 6.8-magnitude earthquake which devastated Kobe, Japan January 17, 1995 with Fukushima, the evidence does not stack up.
A quick Google Images search of Kobe reveals incredible destruction of buildings, bridges, elevated highways, and other infrastructure.
The Fukushima quake, magnitude 9.0, struck about 70 km off the coast of Japan on March 11, 2011.
It sent a 15-meter tsunami crashing over perfectly undamaged bridges, houses, roads, and cars -- over a populace which had not been warned of the incoming tsunami, because there was no mag 9.0 earthquake. They were taken completely off-guard. Yet helicopters were waiting, and people all over Japan got to watch the tsunami roll in on live TV.
What on earth was going on? Ordinarily, the Japanese people are warned of tsunamis. Why weren't they warned? Why was there no structural damage, no reason for them to suspect that a tsunami was coming?
The quake must have seemed like nothing special to a nation of people who are used to quakes. In a video taken in one Tokyo newsroom during the Fukushima quake, staff were seen to continue typing at their computer stations, totally unfazed by it.
A 9.0-magnitude earthquake is more than 100 times stronger than a 6.8. A 9.0 should have devastated everything within a 1,000-km radius. There should have been widespread urban carnage, even worse than what Kobe suffered.
Yet the Fukushima quake of 3/11/11 did not cause a single structure to collapse.
But don't take my word for it. Go look up the helicopter footage on YouTube. Look at the infrastructure the tsunami was crashing onto. Not the slightest bit of damage. Common sense is enough to make you wonder.
Jim Stone did more than wonder. He dug up and analyzed the Japanese seismograms. He proved there was no 9.0 quake, and no epicenter out at sea. Instead, there were three simultaneous quakes of much lesser magnitude, all of them inland.
The authorities lied about the 9.0 quake -- made it up out of whole cloth. An earthquake did not cause the tsunami. There must have been another cause.
fukushima attack by israel 01
Reactors Destroyed by Nukes
It turns out that the official explanation for the Fukushima reactor explosions was bogus as well. Nuclear power containment walls are extremely thick and strong. Hydrogen explosions could never have destroyed them. As a historical reference, hydrogen explosions occurred at Three Mile Island and caused no structural damage, nor even any injuries to plant personnel.
Furthermore, Reactor Four contained no fuel on 3/11/11, and was therefore nonoperational -- yet it exploded and was destroyed as completely as were the other reactors that day. Reactor Four is like Building 7 at the World Trade Center - an utter impossibility, a blatant smoking gun. A reactor containing no fuel cannot operate; a nonoperational reactor cannot explode unless someone explodes it. The destruction of Reactor Four can only have been the result of sabotage.
Israeli Involvement
In February 2010, Japan offered to enrich uranium for Iran. Soon thereafter, an Israeli firm by the name of Magna BSP secured a contract to run security at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. They installed oversized cameras strongly resembling gun-type nuclear weapons. There is strong evidence that they planted Stuxnet, an Israeli computer virus that attacks Siemens power plant control systems, and which Israel previously used to damage Iran's nuclear program. Magna BSP also established internet data links in the reactor cores, in blatant violation of international nuclear regulations.
All twelve members of that security team returned to Israel in the week before 3/11/11. In the aftermath of the disaster, the Israelis publicly monitored the reactor cores via their illegal internet data links. Yet no one took them to task for this.
Jim Stone Targeted for Revealing Truth
What caused the tsunami? What destroyed the reactors? Using skills honed as a former NSA analyst with an engineering background, Jim Stone concluded that Israel was behind the destruction of Fukushima Daiichi. Now he is paying the price.
Stone proved that there was no 9.0-magnitude quake to cause the tsunami. The tsunami must have been artificially induced, perhaps by an atomic bomb placed in the Japan Trench.
The tsunami was blamed for flooding the reactors and causing the explosions. But Stone presents compelling evidence that Israel destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi plant by installing gun-type nuclear weapons in the guise of security cameras, and then setting them off in the tsunami's aftermath.
Stone demonstrates that the Stuxnet virus continues to distort sensor readings at the disaster site to this day. Unlike many others in the world of whistle blowers, Stone bases his conclusions on hard evidence and unassailable logic. Anyone can review and challenge his work. He is open to it.
Since releasing his report and making several radio appearances to support it, Jim Stone has been harassed, threatened, unlawfully detained, and is currently facing prison time on completely trumped-up charges.
I have watched the reaction to his work on the net. Some have slandered him. Others have railroaded his work. No one has debunked him yet. His conclusions have ramifications that make 9/11 pale in significance.
Why, all across the alternative media, this roaring silence on the work of Jim Stone? Why haven't more truth sites simply linked to his report, directing people to review the evidence and decide for themselves? Some have expressed suspicion that Stone might not be what he claims to be. That's irrelevant. Facts are facts. The report stands on facts.
If you haven't done so yet, I urge you to study Jim Stone's Fukushima report. It is well worth the considerable time and effort. Then, if you agree that his conclusions are correct, please do your part in spreading this information and dispelling the alternative media's silence on it.
To conclude, a 9.0-magnitude earthquake never happened in Japan on 3/11; the tsunami must have been artificially induced. Nor did hydrogen explosions obliterate containment walls of concrete and rebar several feet thick. The official story is impossible. Israel was punishing Japan, and Zionist operatives now are attempting to destroy Jim Stone, the man who exposed the truth.

Sunday, 29 October 2017

How often do we hear from the BBC about Britain's STATE TERRORISM?

Does the British public have any idea of the havoc its military forces have caused in Syria?

Britain drops 3,400 bombs in Syria and Iraq - and says no civilians killed.

Following disturbing article from: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-uk-drops-3400-bombs-syria-and-iraq-and-says-no-civilians-killed-2032942935

Iraqis flee coalition air strike in Mosul last November (Reuters)

Last update: 
Friday 27 October 2017 12:44 UTC

Royal Air Force drones and jets have dropped more than 3,400 bombs and missiles on Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq and Syria, an investigation by Middle East Eye has revealed, yet the British government maintains that there is "no evidence" they have killed a single civilian.
The vast quantities of ordnance dropped since the start of Operation Shader against IS in 2014 seriously undermines the claim by ministers that the RAF has not caused any civilian casualties in the three-year-long bombing campaign, and has prompted calls for an investigation.
The Ministry of Defence does not routinely release statistics on the numbers of weapons used over Iraq and Syria, but an MEE analysis has combined weekly updates of operations in the region and information collated by campaign group Drone Wars.

It shows that up to the end of September, UK forces had dropped at least 3,482 bombs and missiles in the battle against IS, including 2,089 Paveway IV bombs and 486 Brimstone missiles from Typhoon and Tornado jets.
RAF Reaper drones have also fired 724 Hellfire missiles at IS targets.
The figures are conservative as MoD updates sometimes do not specify the number of bombs or missiles used in a strike, and last night MoD officials admitted that a further 86 bombs and missiles had been dropped in recent weeks.
The weapon of choice for RAF jets is the Paveway IV precision-guided bomb, but they have also fired large numbers of the more accurate Brimstone missile, which was originally designed as an anti-tank weapon but has been used extensively by the RAF to target IS snipers and vehicles.

The government describes the Brimstone as the most accurate weapon available that can be fired by aircraft, and they are conservatively estimated to cost £100,000 each; heavier Paveway IV bombs are estimated to cost £30,000 each, and Hellfire, fired by the Reaper drone fleet, cost £71,300 each.
IS is in retreat in Iraq and Syria after a US-led bombing campaign that saw the RAF fly more than 8,000 sorties and kill more than 3,000 IS militants. A spike in weapons releases came earlier this summer, when RAF Typhoons and Tornadoes joined the coalition and Kurdish effort to liberate Mosul.
Islamic State regularly used "human shields" in built-up areas, but despite this and the scale of the ordnance dropped by the RAF, the MoD maintains it has "no evidence" that its strikes have caused any civilian casualties - a position now roundly rejected by defence analysts and opposition parties.

"Our armed forces are among the best in the world, so they will be among the most discerning and accurate when it comes to targeting," Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable, told MEE.
"However, it is, at the very best, implausible that our heavy involvement could not have caused civilian deaths. We must not knock our armed services, but, equally, the government has to be honest in its assessment of damage caused in conflict."
The US Air Force, which leads the anti-Islamic State coalition, says it has caused 786 civilian deaths in the three-year air war, but despite saying the air war is the "most challenging fight in decades", the RAF has made so such assessment.
Earlier this month, the minister of state for the British armed forces, Mark Lancaster, told parliament that the government "had been able to discount RAF involvement in any civilian casualties".

Iraqi forces drive through the rubble of west Mosul, which the RAF bombed in a campaign to defeat Islamic State (Reuters)

The RAF says it takes all steps to minimise civilian casualties, but it has conducted more than 1,600 strikes in Iraq and Syria - more than any other coalition country except the US.
Reacting to the figures, military aviation experts and campaigners have said that it is no longer credible for the MoD to maintain that has not killed any civilians.
Samuel Oakford, a spokesperson for Airwars, a group that monitors civilian casualties from international air strikes in the region, told MEE: "The UK's claim that no British air strikes in Iraq or Syria have led to civilian deaths has always been difficult to believe.
"Based on the coalition's own civilian casualty reporting, it is extremely unlikely that a coalition member as active as the UK would have not had a hand in a single civilian death.
"As the campaign continues into its fourth year and more data about British involvement such as this is compiled, the MoD's claim is becoming increasingly absurd."
Over the course of the last 12 months the focus of the air battle against IS, which the MoD calls Daesh, has shifted from the Iraqi city of Mosul, which fell in July, to Raqqa in Syria.
But MEE analysis shows that the overwhelming majority of RAF weapons released took place against IS fighters in Iraq with 3,000 strikes, while a total of 482 bombs and missiles were dropped over Syria, prompting fears of blowback in the UK.
"Turning a blind eye to the consequences of air strikes and pretending they are somehow now 'risk free' is naive in the extreme," said Chris Cole, director of campaign Drone Wars UK.
"Unless we begin to understand and acknowledge the true cost of our ongoing wars in the Middle East, we are likely to pay a high price in the future."

Zero casualties

Airwars, which works with the RAF and US Air Force to report suspected civilian casualties, says that at least 5,600 civilians have been killed by coalition strikes.
In July there were reports that Iraqi soldiers used bulldozers to hide the bodies of hundreds of civilians killed in the final days of the battle for Mosul.
MEE's analysis shows that during the fight for the Iraqi city, RAF Typhoons and Tornadoes dropped dozens of Paveway IV bombs on IS fighters in the city.
However, the MoD does not have troops on the ground in the region carrying out battle damage assessment of sites struck by RAF munitions.

Latest @airwars figures for Coalition's anti-ISIS campaign. Read about each incident here: https://airwars.org/civilian-casualty-claims/ 

Thursday, 26 October 2017

Judicial Murder: Is the USA on the Point of Collapse?


Following from: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/10/26/case-judicial-murder/

A Case of Judicial Murder?

A Case of Judicial Murder?
John Remington Graham

I have been asked many times why I have intervened in the federal prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the young man who was convicted and sentenced to death in the Boston  Marathon bombing case where two brothers, on April 15, 2013, allegedly detonated pressure cooker bombs on Boylston Street in front of the Forum Restaurant that killed or maimed many people.
As I wrap up my career of fifty years as a member of the bar, including service as a public defender in state and federal courts, co-founder of an accredited law school, and chief public prosecutor in Minnesota state courts, I am apprehensive that my country might be entering into an era of judicial murder.
Judicial murder is the practice of designing a trial to get a guilty verdict, regardless of the facts, and a death sentence carried out.  It has happened in many countries in all ages.  It has been recognized as a threat of public justice by the United States Supreme Court in Powell v. Alabama, 287 U. S. 45 at 72-72 (1932). Judicial murder is followed by corruption and destruction of society.The judicial murder of Socrates was followed by loss of the classical civilization of ancient Greece.  The judicial murder of Jesus of Nazareth, whether son of God or venerable philosopher, was followed by the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple. The judicial murder of Joan of Arc was followed by loss of most English lands in France. The judicial murder of Charles the First was followed by loss of the free constitution of England.  The judicial murder of Louis XVI was followed by 150 years of defeat, ruin, suffering, and chaos in France.  Judicial murder in the Third Reich was followed by humiliating defeat of Germany.  Judicial murder in the Soviet Union was followed by collapse of the Soviet empire.  If the justice system cannot be trusted, evil consequences follow.
My active intervention in the case began when I assisted the Russian aunt, herself a lawyer, of Dzhokhar file pro se papers in the federal district court in Boston, asking that she be recognized as a friend of the court so she could present evidence conclusively showing, by FBI-gathered evidence, incorporated by reference into the indictment, that Dzhokhar could not have detonated the bomb he was supposed to have detonated.  I proceeded in this way as instructed by the bar liaison officer of the federal district court and the clerk’s office.  Dr. Paul Craig Roberts wrote up this legal adventure in his column of August 17, 2015, in a way which draws from the judicial record, and portrays the scenario clearly enough.  The link is https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/08/17/fbi-evidence-proves-innocence-accused-boston-marathon-bomber-dzhokhar-tsarnaev.  Those unfamiliar with this case need to read that article.

The claim of the Russian aunt sounds fantastic only so long as one believes newspapers and does not pay attention to critical, undeniable facts gathered by the FBI, and the language of the indictment as returned on June 27, 2013, especially paragraphs 6, 7, and 24.  A number of things have caused me to doubt Dzhokhar’s guilt.
The FBI crime lab determined from fragments at the scene of the explosions by no later than April 16, 2013, that the culprits were carrying heavy-laden black backpacks on Boyleston Street just before the explosions.  This was not an evaporating investigation theory, but was incorporated into the indictment, was part of the government’s case-in-chief, and was never disavowed by anyone involved in the trial.  On April 18, 2013, the FBI determined that the culprits were portrayed in a street video maintained by the Whiskey Steak House on Boyleston Street. Two still frames were used to identify the brothers Tamerlan, who was shot dead by police, and Dzhokhar, who survived, and was charged, convicted, and sentenced to death.   A third still-frame from the same street video shows Dzhokhar, carrying not a heavy-laden black backpack, but a light-weight white backpack over his right shoulder. The very evidence used by the FBI, and described in the indictment to identify Dzhokhar eliminates him as certainly as white is distinguished from black. The FBI evidence of an exploded backpack is black and the FBI’s identification of Dzhokhar at the scene of the crime shows him with a white backpack. This exculpatory evidence was kept out of the trial.
What of the confessions attributed to Dzhokhar?  The law has always known that, contrary to popular belief, confessions are highly unreliable, often contrived or staged by artifice, or otherwise false, which is why the law has long used safeguards to assure that alleged confessions are received only cautiously under proper circumstances.  The alleged confession by Dzhokhar written in the dark on the side of a boat under which the boy injured from gunshot woulds was hiding is highly suspect. Moreover, if Dzhokhar was willing to confess, why was he hiding?  The confession at sentencing was plainly enough scripted for him, and is not corroborated by what the law calls the “corpus delicti.”

But more troubling evidence exists.  Dr. Lorraine Day was the chief of orthopedic surgery at San Francisco General Hospital for some twenty-five years.  She treated many grave injuries, and is an impeccable medical expert.  She prepared a decisive report, dated May 4, 2015, on the Boston bombing case, which she concluded was a hoax. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/34vs8r/lorraine_day_md_former_chief_of_orthopedic/  She observed, for example, that photos of the scene after the explosions revealed no blood when it should have been visible everywhere, and that, when blood did appear, it was of a bright orange red Hollywood color, not maroon as real blood appears in real life.  The Boston marathon case appears to be at least contaminated by crisis actors if not entirely a false flag event. The video of the man showing no trauma whose leg is purported to be blown away being wheeled down the street sitting upright in a wheelchair is a dead giveaway as to the presence of crisis actors. Any such casualty mishandled in such a way would have quickly bled to death.
The trial of Dzhokhar raises more serious questions. Mr. Tsarnaev was defended by court-appointed lawyers who did not do their job.  His chief counsel had powerful exculpatory evidence available, yet she forcefully asserted that he was guilty in her opening statement, never used the exculpatory evidence at trial, and did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty in her final argument to the jury. Dzhokhar had no defense.  As a lawyer with a half century of experience, it was painful for me to watch what looked like a show trial in which the verdict and sentence were assured in advance.
On verge of retirement, I have no interest in acquiring notoriety to build a practice. I have nothing to gain from coming to the defense of a person abandoned by law, the media, and everyone but his aunt. But my country has everything to lose from judicial murder in behalf of some government agenda. We must examine if that is the case and, if so, prevent it.
As a last hurrah as a lawyer, I recently filed a motion in behalf of three American citizens before the First Circuit in the appeal of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, asking that they be recognized as friends of the court, so they can show that, on the basis of facts actually of record before the federal district court in Boston, Dzhokhar did not detonate a pressure-cooker bomb on Boylston Street on April 15, 2013, as charged in the indictment. The government and major media of the United States have created such confusion and libelled the accused so foully that it is impossible for the average citizen relying on newspapers to imagine that Dzhokhar is innocent. Major media waged a lock-step propaganda campaign against Mr. Tsarnaev. 
However, perhaps a turning point occurred on Monday of this week. Newsweek on October 23, 2017, reported, two years and two months after Dr. Roberts’ report on my filing in behalf of Dzhokhar’s aunt, Maret Tsarnaeva, that evidence might exist of Dzhokhar’s innocence. http://www.newsweek.com/boston-marathon-bombers-aunt-says-fbi-set-her-nephew-and-she-has-proof-691058 If other of the American media would join Newsweek in informing the public that there is doubt about the conviction, perhaps not only a possible case of wrongful conviction can be corrected, but also a case of possible judicial murder could be prevented.
 – John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X), jrgraham@novicomfusion.com, 418-888-5049.

What occult, demonic or covert complex of forces, has come together to create, from all angles, an "United States of America", no longer worthy of the respect of the world and is the United Kingdom locked into the same downward spiral?  
The Mistreatment of Norman Finkelstein

"There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest." Elie Wiesel (1928 - 2016)


It is frequently the case, that our judgement of nations, is viewed through the prism of the treatment of identifiable individuals. 

Political leaders and establishments, may lay claim to high moral principles for the nations they represent, but the acid test is how in practice their armed forces, police and other enforcement agencies, exercise the considerable power afforded them, when in contact with fellow human beings. 

The treatment of Norman Finkelstein by the United States of America is a case in point.

(His own description of how he was recently "kidnapped by the Nassau (New York) County Police on October 9th 2017" (1) can be viewed here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzaCdY2HTsE&feature=share; https://thegoldwater.com/news/10264-Palestinian-Activist-Norman-Finkelstein-Needs-Your-Help )

It appears he was previously arrested on the 17th September, 2017.

For those unfamiliar with the man, his mission and experience, Norman Finkelstein is the 64 year old son of Jewish parents who survived the German holocaust, moved to America after the war ended and passed away in 1995. Their experiences made them political and radical critics of subsequent American foreign policy, particularly in relation to the "Cold War" and the Vietnam War. They were liberated by Russian forces and therefore took a very different view of it and the American obsession with 'defeating Communism', that dominated '50's and 60's thinking.

Brought up in such an environment, it is not surprising that the intellectually bright Norman, born on the 8th December, 1953, should do well academically - he eventually  received his PhD from Princeton in 1988 - or take a radical and outspoken stand. The irony of course proved to be, given his parentage, rather than adopting the prevailing orthodoxy, he became a notable critic of it, to which can be traced his tribulations - indeed victimisation - by Zionist-dominated political power. 

Finkelstein achieved his notoriety (and PhD thesis) for challenging and deconstructing a popular book of the 1980's, entitled "From Time Immemorial" by Joan Peters, that basically propounded the notion that Palestinians were peripatetic squatters in an otherwise eternally Jewish homeland - a perspective in line with the stance promulgated by Zionists since the foundation of the State of Israel in 1948.

In contrast, Finkelstein asserted that the book was a "monumental hoax". Needless to say this attracted immediate opposition and criticism from many quarters. Noam Chomsky summed it up with the warning:  "If you follow this, you're going to get in trouble—because you're going to expose the American intellectual community as a gang of frauds, and they are not going to like it, and they're going to destroy you." (2)


Perhaps an even more damaging and long-running dispute was with the noted Harvard jurist Alan Dershowitz's and since retirement  (now a regular CNN and Fox News contributor and political analyst which probably speaks volumes!)  over his 2004 book "The Case for Israel" - a Zionism apologetic. The two disputes were related as Dershowitz drew heavily on the earlier work by Peters without properly acknowledging it, which Finkelstein had pleasure in drawing attention to, whilst trashing both. However, it had serious academic consequences for the latter, losing his tenure at dePaul University as a result and illustrating the power of the Jewish lobby on academic freedom of expression. (3) 

Meanwhile Dershowitz, described as a "leading defender of civil liberties" perhaps showed his true colours in the cutting remark, quoted by Wikipedia, "I don't think he is a Jew. He's Jewish only on his parents' side." I wonder if his support for civil liberties will prompt him to now to demand Finkelstein be treated fairly and justly to dispel the aura of victimisation and stitch-up by Zionist forces now surrounding his recent arrest?

The people Dershowitz has defended is perhaps instructive, including the notorious Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted prostitution soliciting billionaire and holiday-island-procuring friend of the 'great and the bad'. (4)

Finkelstein's famous response to a questioner is shown in this You Tube clip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0CulhsQkTA) but his academic output and activity can only be adequately appreciated by referring to the Wikipedia biography. Rather strangely it makes no reference (as yet) to his recent arrest, the reasons for which, or the alleged brutality in which it was carried out, are hard to discover.

Finkelstein's account of night time arrest and subsequent treatment can be found here. (5)  He draws attention to his required psychological assessment because he turned up to court in only the shorts he was arrested in, whilst contrasting the judge's shock with what he claims is "a filthy, racist enclave of Nassau County" where all the defendants on the day were black.

This recent disproportionate treatment appears to be at the instigation of Michael Chetkof and Allyson Burger, although the precise grounds for it are not clear. (6) It would appear that Finkelstein had acted on behalf of an individual being targeted by the above individuals, as a result of which he also was attacked and arrested. What is not clear is to what extent this involves a Zionist conspiracy to finally punish and silence Finkelstein for daring to counter the prevailing narrative of Jewish victim hood that justifies its hegemonic, aggressive and apartheid policies in Palestine?

Time will tell, but in the meantime, I believe he and his efforts to balance the narrative scales deserves whole-hearted support.


1.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassau_County_Police_Department

2.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein

3.  https://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/finkelstein.html

4.  'The Fantacist' New York Magazine, December 8, 2007. http://nymag.com/news/features/41826/

5.  http://normanfinkelstein.com/2017/10/22/sanity-and-lunacy-in-nassau-county-ny/

6.  http://normanfinkelstein.com/2017/10/22/michael-chetkof-and-allyson-burger-their-gestapo-tactics-will-not-stop-me-truth-and-justice-are-mightier-weapons-2/


Following from: http://normanfinkelstein.com/2017/10/06/michael-chetkof-and-allyson-burger-day-of-judgment-approaches/


 I. Dr Rudolph Baldeo appeared in Court on Wednesday, 04 October 2017.  He had been served with an Order of Contempt by the contemptible Michael Chetkof and Allyson Burger.  The judge, Hon. Stacy D. Bennett, was eminently fair and compassionate.  Indeed, she registered in open court a unique concern with Dr Baldeo’s plight.  If Judge Bennett continues to uphold the principles of Truth and Justice in the face of Chetkof and Burger’s pit bull tactics, a reasonable resolution might be within reach.
II. I must appear in Court on Tuesday, 10 October 2017, regarding the incident on 6 September 2017.  A member of the UN High Commission on Human Rights has unexpectedly intervened in my case.  He has expressed concern about my apparent “arbitrary arrest.”  I was asked to describe what happened. Here’s my account (a few points have been omitted to protect the innocent):
1. I was arrested on 6 September 2017.  
2. Two police detectives barged into my apartment at 11:30 p.m.  
3. [omitted]
4. [omitted]
5. The detectives demanded that I sit on a rickety coffee table in my foyer that comes up to my kneecap.  They wouldn’t let me sit on a chair.  
6. I was handcuffed as I left my apartment building in order to humiliate me in front of my neighbors.  
7. I was transported to a police precinct located fully one hour from where I live.  I was handcuffed the entire trip and was in agonizing pain.  (I am 64 years old.)
8. I was handcuffed to a pole for five hours in the police precinct while the detective filled out a single-paged form.
9.  I was then thrown into an overcrowded jail cell and had to sleep on a stone floor.  I asked for a blanket as I was freezing but the request was denied.
10.  I was brought before a judge at 11:00 a.m.
11. I was served with an Order of Protection forbidding me to have any contact for one year with the two opposing lawyers, Michael Chetkof and Allyson Burger.
12.  The police alleged that I was harassing Chetkof and Burger by constantly emailing them.  
13.  The allegation is a flat-out lie.  Every email I sent to Chetkof and Burger and their colleagues had appended at the head:

Note: I am writing each of you in your private capacity and not as members of a law firm.  If you want me to remove you from this ListServe, just email me and I will immediately oblige. (This formulation was recommended and approved by the ACLU to protect this writer from future claims of online harassment.)

14. If Chetkof and Burger didn’t want to receive my emails, they merely had to inform me, and I most certainly would have ceased writing them.
15.  They had me arrested in order to intimidate me into silence. 
16. This is not the first time Chetkof and Burger tried to intimidate me.  When I informed them that I was writing an article to expose their racist shakedown of Dr Rudolph Baldeo, Chetkof threatened to “open Pandora’s Box” and destroy Dr Baldeo “Personally and Professionally” unless I desisted.
17.  Because of the Order of Protection, I can no longer accompany Dr Baldeo to Court.  They want to isolate him in Court so they can terrorize him into submission.  
18. [omitted]
19.  I must appear in Court again on 10 October 2017.  It is possible that I will again be thrown into jail.  
20. I am not afraid.  My late parents survived five years in Hitler’s death camps.  I will survive a Long Island jail cell.  
21.  I will not be browbeaten into abandoning Dr Baldeo in his Moment of Truth. 

III.  Yesterday (05 October), I sent the letter below to Chetkof and Burger’s law partners:
William B Saltzman and Lee Rosenberg,

You are perhaps aware that yesterday ‘s court hearing was not a banner day for Michael Chetkof and Allyson Burger.  Hon. Stacy D. Bennett was eminently fair and compassionate.  Indeed, Judge Bennett signaled in open court a unique solicitude for Dr Baldeo’s plight.  
The tide has turned.
I have repeatedly warned you that you will never prevail against me.  You do not possess my intelligence, integrity, courage, stamina, or conviction.  But most important of all, I have arrayed in my arsenal the invincible weapons of Truth and Justice.  That is why 3,000 people worldwide have signed the petition calling for the disbarment of Chetkof and Burger; that is why the UN High Commission on Human Rights has intervened; that is why an internationally renowned journalist is writing an article on this case (see attachment, cc’d to me this morning).
I have repeatedly warned you to settle this case before Chetkof and Burger drag you over the precipice with them.  I of course want to resolve this matter so as to move beyond the sleazy, smarmy, sordid, squalid machinations of Long Island matrimonial lawyers.  But it is literally inconceivable that I will abandon Dr Baldeo in his Moment of Truth.  However long it takes, however much time it consumes, I will be at his side until and unless his dignity is restored.  Dr Baldeo currently resides in his parents’ attic and all his belongings are stored in the boiler room, while his ex-wife demands $250 per month for her “beauty parlor,” $500 per month for her “beauty aids,” and $4550 per month for food. That will not stand!  I was Dr Baldeo’s professor when he first came to the US penniless and labored as a shipping clerk.  I watched in awe as this guileless and brilliant student, struggling and sweating (like Jewish immigrants of yore), climbed one by one each rung on the ladder of success.  I was there at each of his graduations to celebrate his hard-won achievements. But—woe to that ghastly day!—I was also personally witness when all of Dr Baldeo’s life’s earnings were swiped from him in broad daylight by two thieving lawyers, who concocted the monstrous lie that he had committed “countless” acts of “unspeakable” violence against his wife over a quarter century. If this allegation contained even a jot of truth, why couldn’t Burger and Chetkof adduce a single document—a single police record, a single medical record, a single witness affidavit, a single counseling record—to corroborate it?  
It is my understanding that Dr Baldeo will be writing you.  He is ready to settle and get on with his life.  I emphatically do not agree with his terms.  Dr Baldeo is generous to an absurd fault, but that is his nature, naively forgiving and forgetting–it is also what makes him so endearing and admirable a human being.  
You should think hard about where things are now headed as you contemplate your response to Dr Baldeo’s olive branch.


Professor Norman G Finkelstein

P.S. You should also advise the District Attorney that the UN High Commission on Human Rights is monitoring my case.  The DA might decide it’s the better part of prudence to drop the charges now before I show up in court.  It is surely cause for curiosity, not to say incredulity, how it came to pass that a 64-year-old professor was dragged at midnight from his apartment in Coney Island, Brooklyn in handcuffs, transported all the way to Hempstead Long Island an hour away, and held overnight in an overcrowded freezing cell where he had to sleep on a stone floor, on account of an email correspondence that he had offered on request to cease.