Tuesday, November 12, 2013

700 US Election: Culture War fails Democrats

US Election: Culture War fails Democrats

Newsletter published on 7 November 2014

(1) US Election: Culture War fails Democrats
(2) The abandoned poor and Working Class turn to Radical Christian right

(1) US Election: Culture War fails Democrats


The Democrats are running on empty

Sean Collins
US Correspondent

The US midterms exposed the Obama administration's utter exhaustion.

7 November 2014

The Republican Party won a sweeping victory in Tuesday's midterm
elections in the US. Most notably, the Republicans wrested control of
the Senate from the Democrats, giving them majorities in both Houses of

In the colour scheme of American politics, the Republicans are red and
the Democrats are blue, and after the midterms the political map looks
like a sea of red. The Republicans extended their majority in the House
of Representatives, and now have their highest number of seats since
1929. At the level of state government, the Republicans have 31 of 50
governors and control 69 of 99 state legislatures.

For sure, the Republican Party did have the wind at its back going into
the midterms. Historically, voters have used the midterms to express
displeasure with the president's party. Turnout is highest among older
voters during midterm elections, and the Republicans do better with
older voters. And many of the states up for the Senate were ones that
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney won in 2012.

But few expected these favorable conditions to translate into such a
landslide. The typical midterm sees the opposition pick up three Senate
seats; this year the Republicans are likely to gain nine. The
Republicans expanded the map to win in traditionally blue states
(governors in Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland) and purple states
(senators in Colorado, Iowa and North Carolina). Clearly, these results
expressed something more than a traditional turn to the opposition party.

For a start, the latest polls represented a negative verdict on
President Obama and his administration. Republicans 'nationalised' the
election, and pounded a consistent message: a vote for us is a vote
against Obama. At the same time, Democratic candidates distanced
themselves from Obama, telling the White House to stay away (the
Democratic candidate for the Senate in Kentucky wouldn't even admit she
voted for Obama in 2012). The Republicans ran more advertisements
against Obama's signature health reform - Obamacare - than on any other
issue, while Democrats barely defended it. Must-reads from the past week

With an approval rating at a low 42 per cent, Obama's standing in the
eyes of the public has fallen mightily since his promise of 'hope and
change' at the 2008 presidential election. The political scientist David
Leege captured Obama's change in fortunes well: 'The immediate aftermath
of 2008 was that Americans had finally conquered their racial aversions.
The election of Obama was a victory both for renewed national hope and
long-awaited democracy. Obama was big, a star, a voice to be reckoned
with, a mind to be taken seriously. By 2014 Obama was small, a punching
bag, easily bullied, the one to whom small politicians could talk tough,
abusively, the one whose ideas were ignored, the one whom his fellow
partisans would avoid at all cost. How could this happen in six short

The midterms revealed Obama and the Democrats looking exhausted. Not
only did their ground campaign look unenergetic, and their whiz-bang
data-mining operation seem non-existent, their ideas also appeared to be
past their sell-by date.

The economy has improved, but voters are unimpressed: exit polls found
nearly 70 per cent have negative feelings about the economy.
Unemployment has fallen, but in large part because many workers are no
longer searching for jobs. GDP is growing, but slowly (two per cent a
year). Democrats lack a sense of urgency to address economic growth,
perhaps because they believe slow growth is more 'sustainable'. Their
main economic policies - an increase in the minimum wage, green energy
and infrastructure spending - are old and uninspiring.

Over the past year, the Obama administration's lack of forward momentum
has led to a series of mini-scandals and screw-ups that have raised
questions about its competence. The wheels started to fall off the bus
with the disastrous roll-out of Obamacare in autumn 2013. From then on,
it seemed there was a new flare-up every week: domestic-surveillance
revelations; scandal at the Department of Veterans Affairs;
unaccompanied children crossing the border with Mexico; intruders
entering the White House; panic over ebola. And from Syria and Ukraine
to ISIS and Iraq, the world appeared more out of control, with the White
House flailing in response.

While the midterms have brought the Democrats' exhaustion into greater
relief, there were already signs of it in Obama's re-election run in
2012. Having no ambitious and unifying program to present, the Obama
campaign sought to build a multicultural coalition of certain groups
(blacks, Latinos, single women), and appeal to them by promoting
socially liberal issues (what's known as the Culture Wars). In the
event, they were able to eke out a victory with 51 per cent of the vote.

Fast forward to the 2014 midterms, and once again the Democrats sought
to utilise the Culture Wars for electoral advantage, but this time it
didn't work. Democrat candidates once again charged the Republicans with
waging a 'war on women', but it didn't stick. In Texas, abortion-choice
campaigner and media darling Wendy Davis lost her bid for governor by a
big margin. In Colorado, Democrat Senator Mark Udall talked about
contraception and nothing else in the hope of putting his Republican
challenger on the defensive. This backfired: the Denver Post accused him
of running 'an obnoxious one-issue campaign' and he lost, too.

Democrats called for easing immigration restrictions, but Republicans
increased their share of the Hispanic vote. The party's supporters tried
to use the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, to motivate black turnout,
but it never caught on. Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer, an
environmentalist and former hedge-fund manager, spent $74million in
donations to the Democrats in an effort to get politicians who share his
views on climate change into office, but to little effect.

There were a number of factors that led to the Culture Wars losing their
magic. For one, Democrats like Udall overplayed their hand; many now see
through attempts to deploy Culture War issues for narrow political
purposes. Furthermore, in promoting right-on social causes, liberals
claim to be supporting disadvantaged groups, but they can simultaneously
appear to be looking down on those in 'middle America' who don't share
their values. When Bruce Braley, the Democratic candidate for the Senate
from Iowa, was caught disparaging farmers in a closed-door meeting with
lawyers, it was seen by many as revealing an elitist outlook among
liberals (similar to the reaction when Obama spoke dismissively of
people who 'cling to guns or religion' on the 2008 campaign trail).

But probably the most important reason why the Culture Wars approach
didn't work in this election is because Republican candidates largely
avoided getting sucked in - even if it meant conceding the issue at
hand. In Colorado, the Republican challenger Cory Gardner trumped Udall
by calling for legalising the sale of over-the-counter oral
contraceptives. He also downplayed his previous stances on abortion and
immigration. In Wisconsin, Republican governor Scott Walker came out in
favour of women's equal-pay legislation. The Republicans' image was also
helped by prominent women candidates, including Joni Ernst, the new
Senator from Iowa, and Mia Love, the party's first black female
representative, who was elected to Congress in Utah.

As one commentator noted: 'On social issues, Republicans are mumbling,
cringing, and ducking. They don't want the election to be about these
issues, even in red states.' This approach did not seem to turn off
conservatives, who still came to the polls to vote Republican.

The midterm election results are an indication of dissatisfaction with
Obama and the Democrats. But on the flip side, the vote does not signal
a ringing endorsement of the Republicans. Making the election a
referendum on Obama meant that the Republicans got something of a free
pass. Their inability to offer a coherent set of policies means that we
can't really talk about a Republican mandate for change. By all means,
it would be great if the Keystone XL oil pipeline was finally built, as
the Republicans promise to do, but that one proposal does not constitute
an economic-growth agenda.

Washington politics is widely referred to as dysfunctional, best
symbolised by the shutdown of the government for a period in 2013.
Approval ratings for congress are at an abysmally low 14 per cent (even
more unpopular than Obama). It is hard to see how the outcome of the
midterm elections will change this situation. If anything, there is a
risk that each party will continue to labour under certain delusions:
giddy Republicans may believe that they are suddenly popular, while the
Democrats may sit tight in the hope that Hillary will excite the
electorate in 2016. Both parties seem so consumed by the electoral
process, by who 'wins' or 'loses', that they forget that what really
matters is what is accomplished in office. It remains to be seen whether
the American political class can fully appreciate the depth of its
legitimacy crisis and do something about it.

Sean Collins is a writer based in New York. Visit his blog, The American

(2) The abandoned poor and Working Class turn to Radical Christian right

    Gary G. Kohls<gkohls@cpinternet.com> 8 November 2014 03:33

The Radical Christian right and the War on Government

By Chris Hedges

Posted on Oct 6, 2013


There is a desire felt by tens of millions of Americans, lumped into a
diffuse and fractious movement known as the Christian right, to destroy
the intellectual and scientific rigor of the Enlightenment, radically
diminish the role of government to create a theocratic state based on
“biblical law,” and force a recalcitrant world to bend to the will of an
imperial and “Christian” America. Its public face is on display in the
House of Representatives. This ideology, which is the driving force
behind the shutdown of the government, calls for the eradication of
social “deviants,” beginning with gay men and lesbians, whose sexual
orientation, those in the movement say, is a curse and an illness,
contaminating the American family and the country.

Once these “deviants” are removed, other “deviants,” including Muslims,
liberals, feminists, intellectuals, left-wing activists, undocumented
workers, poor African-Americans and those dismissed as “nominal
Christians”—meaning Christians who do not embrace this peculiar
interpretation of the Bible—will also be ruthlessly repressed. The
“deviant” government bureaucrats, the “deviant” media, the “deviant”
schools and the “deviant” churches, all agents of Satan, will be crushed
or radically reformed. The rights of these “deviants” will be annulled.
“Christian values” and “family values” will, in the new state, be
propagated by all institutions. Education and social welfare will be
handed over to the church. Facts and self-criticism will be replaced
with relentless indoctrination.

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz—whose father is Rafael Cruz, a rabid right-wing
Christian preacher and the director of the Purifying Fire International
ministry—and legions of the senator’s wealthy supporters, some of whom
orchestrated the shutdown, are rooted in a radical Christian ideology
known as Dominionism or Christian Reconstructionism. This ideology calls
on anointed “Christian” leaders to take over the state and make the
goals and laws of the nation “biblical.” It seeks to reduce government
to organizing little more than defense, internal security and the
protection of property rights.

It fuses with the Christian religion the iconography and language of
American imperialism and nationalism, along with the cruelest aspects of
corporate capitalism. The intellectual and moral hollowness of the
ideology, its flagrant distortion and misuse of the Bible, the
contradictions that abound within it—its leaders champion small
government and a large military, as if the military is not part of
government—and its laughable pseudoscience are impervious to reason and
fact. And that is why the movement is dangerous.

The cult of masculinity, as in all fascist movements, pervades the
ideology of the Christian right. The movement uses religion to sanctify
military and heroic “virtues,” glorify blind obedience and order over
reason and conscience, and pander to the euphoria of collective
emotions. Feminism and homosexuality, believers are told, have rendered
the American male physically and spiritually impotent. Jesus, for the
Christian right, is a man of action, casting out demons, battling the
Antichrist, attacking hypocrites and ultimately slaying nonbelievers.

This cult of masculinity, with its glorification of violence, is
appealing to the powerless. It stokes the anger of many Americans,
mostly white and economically disadvantaged, and encourages them to lash
back at those who, they are told, seek to destroy them. The paranoia
about the outside world is fostered by bizarre conspiracy theories, many
of which are prominent in the rhetoric of those leading the government
shutdown. Believers, especially now, are called to a perpetual state of
war with the “secular humanist” state. The march, they believe, is
irreversible. Global war, even nuclear war, is the joyful harbinger of
the Second Coming. And leading the avenging armies is an angry, violent
Messiah who dooms billions of apostates to death.

Dominionists believe they are engaged in an epic battle against the
forces of Satan. They live in a binary world of black and white. They
feel they are victims, surrounded by sinister groups bent on their
destruction. They have anointed themselves as agents of God who alone
know God’s will. They sanctify their rage. This rage lies at the center
of the ideology. It leaves them sputtering inanities about Barack Obama,
his corporate-sponsored health care reform bill, his alleged mandated
suicide counseling or “death panels” for seniors under the bill, his
supposed secret alliance with radical Muslims, and “creeping socialism.”
They see the government bureaucracy as being controlled by “secular
humanists” who want to destroy the family and make war against the
purity of their belief system. They seek total cultural and political

All ideological, theological and political debates with the radical
Christian right are useless. It cares nothing for rational thought and
discussion. Its adherents are using the space within the open society to
destroy the open society itself. Our naive attempts to placate a
movement bent on our destruction, to prove to it that we too have
“values,” only strengthen its supposed legitimacy and increase our own

Dominionists have to operate, for now, in what they see as the
contaminated environment of the secular, liberal state. They work with
the rest of us only because they must. Given enough power—and they are
working hard to get it—any such cooperation will vanish. They are no
different from the vanguard described by Lenin or the Islamic terrorists
who shaved off their beards, adopted Western dress and watched
pay-for-view pornography in their hotel rooms the night before hijacking
a plane for a suicide attack. The elect alone, like the Grand
Inquisitor, are sanctioned to know the truth. And in the pursuit of
their truth they have no moral constraints.

I spent two years inside the Christian right in writing my book
“American Fascists: The Christian right and the War on America.” I
attended services at megachurches across the country, went to numerous
lectures and talks, sat in on creationist seminars, attended classes on
religious proselytizing and conversion, spent weekends at
“right-to-life” retreats and interviewed dozens of followers and leaders
of the movement. Though I was sympathetic to the financial dislocation,
the struggles with addictions, the pain of domestic and sexual violence,
and the deep despair that drew people to the movement, I was also
acutely aware of the dangerous ideology these people embraced. Fascist
movements begin as champions of civic improvement, communal ideals,
moral purity, strength, national greatness and family values. These
movements attract, as has the radical Christian right, those who are
disillusioned by the collapse of liberal democracy. And our liberal
democracy has collapsed.

We have abandoned our poor and working class. We have created a
government monster that sucks the marrow out of our bones to enrich and
empower the oligarchic and corporate elite. The protection of criminals,
whether in war or on Wall Street, is part of our mirage of law and
order. We have betrayed the vast and growing underclass. Most believers
within the Christian right are struggling to survive in a hostile world.
We have failed them. Their very real despair is being manipulated and
used by Christian fascists such as the Texas senator. Give to the
working poor a living wage, benefits and job security and the reach of
this movement will diminish. Refuse to ameliorate the suffering of the
poor and working class and you ensure the ascendancy of a Christian fascism.

The Christian right needs only a spark to set it ablaze. Another
catastrophic act of domestic terrorism, hyperinflation, a series of
devastating droughts, floods, hurricanes or massive wildfires or another
financial meltdown will be the trigger. Then what is left of our anemic
open society will disintegrate. The rise of Christian fascism is aided
by our complacency. The longer we fail to openly denounce and defy
bankrupt liberalism, the longer we permit corporate power to plunder the
nation and destroy the ecosystem, the longer we stand slack-jawed before
the open gates of the city waiting meekly for the barbarians, the more
we ensure their arrival.

699 Four Corners TV documentary: Israelis torturing non-Jewish children

Four Corners TV documentary: Israelis torturing non-Jewish children

Newsletter published on 7 November 2014

(1) Four Corners TV documentary: Israelis torturing non-Jewish children
(2) Australian documentary reveals Israeli torture of Palestinian youth
(3) Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty
(4) USS Liberty: Government Betrayal and Cover-up - Paul Craig Roberts

(1) Four Corners TV documentary: Israelis torturing non-Jewish children

From: Bruce Brown <convertdocs@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 19:52:04 -0800
Subject: MUST SEE Four Corners TV documentary

Peter - I urge you to share this with your readers.  It is the most
powerful documentary about Israel that I can recall ever seeing.  No
one except a Zionist can walk away unaffected.

Here in the U.S., airing this documentary would probably cost a
station its license to broadcast.  You're lucky having Four Corners in
Australia.  They did a bang-up job on Scientology too.  Cheers, Bruce.

Israelis torturing non-Jewish children. 2014 Australian documentary
film. Viewer discretion.


(2) Australian documentary reveals Israeli torture of Palestinian youth


Australian documentary reveals Israeli torture of Palestinian youth

By Will Morrow
13 February 2014

A documentary broadcast on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s
“Four Corners” television program on Monday night provided a devastating
portrait of the Israeli government’s systematic policy of threats,
arbitrary arrest and torture of Palestinian youth and children.

These measures are aimed at holding the Palestinian population,
particularly the youth, in a permanent state of terror and suppressing
any opposition to the Israeli occupation. An entire generation of youth
is being traumatised as the Israeli security forces sow a climate of
fear, as well as suspicion and division, through the forced recruitment
of young informers.

The well-researched exposé—which also involved the Australian
newspaper—was based on interviews with Palestinian youth themselves, as
well as an Israeli lawyer, a former Israeli soldier and an Australian
lawyer who has spent six years in the country.

Qusai Zamara, one of the boys interviewed, was 14 years old when he was
abducted from his bed during a late-night military raid on his family
home in the West Bank. He was taken to an interrogation facility and
tortured into confessing to throwing stones at Israeli citizens and
security forces. This accusation is commonly used by the Israeli
military to justify the repression, arbitrary arrests and killings meted
out against the Palestinian people.

“There was a big machine with electrical wires on it connected to the
electricity,” Zamara said. “He would throw me on the ground and hit
me... He also had a whip with a hose, which he hit me with... He said,
‘Either confess or we’ll beat you up and bring your parents, beat them
up and break their bones’.” After signing a confession written in
Hebrew, which he did not understand, Zamara later found out that many
additional crimes had been added.

Fifteen-year-old Fahti Mahfouz explained what happened when he refused
to confess. He was kept in prison for 82 days and tortured. Mahfouz said
that the lead interrogator “sent me to a room that had a cross in it and
hung me on it. I was standing on the tips of my toes and all my weight
was on the handcuffs and my toes ... and he kept hitting me.” When he
was taken down five hours later, “white foam started coming out of my
mouth. Two men came and took me to first aid. Then my chest was cramped.
I couldn’t breathe. He took me in and asked me, ‘Where’s the pain?’ Then
he’d press on it and hit it.”

Children are also detained. Wadi’a Mawadeh was just five years old when
six soldiers arrested him after an Israeli man accused him of throwing a
stone. He was held for two hours before being released.

Among the brutal acts committed in interrogation, Australian lawyer
Gerard Horton reported the case of a large dog feeding on food placed on
a child’s bare body. Another interrogator “specialised” in making
detailed threats of rape against children. Horton, from the organisation
Military Court Watch, interviewed hundreds of Palestinian youth about
their experiences.

The interviews make clear that the abuse is not the callous actions of a
few rogue soldiers, but a strategy organised by the Israeli government
and security forces. It is part of the decades-long suppression of the
Palestinian population that has included targeted assassinations of
political opponents and illegal and disproportionate wars of aggression,
most recently the 2008–2009 slaughter in Gaza.

A UNICEF report from March 2013 estimated that for each year over the
past decade, approximately 700 youth aged 12–17 have been arrested,
interrogated and detained—an average of two per day. After being forced
into confessions, they are hauled before military courts, and sentenced
in “hearings” as short as 60 seconds. “Four Corners” revealed that the
courts have a conviction rate of 99.74 percent—that is, they simply
rubberstamp the charges.

Last June, a UN report documented the use of torture, solitary
confinement and death threats in Israeli prisons. It was also revealed
late last year that the Israeli government kept children overnight in
outdoor cages during snowstorms, a practise that the government claims
to have since stopped.

One Palestinian man interviewed on the documentary pointed to another
purpose of the government program: to expel sections of the population
from the occupied territories captured by Israel in the 1967 war. The
man was told by an Israeli soldier that in “five years ... you’ll be out
of the houses. Your houses have been sold. You have no houses.”

The documentary revealed a practice known as “mapping,” in which young
people are woken from their beds at night during heavily-armed military
raids, photographed, checked for ID, and forced to detail where they
sleep. During interrogations, they are coerced into becoming regular
informants for the Israeli state about family members, friends and

Islam Darayyoub was 14 when he and his brothers were awoken at 2 a.m.
and “mapped.” Several days later, security forces arrested Islam and
demanded that he inform on his uncle, Bassem Tamimi, reportedly the
leader of a local protest movement.

The broadcast pointed to significant opposition among Israelis to the
government’s program. It included footage of Guy Pavia, an Israeli
civilian who carries a video camera to escort school children walking
past Israeli settlements in the hope of preventing attacks from Israeli
thugs. The program revealed that Israeli soldiers are ordered to not
intervene if such attacks take place.

Pavia stated: “I can’t describe this in words because I feel myself as a
holocaust survivor. My grandfather was a holocaust survivor... All his
family died in the Holocaust. And I don’t get it. How one who is
suffering from all that stuff, we became people who made other people
suffer. It breaks me.”

The program also interviewed Gaby Lasky, an Israeli lawyer who has
defended Palestinians in court and opposed the two-tier justice system
between Israeli citizens and Palestinians, and Yehuda Shaul, the founder
of Breaking the Silence. This is an organisation of 950 current and
former Israeli soldiers who have written testimonies exposing their
previous human rights abuses. Shaul recounted: “I have never broken into
houses in the middle of the night here in Jerusalem and torn apart
apartments. But in Hebron where I served for 14 months 24-7, that’s what
we’ve done, in order to make our presence felt.”

The Israeli government simply rejected the revelations and blamed the
Palestinian people themselves. Interviewed in the documentary, foreign
ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor declared: “A policy to create fear?
There is no such thing. The only policy is to maintain law and order,
that’s all.”

The Australian government responded by stressing its full support for
the Israeli regime. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop claimed to be “deeply
concerned by allegations of the mistreatment of Palestinian children,”
but in the same breath said the “Australian government welcomes Israel’s
ongoing efforts to address these issues.” Both the ruling
Liberal-National Coalition and opposition Labor Party in Australia have
long been apologists for the Israeli state and all its crimes.

(3) Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty

Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 16:30:15 +0000 (UTC)
From: leo schmit <leoschmit@yahoo.com>
Cc: Willem Wolters <willemwolters@me.com>
Subject: Re: Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty: the Day Israel
  attacked America


There seem to be two explanations for the attack by Irgun forces on the
USS Liberty in 1967.

- The USS Liberty intelligence task would reveal the intention of Irgun
to take the Golan Heights and the West Bank later on. This is suggested
in the Al Jazeera video and it seems to me quite plausible (hiding their
intentions - with success, because the terrified Liberty crew destroyed
all their evidence of this intention), except for the fact that LBJ and
the US congress probably would not have objected against taking Golan,
or the West Bank or whatever the zionist expansion would require, even
when they would have picked up those signals. Should the Liberty have
caught the signals from Irgun re.: their intention to take more ground,
the LBJ givernment would have done nothing about it, as they were
already in the zionist pocket and continue to be so to this day, more
than 50 years later. So why burn the ship and murder its crew? Are we
looking at a case of over-zealous zionists. No We are looking at a
murderous gang that has started its racket way back in the 1920's and
continues its terror until july 2014, with another onslaught on Gaza.

- the other explanation for the attack by Irgun on the Liberty would be
to attempt a false flag type of thing to draw the US into a war with
Egypt. Not plausible at all. Irgun needs US guns and money, but not open
involvement. It's a zionist enterprise, after all with full support from
US congress and European holocaust tear-jerkers..

One more critical comment:

- the suggested 'gifts' in the presentation elude me. After destroying
'Liberty' and sweeping this under the carpet the US jews were more
lenient on Vietnam? This supposes an incredible level of Jew control in
the US, way over and beyond the Jew control over Congress and every
whatsoever politician in the US.

I pity the US folks and the guilty - feeling  European Holocaust  tear
jerkers to be fooled by Irgun.

People in Latin America, Chile, Argentina, who had nothing to do with
this holocaust guilt syndrome and who have suffered US terror in their
cities and villages, well they see clearly the threat that Irgun and the
US pose to world peace, which is further away than ever.



(4) USS Liberty: Government Betrayal and Cover-up - Paul Craig Roberts


USS Liberty: Government Betrayal and Cover-up Finally Exposed

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Global Research, June 08, 2014

This article was published by Global Research June 8, 2011. Today marks
the 47th anniversary of this attack.

Author’s Note:

This article was written by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts in 2008.  It was
published in July 2008, and is based entirely on documented sources and
on interviews with the survivors.  Today marks 44 years since this
heinous war crime was not only committed but has been covered up — by
all succeeding administrations and mainstream media.  It is a “must
read” for those concerned about an attack on America; the needless
slaughter of American citizens. ==

June 8, 1967 — the fourth day of the Six Day War between Israel and
Egypt, Syria and Jordan — was a beautiful day in the Mediterranean. The
USS Liberty was in international waters off the coast of Egypt. Israeli
aircraft had flown over the USS Liberty in the morning and had reported
that the ship was American. The crew, in close proximity to the war
zone, was reassured by the presence of Israeli aircraft. But at 2:00
p.m. sailors sunbathing on the deck saw fighter jets coming at them in
attack formation. Red flashes from the wings of the fighters were
followed by explosions, blood and death. A beautiful afternoon suddenly
became a nightmare. Who was attacking the USS Liberty and why? The
attack on the Liberty was an attack on America.

The Liberty was an intelligence ship. Its purpose was to monitor Soviet
and Arab communications in order to warn both Israel and Washington
should the Soviets enter the war on behalf of its Arab allies. The
Liberty was armed only with four machine guns to repel boarders. Its
request for a destroyer escort had been denied.

The assault on the Liberty is well documented. With no warning, the
Liberty was attacked by successive waves of unmarked jets using cannon,
rockets and napalm. The attacking jets jammed all of the US
communications frequencies, an indication they knew the Liberty was an
American ship.

The air attack failed to sink the Liberty. About 30 minutes into the
attack three torpedo boats appeared flying the Star of David. The
Israeli boats were not on a rescue mission. They attacked the Liberty
with cannon, machine guns and torpedoes. One torpedo struck the Liberty
mid-ship, instantly killing 25 Americans while flooding the lower decks.
The Israeli torpedo boats destroyed the life rafts the Liberty launched
when the crew prepared to abandon ship, sending the message there’d be
no survivors.

At approximately 3:15 two French-built Israeli helicopters carrying
armed Israeli troops appeared over the Liberty. Phil Tourney could see
their faces only 50/60 feet away. He gave them the finger. Surviving
crew members are convinced the Israelis were sent to board and kill all

The Israeli jets destroyed the Liberty’s communication antennas. While
under attack from the jets, crew members strung lines that permitted the
ship to send a call for help. The USS Saratoga and the USS America
launched fighters to drive off the attacking aircraft, but the rescue
mission was aborted by direct orders from Washington.

When the Liberty notified the Sixth Fleet it was again under attack,
this time from surface ships, the Fleet commander ordered the carriers
America and Saratoga to launch fighters to destroy or drive off the
attackers. The order was unencrypted and picked up by Israel, which
immediately called off its attack. The torpedo boats and the hovering
helicopters sped away. Israel quickly notified Washington that it had
mistakenly attacked an American ship, and the US fighters were recalled
a second time.

The USS Liberty suffered 70% casualties, with 34 killed and 174 wounded.
Although the expensive state of the art ship was kept afloat by the
heroic crew, it later proved unsalvageable and was sold as scrap.

Why didn’t help come?

No explanation has ever been given by the US government for Defense
Secretary Robert McNamara and President Lyndon B. Johnson’s orders for
the Sixth Fleet to abort the rescue mission. Lt. Commander David Lewis
of the Liberty told colleagues that Admiral L. R. Geis, commander of the
Sixth Fleet carrier force, told him that when he challenged McNamara’s
order to recall the rescue mission, LBJ came on the line and said he
didn’t care if the ship sank, he wasn’t going to embarrass an ally. The
communications officer handling the transmission has given the same account.

A BBC documentary on the Israeli raid reports confusion about the
attacker’s identity almost resulted in a US assault on Egypt. Richard
Parker, US political counsel in Cairo, confirms in the BBC documentary
he received official communication an American retaliatory attack on
Egypt was on its way.

The US government’s official position on the USS Liberty corresponds
with Israel’s: The attack was unintentional and a result of Israeli
blunders. This is the official position despite the fact that CIA
Director Richard Helms, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Assistant
Secretary of State Lucius Battle, and a long list of US Navy officers,
government officials and Liberty survivors are on record saying the
Israeli attack was intentional.

According to Helms, Battle and the minutes of a White House meeting,
President Johnson believed the attack was intentional. Helms says LBJ
was furious and complained when The New York Times buried the story on
page 29, but that Johnson decided he had to publicly accept Israel’s
explanation. “The political pressure was too much,” Helms said.

US communications personnel, intelligence analysts and ambassadors
report having read US intercepts of Israeli orders to attack the
Liberty. In one intercept an Israeli pilot reports that the Liberty is
an American ship and asks for a repeat and clarification of his orders
to attack an American ship. One Israeli who identified himself as one of
the pilots later came to America and met with US Representative Pete
McCloskey and Liberty survivors. The pilot said he had refused to
participate in the attack when he saw it was an American ship. He was
arrested upon returning to base.

The Liberty flew the US flag. The ship’s markings, GTR-5, measured
several feet in height on both sides of the bow. On the stern the ship
was clearly marked USS LIBERTY. Mistaking the Liberty for an Egyptian
ship, as Israel claims to have done, was impossible.

Tattered flags show ferocity of the attacks

The Israelis claim the Liberty flew no flag, but two US flags full of
holes from the attack exist. When the first flag was shot down, crewmen
replaced it with a flag 7-feet by 13-feet. This flag, with its battle
scars, is on display at NSA headquarters at Ft. Mead, Maryland.

Admiral John S. McCain Jr., the father of the current US senator,
ordered Admiral Isaac C. Kidd and Captain Ward Boston to hold a court of
inquiry and to complete the investigation in only one week. In a signed
affidavit Captain Boston said President Johnson ordered a cover-up and
that he and Admiral Kidd were prevented from doing a real investigation.
Liberty survivors were ordered never to speak to anyone about the event.
Their silence was finally broken when Lt. Commander Jim Ennes published
his book, Assault on the Liberty .

It is now established fact that the attack on the Liberty was
intentional and was covered up by President Johnson and every
administration since. There has never been a congressional
investigation, nor has the testimony of the majority of survivors ever
been officially taken. Moreover, testimony that conflicted with the
cover-up was deleted from the official record.

Disgusted by the US government’s official stance discounting the
survivors’ reports, Admiral Tom Moorer, retired Chief of Naval
Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, organized the
Moorer Commission to make public the known facts about the attack and
cover-up. The Commission consisted of Admiral Moorer, former Judge
Advocate General of the US Navy Admiral Merlin Staring, Marine Corps
General Raymond G. Davis and former US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia James

The Commission’s Report concluded:

“That there is compelling evidence that Israel’s attack was a deliberate
attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew.

“That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately
prevented the US Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty by
recalling Sixth Fleet military rescue support while the ship was under

“That surviving crew members were threatened with “court-martial,
imprisonment or worse’ if they exposed the truth; and [the survivors]
were abandoned by their own government.

“That there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American
naval history.

“That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected
officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any
foreign nation.”

Why did Israel attack the Liberty? Was something super secret going on
that is so damaging it must be protected at all cost?

Some experts believe Tel Aviv decided to sink the Liberty because the
ship’s surveillance capability would discover Israel’s impending
invasion and capture of Syria’s Golan Heights, an action opposed by
Washington. Others believe Israel was concerned the Liberty would
discover Israel’s massacre of hundreds of Egyptian POWs, a war crime
contemporaneous with the attack on the US ship. Still others believe
that Israel intended to blame the attack on Egypt in order to bring
America into the war. It is known the US was providing Israel with
reconnaissance and that there were joint US-Israeli covert operations
against the Arabs that Washington was desperate to keep secret.

Survivors with whom I spoke said the attack was the easy part of the
experience. The hard part has been living with 40 years of official
cover-up and betrayal by the US government. One survivor said that he
was asked to leave his Baptist church when he spoke about the Liberty,
because the minister and fellow church-goers felt more loyalty to Israel
than to a member of the congregation who had served his country. His
church’s position was that if our government believed Israel, the
survivors should also.

Survivor Phil Tourney said that “being forced to live with a cover-up is
like being raped and no one will believe you.”

Survivor Gary Brummett said he “feels like someone who has been locked
up for 40 years on a wrongful conviction.” Until the US government
acknowledges the truth of the attack, Brummett says the survivors are
forced to live with the anger and dismay of being betrayed by the
country they served.

Survivor Bryce Lockwood has been angry for 40 years. The torpedo that
killed his shipmates, wrecked his ship and damaged his health was made
in the USA.

Survivor Ernie Gallo told me he “has been haunted for four decades” by
the knowledge that his commander-in-chief recalled the US fighters that
could have prevented most of the Liberty’s casualties.

Every American should be troubled by the fact that the President of the
United States and the Secretary of Defense prevented the US Sixth Fleet
from protecting a US Navy ship and its 294-man crew from foreign attack.
They should also be troubled that the President ordered the Navy to
determine the attack was unintentional.

For more information, visit the USS Liberty site.

Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an
Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury.  His latest book, HOW THE
ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Pres


NOVEMBER 1, 2014 6:04AM

The Day Israel Attacked America

By Richard Belfield

I was first told about the attack on the USS Liberty in 1980 over dinner
with a former analyst from the National Security Agency (NSA) in
Washington DC.

Back in 1980, I promised my friend that if I ever got the chance I would
make a film about it. Over the years, I pitched the idea to numerous
broadcasters and always got the same response: eyes rolled upwards,
usually followed by the statement, "Are you completely mad?"

Fast forward to 2009 and I was a guest speaker at the NSA's biennial
conference on historical cryptography, talking about an unsolved code on
an 18th century monument in an English stately home.

While there, I went to two other sessions - both about attacks on
American signal intelligence naval vessels.

The first was the capture of the US spy ship, the Pueblo (boarded by
North Korean forces in 1968 - and never returned). The survivors of that
incident were treated like heroes and feted on stage.

The next day there was a session about the USS Liberty. James Scott, who
has written easily the best book on the Liberty attack, was on stage and
limited to his allotted 20 minutes. Ranged against him were three
Israeli apologists, all of whom were allowed to overrun their time.
Survivors from the Liberty affair were allowed to sit in the audience,
but they were denied any say in proceedings.

As an Englishman, I was brought up with a strong sense of fair play and
I thought this was a disgrace. It was gruesome to watch. First, the crew
had been attacked in broad daylight by a close ally, then they were
betrayed by their government and now they were being humiliated by the
same agency many had worked for back in 1967. ...

... (in early 2014) we began filming interviews.

The (USS Liberty) veterans were extraordinary. One after another, they
were generous with their time, uniformly eloquent and passionate and
above all, honest in their recollections.

They all felt betrayed by the American government but were keen to
exonerate ordinary Jewish people both in Israel and without, for any
responsibility for the incident. Their beef was simply with the senior
Israeli officers in the control room and their superiors higher up the
command chain who had ordered the attack.  ...

...In Texas we interviewed Bobby Ray Inman, an intelligence officer with
a glittering track record at the CIA, Naval Intelligence and as a former
director of the NSA. My contacts in the UK intelligence world had always
told me "he is one of the good guys" and I quickly discovered why. He
was frank and clear. The top Israeli commanders, he explained, had known
exactly what they were doing when they attacked the Liberty and when it
came to holding them to account, the US government rolled over for them.

...an interview with one of the other survivors, Jim Kavanagh came
suddenly to mind. "I went through hell," he had said about his
shipmates. "But they left this earth."

Finally, we filmed on a sister ship to the Liberty, now moored in San
Francisco. The crew hauled an outsized US flag up a mast for us. The
flag - known as the "holiday colours" - was identical to that which was
flown from the Liberty on June 8, 1967. It was huge, clearly visible for
miles, and I knew immediately that no one could ever have been in any
doubt about the nationality of the ship beneath it.



ON JUNE 8, 1967, while patrolling in international waters in the Eastern
Mediterranean Sea, USS Liberty (AGTR-5) was savagely attacked without
warning or justification by air and naval forces of the state of Israel.
  Of a crew of 294 officers and men (including three civilians), the
ship suffered thirty four (34) killed in action and one hundred seventy
three (173) wounded in action.  The ship itself, a Forty Million
($40,000,000) Dollar state of the art signals intelligence (SIGINT)
platform, was so badly damaged that it never sailed on an operational
mission again and was sold in 1970 for $101,666.66 as scrap. At 1400
hours, while approximately about 17 nautical miles off the northern
Sinai coast ...

USS Liberty Veterans Association

698 Singapore Court ruling a major setback for Gay Rights - HRW

Singapore Court ruling a major setback for Gay Rights - HRW

Newsletter published on 3 November 2014

(1) Singapore Court Ruling a Major Setback for Gay Rights - HRW
(2) Gay rights in Singapore - The Economist
(3) Gays should abandon "same-sex marriage" campaign - Derek Byrne
(4) Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pushes Gay Marriage -
Brother Nathanael
(5) Jewish leaders push Gay Marriage - Brother Nathanael

(1) Singapore Court Ruling a Major Setback for Gay Rights - HRW


Singapore: Court Ruling a Major Setback for Gay Rights

Repeal Retrograde Law Banning Consensual Sex Relations Between Adult Men

OCTOBER 29, 2014

(c) 2014 Reuters

(Berlin) – A Singapore Supreme Court ruling on October 29, 2014 to
uphold the country’s ban on same-sex relations between consenting adult
men is a major setback for equal rights in Singapore, Human Rights Watch
said today. The court decision sends a message that gay men may lawfully
be subject to discrimination.

The Supreme Court held that section 377A of Singapore’ penal code, which
criminalizes sexual intimacy between men, does not violate articles 9
and 12 of the country’s constitution. These articles guarantee the right
to life and personal liberty, and provide that all people are entitled
to equal protection before the law.

“The Supreme Court’s decision is a terrible setback for homosexual
people in Singapore who want to live their lives like everyone else,
without government interference,” said Boris Dittrich, advocacy director
of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights program at
Human Rights Watch. “The ruling tramples upon basic rights to privacy,
equality, and non-discrimination.”

In July, the Supreme Court heard a joint appeal by three Singaporean
citizens contesting section 377A . Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee had been
involved in a romantic relationship for 16 years.  They were joined in
their appeal by Tan Eng Hong, who had been arrested in 2010 for
allegedly engaging in a sexual encounter with another man. After both
cases were dismissed by the Singapore High Court in April 2013, the
Supreme Court decided to hear the case in 2014.

Section 377A of the Penal Code states: “Any male who, in public or
private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to
procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency
with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to 2 years.”

“Singapore likes to advertise itself as a modern Asian country and
business destination,” Dittrich said. “But this discriminatory anti-LGBT
law is wholly out of step with international rights standards that
guarantee protections, including for sexual orientation and gender

Penal code section 377A, introduced in 1938, is a relic of British
colonial rule. In 2007, the Singaporean government conducted a review of
the penal code and decriminalized consensual acts of sodomy between
heterosexual adults, while maintaining the provisions regulating “gross
indecency” between men. However, the government rejected arguments to
eliminate the discriminatory law.

Singapore’s law against homosexual conduct is contrary to the rights to
non-discrimination, privacy, and freedom of expression recognized by the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose provisions are considered
reflective of customary international law. Singapore has a poor record,
especially among members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN), of ratifying international human rights instruments.

In 1994, the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled in the case of
Toonen v. Australia that laws criminalizing consensual homosexual
conduct between adults violate the rights to non-discrimination and
privacy. Consensual same-sex conduct between adults is currently
criminalized in at least 76 countries.

Singapore should join countries such as Australia and New Zealand that
have already abolished the British colonial-era sodomy laws that they
also inherited, and take the lead on ending such discrimination, Human
Rights Watch said.

“Singapore should recognize that its arbitrary restrictions on human
sexuality affect not only Singaporeans, but everyone wanting to visit,
work or study in Singapore,” Dittrich said. “Perpetuating discrimination
based on sexual orientation should worry foreign companies and
educational institutions—and make them ask hard questions about whether
they can operate freely in a Singapore with such retrograde laws on the

(2) Gay rights in Singapore - The Economist


Gay rights in Singapore

On permanent parole Oct 30th 2014, 3:41 BY J.F. | SINGAPORE

A FOUR-YEAR battle ended yesterday, when Singapore's highest court
upheld the constitutionality of Section 377(a) of the country's penal
code, which renders any man convicted of committing "or abet[ting] the
commission of...any act of gross indecency" with another man liable to
two years in prison. Tan Eng Hong first challenged the law in September
2010, after he was charged under 377(a) for having oral sex with another
man in a public-toilet stall. Two years later a second challenge was
raised by Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee, a gay couple who have been together
for 17 years. They argued that the law contravened two articles in
Singapore's constitution: Article 9, which guarantees that "no person
shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance
with the law", and Article 12, the first section of which states, "All
persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of
the law."

The result was not entirely surprising. Singapore's government tends to
do well before Singaporean courts: it has, for instance, never lost a
defamation suit. The court itself, both in oral arguments last summer
and in this ruling, repeatedly expresses unwillingness to consider
"extra-legal" and "emotional" arguments, which have their place in the
legislative rather than the judicial process. The court's role, the
ruling said, was to be "independent, neutral and objective", though in
the early, throat-clearing section of this ruling, the court noted that
it grants the government a "presumption of constitutionality", because
"our legislature is presumed not to enact legislation which is
inconsistent with the Singapore Constitution." In other words, the court
will neutrally and objectively weigh the arguments presented by each
side, though one side (the government's) enters with the wind at its back.

Attorneys for Messrs Lim and Chee argued that inherent to Article 9's
guarantees of life and liberty are "a limited right to privacy and
personal autonomy allowing a person to express affection and love toward
another human being." The court swiftly shot down that argument: in
Singaporean jurisprudence, Article 9 only guards against unlawful
detention. Mr Tan's attorney argued that 377(a) criminalises a group of
people for an innate attribute; the court concluced here that "there is,
at present, no definitive conclusion" on the "supposed immutability" of
homosexuality (Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore's prime minister, takes a
different view). M. Ravi, a human-rights lawyer representing the
challengers, had argued that Section 377(a) arbitrarily distinguished
between gay men and women, leaving the former open to incarceration and
the latter untouched, but his argument also held no weight for the
court. It cited an earlier ruling that validated that distinction
because female homosexual acts "were either less prevalent or perceived
to be less repugnant than male homosexual conduct". As for appeals to
Article 12(1), the court pointed to the article immediately following,
which states, "Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution,
there shall be no discrimination against citizens of Singapore on the
ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth," but does not
mention sex, gender or sexual orientation.

It reviewed historical documents on Section 377(a)'s adoption, which
precedes Singapore's independence, and held that the legislature has the
right to pass laws that express and enforce popular morality. As for
fears that this permits a tyranny of the majority, the court warns
against a "tyranny of the minority", and says that in this case the
appellants have failed to provide a "legal basis for claiming that their
rights should trump those of the majority." As for the rather sensible
argument that what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home
neither harms anybody nor impinges on anyone else's rights to disapprove
of what they do (only to have that disapproval codified into law), the
court held that it was a question for the legislature.

The question now, of course, is whether Singapore's legislature will
take up the debate. The last time it did so was 2007, when laws
criminalising heterosexual anal and oral sex were removed. On a daily
level, Singapore is hardly hostile to gay people: Pink Dot, its
gay-pride event (pictured), drew a record crowd of 26,000 this year.
Singapore told a United Nations anti-discrimination committee that
"homosexuals are free to lead their lives and pursue their social
activities. Gay groups have held public discussions and published
websites, and there are films and plays on gay themes and gay bars and
clubs in Singapore."

But if every sexually active gay man who attends one of those plays or
bars or clubs has the threat of imprisonment hanging over his head,
simply for who he chooses to love in the privacy of his own home, that
tolerance is conditional. Between 2007 and 2013, nine people were
convicted under 377(a), according to a spokesman for Singapore's State

And leaving aside arguments over whether the government has any place in
the bedroom (this newspaper has long believed it does not), Singapore's
laws make it an outlier, particularly in the developed world. Gay sex is
now legal in 113 countries; gay marriage or civil unions in dozens more.
Singapore is rightfully proud of its ability to attract talent from all
over the world. Yet how long will that ability last? Section 377(a)
turns men who are legally married in countries around the world into
unindicted criminals in Singapore; why would they come here if they
could go anywhere else?

Readers' comments

guest-ojsasnm Nov 2nd 2014 8:06 GMT

The relevant provision is Section 377A of the Penal Code, not 377(a).

John Smith737 Oct 31st 2014 11:10 GMT

As a "foreign talent" living in Singapore I'm deeply disturbed by the
storm of hate and bigotry launched in singaporean social media. I wasn't
aware of such a latent widespread hate. They are comparing homosexuality
with population decimation, zoophilia and pedophilia. At best, we gays
are simply perverts who should "conceal our repugnant behavior to the
privacy of our homes". There is also a lot of paranoia and conspiracy
about the "west" and gay agenda,the majority of people are cheerful and
celebrating the court's decision. Although I've met very nice people in
Singapore, I'm deeply disappointed. I wish young people stand up against
this conservative morals. But they won't, I've never seen a lowest level
of political activity in my life. And foreign people won't stop coming
to Singapore. Money rules

guest-ojlnaen in reply to John Smith737 Nov 2nd 2014 1:58 GMT

I am a Singaporean. Your statements are mostly untrue.

The correct part: homosexuals should confine your sex acts to the
privacy of your homes. And you would be a nice person to do that.

Morals, whether conservative or not, are still morals. You are confused
if you think that morals can become outdated. And if you are from the
west, please stop sprouting the values of pre-marital sex, sex on first
dates, taking and showing off photos of your sex acts, AND homosexual
pride parades.

(3) Gays should abandon "same-sex marriage" campaign - Derek Byrne

From: Tim OSullivan <timos2003z@hotmail.com>
Subject: Same Sex Marriage Article
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 02:06:44 +0000

Opinion: What we need are laws that celebrate our differences, not laws
that make everyone the same

Derek Byrne


Oct 9 2014

When I first became active in the gay liberation movement almost 30
years ago in 1985, I believed I was at the heart of something
groundbreaking that would, ultimately, change the face of Irish society

There can be no doubt that the achievements of the gay liberation
movement in the past 30 years, the decriminalisation in 1993 and the
Civil Partnership Bill of 2010, have affected the social fabric of life
in Ireland for the better.

However, the campaign for same-sex marriage is a move too far, in my
opinion, from the principles of equality and is discriminatory in its
very nature as it does not value the counter-culture responsibilities of
the gay community.

To be homosexual is to be part of a subculture within society. We are,
quite simply, different from the norm.

Of course, gay people should have equality under the law. Equality
legislation is what sets the standard in a civilised world, but what we
need are laws that celebrate our differences and provide for them, not
laws that make everyone the same.

This is where, I believe, the campaign for same-sex marriage falls down.
It is based on assimilation rather than equality, the belief we can only
be equal if we are allowed to live the same way.

The concept of marriage under the Constitution is derived from the
Christian notion of partnership and is confined to persons of the
opposite sex. In Irish law marriage is grounded in the monogamous union
of a man and a woman.

Heterosexual construct

Put simply, marriage, as we understand it in Ireland is a heterosexual
construct that has catered for the needs of a paternalistic society and
the subjugation of women; so why the gay liberation movement believes it
is a fit model for gay people’s lifestyles and values is beyond my

I know of many same-sex couples who have been joined in civil
partnership and I can say with certainty only one of these is grounded
in monogamy. This is not a judgment; it is a fact and an accepted way of
life for many gay couples, civilly partnered or not.

One other flaw in the same-sex marriage debate has been how to include
for the provision of children. Under the Constitution, the State
promises to guard with special care the institution of marriage, on
which the family is founded. However, the family, in this context, is
defined only in terms of consisting of parents and children, and it is
my belief that until this definition is changed there will never be a
same-sex marriage.

Variety of models

Modern Ireland has a variety of family models ranging from the promoted
norm, to single parent, same-sex parent and no-children families. In the
2011 census, married couples accounted for 69.5 per cent of all family
units. With a 500 per cent increase in broken marriages since 1986 and a
106 per cent rise in the number of single-parent families in that
period, there is obviously already a change of narrative on marriage in
Ireland, which the gay community seems to ignoring.

In my opinion, the gay liberation movement needs to reconnect with its
roots and have an unbiased and inclusive debate on same-sex marriage
before a referendum. There has been little or no discussion within gay
ranks on the issue and nobody seems to be considering what might happen
if a referendum were to fail.

The achievements of the past 30 years have created a sense of arrogance
within what I call the “gay establishment”,who, with the best of
intentions are campaigning for a progressive society, while driving us
blindly down a road to conformity.

This desire for some gay people to be assimilated into mainstream Irish
society is, in my view, based on a prevailing small town, village
mentality founded on Catholic guilt and a desire for Irish gay men and
women to fit into the norm so that they don’t upset their mammies.

While I applaud those who march and speak with passion on injustice and
inequality, it is all too easy to get caught up in the euphoria brought
on by speaking through a microphone to an adoring and accepting public.
It is the silent majority that must be won over if the referendum next
spring is to bear fruit.

No consultation

But without consultation there is no consideration for gay men and
women, who like me, are not wholly behind the campaign for same-sex
marriage as it currently stands. Indeed, many gay people have been
silent on the subject for fear of being cast out by their peers, or,
dare I say, being branded as homophobic.

We desperately need a change of narrative from the Irish gay liberation
movement on the subject of same-sex unions and an honest acceptance of
the cultural values and norms of gay men and women in this country if
true equality, either constitutionally, legally or culturally is ever to
be achieved. Vive la difference! Derek Byrne is an academic and journalist

(4) Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pushes Gay Marriage -
Brother Nathanael

    Brother Nathanael<bn@realjewnews.com> 21 September 2014 19:50


How Ginsburg Pushes Gay Marriage

By Brother Nathanael Kapner

September 21, 2014

IF JEWS ARE OUR MISFORTUNE, then Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg is Jewry’s chief architect of America’s woes.

In a clear violation of judicial protocol, Ginsburg told an audience at
the University of Minnesota Law School that if the Sixth District Court
of Appeals rules in favor of same-sex marriage, there will be “no need
for us to rush” on a decision on the definition of marriage.

“If however,” Ginsburg added, the Court that covers Kentucky, Michigan,
Ohio, and Tennessee “upholds” the centuries-old, natural definition of
marriage as one man and one woman, “there will be some urgency” to “step
in sooner.”

Liberty Counsel contends that Ginsburg violated the Judicial Code of
Conduct since judges are not to make public comments on pending cases
especially saying which way they would vote before hearing the merits of
the matter. Thus Ginsburg should recuse herself from all cases that
involve homosexual and lesbian marriages.

Mat Staver, head of Liberty Counsel, added that since Ginsburg has
officiated same-sex marriage ceremonies she consequently brings her own
personal experience to the bar which would compromise objective

Staver cites Canons 2 and 3 of the Judicial Code of Conduct which
explains that judges are not to allow outside influence to impact their
judgment nor to make public comment on the merits of a pending or
impending action.

“A judge should comply with the law and in a manner that promotes public
confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary, the code reads,” says
Staver. “A judge should not allow social and political relationships to
influence judicial conduct or judgment.”

But what Staver doesn’t get, (Liberty Counsel is a Zionist-christian,
Jew-loving legal lobby), is that Ginsburg is part of a “social and
political” alliance—JEWRY—that agitates for the destruction of the White
Christian family via homosexuality.

While Staver censures Jew judge Richard Posner of the 7th US Court of
Appeals for ruling that marriage between a man and a woman derives from
“a tradition of hate,” Staver fails to see that Posner—AS A JEW—assaults
the Biblical definition of marriage.

THE ONGOING ASSAULT on God’s creational design for the perpetuity of the
human race is a key component of Jewry’s dismantling of a White
Christian power bloc that would oppose the Jew’s role in forming
domestic policy and shaping our nation’s culture.

In a nation of sissies, fags, dykes, and queers, the Jew takes the upper
arm of control.

And while Jews like Ginsburg and Posner wreak more destruction on our
Jew-ruined nation….Zionist-christian dupes like Staver continue to
worship the Jewish beast.

(5) Jewish leaders push Gay Marriage - Brother Nathanael

Why Jews Push Gay Marriage

By Brother Nathanael Kapner

April 1, 2013 @ 8:49 pm

The push is on.

With the Supreme Court Hearings last week on homosexual unions—and
Obama’s own endorsement—Jews are at the forefront in promoting ‘gay’

Jewish leaders like billionaire’s Sheldon Adelson, Michael Bloomberg,
and Marc Stern of the American Jewish Committee, have all come out in
favor of what has traditionally been looked upon as sexual depravity.

Even Elena Kagan at the Supreme Court, yes, Jewish, an alleged lesbian
at that, is reportedly known for “queerifying Harvard” when Dean of the
Law School by introducing “transgender law courses”

Two Jewish groups in particular: The Anti-Defamation League, together
with the American Federation of Teachers, have been promoting the
homosexual agenda in our public schools.

Books like Daddy’s New Roommate, (Ken), Daddy’s Wedding, (Daddy marries
Ken), King and King, are part of the ADL’s Early Learning Program,
molding the minds of impressionable little children to accept and
embrace deviant sexual acts.

But Jews prefer sending their kids to private schools. It gives their
children better standing for admittance to Ivy-League colleges and
shields them from homosexual propaganda.

Believe me, for I grew up as a Jew, for a Jewish son or daughter to
announce to their parents that they are ‘gay’ is one of the worst things
that could ever happen.

You see, Jews look upon marriage for their own as sacrosanct, as
paramount for the perpetuity of the Jewish race.

[Clip: “I’m going to tell you the most important thing you have to
remember, about all that I learned in the world this is it, no matter
what happens you marry a Jewish girl.” [audience laughs] “That’s right,
your mother was right. You marry a Jewish boy. There’s nothing more
important in the whole than this. And there’s another reason you better
marry a Jewish girl. So you mother doesn’t break both your legs.”]

Indeed according to my own Jewish upbringing, there’s nothing ‘gay’
about two men having sex in each other’s rectums and two women using
dildos to imitate the act of procreation.

And we heard during the Sabbath Torah Readings the passage from
Leviticus, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is an
abomination, saith the Lord.”

Why then are Jews pushing gay marriage? It’s for the Goys, that’s why.

I’ll never forget the day that a ‘gay’ movie came to Brookline Mass.
with homosexual images plastered all over the marquee.

As I stood across the street in disgust, a Hasidic rabbi came walking by.

I pointed to the movie and said, “Isn’t it horrid that we’re assaulted
with these lewd images and titles?”

The rabbi laughed and scorned and said, “It’s for the Goys! Who cares!”

You see, Jews have no special love for queens, transvestites, and
cross-dressers. They look upon them as “dreck”…as repulsive.

But to dismantle a Christian culture in America that opposes Jewry,
that’s what the Jews are after.

Homosexuality is for the Goys! But the Regime is for the Jews.

697 Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty: the Day Israel attacked America

Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty: the Day Israel attacked America

Newsletter published on 1 November 2014

(1) Fwd: Report on al-Jazeera on USS Liberty
(2) Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty story

(1) Fwd: Report on al-Jazeera on USS Liberty

    Sababu Sanyika<sanyikasa@mymail.vcu.edu> 1 November 2014 11:17
To: askthemayor@richmondgov.com

the attack on USS Liberty has gone unreported and unpunished, as
zionazis Jews have bribed and silenced those in government elected to
represent our nation. Traitors abound in Congress, the military,
intelligence community, and in high offices of private business. The
United States of America is a zionazis Jew occupied nation having no
sovereignty whatsoever, and our precious youth are sent off to fight in
wars that are deliberately orchestrated premeditatedly by zionazis Jews
to serve zionazis interest and not what's best for our nation.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CNI <contact@cnionline.org>
Date: Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 10:38 AM
Subject: Report on al-Jazeera on USS Liberty
To: sanyikasa@vcu.edu

October 31, 2014

Dear Friends,

Many CNI supporters were energized to do something about America’s
lopsided relationship with Israel after they learned about the USS
Liberty. The Liberty was an intelligence gathering ship that was
attacked repeatedly by Israel on June 8, 1967. The ship was in
international waters at the time and was clearly identified as American.
The attempt to sink the vessel resulted in 34 deaths of US servicemen
and civilians as well as 171 wounded. US fighters scrambled to assist
the Liberty were called back under orders from President Lyndon B.
Johnson so as not to embarrass the Israelis. Subsequently, a cover up
involving Admiral John McCain, the Senator’s father, failed to hold
Israel accountable for the attack and even went so far as to gag the
survivors so they could not report what had actually occurred.

Tonight al-Jazeera America is airing a special report on the Liberty
called “The Day Israel Attacked America.” It is airing at 10 pm Eastern
Time, 9 pm Central. Al-Jazeera can be found on Comcast Cable at station
107, Dish at 215, Verizon FIOS at 114 and on Directv at 347. The
al-Jazeera website has a search engine to enable you to determine its
availability in your local area. It is strongly recommended that friends
of CNI DVR or view it and share it with friends. The Liberty survivors
are ageing and their repeated attempts to obtain justice have been
thwarted by Democratic and Republican Administrations alike. It is past
time that they are allowed to be heard.

As always, your support of CNI is vital to enable us to tell the truth
about the Liberty. Thank you for your commitment.

Phil Giraldi

Executive Director
Council for the National Interest

Council for the National Interest Foundation
1350 Beverly Rd., Suite 115-100 · McLean, VA 22101
· 202.863.2951 ·


(2) Al Jazeera documentary on the USS Liberty story

Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 09:05:57 +0300
From: Debbie Menon <debbiemenon@gmail.com>

Dear All,

Folks, I have just highlighted the story at Veterans News Now, about the
Exclusive Al Jazeera - America documentary on the USS Liberty story.
Some pretty hard truths there for the dissenters to swallow, but they
will have to get used to it, the vets/we were, and have all been "had"
in the worst sort of way... and those dead guys are no exceptions.

Truth will never win any popularity contests, only that it shall set us
free. Lies look better and feel so much more comfortable for most cowards.

I hear that our Ray McG is being arrested for speaking and writing the
truth like he does.... but it takes guts to say and do what he does...
and to publish it... and it is high time more Americans like him to whom
people will listen to, stepped out of their comfort zone and joined him.

There are a lot of Americans out there who do not want to be set free of
their sheltering pretenses, pretexts,  fallacies and fancies, and you
are going to hear from them.


696 Haaretz cartoon depicts Netanyahu as a 9/11 Terrorist

Haaretz cartoon depicts Netanyahu as a 9/11 Terrorist

Newsletter published on 1 November 2014

(1) Haaretz cartoon depicts Netanyahu as a 9/11 Terrorist
(2) Haaretz Daily Cartoon - 30/10/14
(3) Israeli Cartoon Shows Bibi as a 9/11 Terrorist - Forward blog
(4) Israeli Cartoonist Stands By 9/11 Image of Benjamin Netanyahu - Forward
(5) Israeli newspaper cartoon depicts Netanyahu flying a plane towards
World Trade Center

(1) Haaretz cartoon depicts Netanyahu as a 9/11 Terrorist
- by Peter Myers, November 1, 2014

The Haaretz cartoon is at

The Jewish Daily Forward has it at
and at

This cartoon is closer to reality than the fake news put out by the
"Mainstream Media" on 9/11.

It recalls Alan Sabrosky's shocking Press TV Interview on Israel and 9/11:

The Anglo-American Establishment is finally realizing that Israel and
the Sunni states (Saudi Arabia, Turkey) are on the "other side" from us,
enmeshing us in endless wars in the Middle East.

The failure of Turkey and the Saudis to help contain Islamic State has
been an eye-opener; but Israel's takeover of East Jerusalem, inflaming
the Moslems over Al Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, is the last straw.

(2) Haaretz Daily Cartoon - 30/10/14


Haaretz Daily Cartoon - 30/10/14

By Amos Biderman 06:09 30.10.

U.S.-Israel tensions: The crisis with Washington is here to stay.

(3) Israeli Cartoon Shows Bibi as a 9/11 Terrorist - Forward blog


October 30, 2014, 2:23pm

Israeli Cartoon Shows Bibi as a 9/11 Terrorist

By Anne Cohen

Today in things in poor taste: A Haaretz cartoon by Amos Biderman
showing one Bibi Netanyahu, flying an Israel plane into an American
building. Subtle. <http://www.haaretz.com/daily-cartoon/.premium-1.623521>

I guess people who lost a loved one on 9/11 will just have to get past
that boring old thing called grief in the interest of depicting
political tension.

Forward cartoon at

(4) Israeli Cartoonist Stands By 9/11 Image of Benjamin Netanyahu - Forward


Israeli Cartoonist Stands By 9/11 Image of Benjamin Netanyahu

Amos Biderman Says 'Never Imagined' Storm Over Satire

By Forward Staff

Published October 30, 2014.

Israeli cartoonist Amos Biderman stood by his an explosive work that
depicts Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flying a plane towards the
World Trade Center.

Biderman, the political cartoonist for the liberal Haaretz newspaper,
said he “never imagined” the harsh reaction to the terror-themed cartoon
but pointedly refused to apologize in an article published on its web site.

“It was certainly not my intention to insult or upset anyone,” Biderman
told Haaretz. “I wasn’t sufficiently aware of the great sensitivity that
9/11 holds for Americans.”

The article did not quote any Haaretz editors and the work remained on
the paper’s web site, suggesting Biderman’s bosses back his explanation.

Biderman insisted his cartoon was fair criticism of Netanyahu, who he
claims has damaged relations with the U.S.

“I was mocking Bibi,” he said. “He’s been acting like a bull in a china
shop with the United States, which is Israel’s most important strategic

Biderman noted that he has often grappled with controversial issues in
his work — and refuses to censor himself even when he knows many readers
may object.

“I have drawn cartoons depicting every war that Israel has fought,
including the Yom Kippur War – which I was involved in – where we
suffered thousands of casualties. I have used some of Israel’s greatest
tragedies as the background for my cartoon(s). .. . I never imagined
that by using an image that evoked 9/11 I would cause such a storm.”

(5) Israeli newspaper cartoon depicts Netanyahu flying a plane towards
World Trade Center



The left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz published a political cartoon
Thursday that shows Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flying a plane
into a building that is meant to represent the World Trade Center.

Haaretz Daily Cartoon - 30/10/14

The cartoon was published on a page on the newspaper's website. Below
the cartoon, the outlet wrote "U.S.-Israel tensions: The crisis with
Washington is here to stay" and linked to a story about the state of
affairs between the two countries.

The political cartoon was published one day after a senior Obama
administration officials called Netanyahu a "chickensh-t," in an
interview with the Atlantic, referring to the prime minister's ability
to broker peace with Palestinians. That same senior official called
Netanyahu a "coward" when it came to Iran.

The relationship between the U.S. and Israel is sliding into what many
are calling a full-blown crisis. Jeffrey Goldberg, the author who
originally published the "chickensh-t" quote in the Atlantic,wrote in
his article that the comment from the official is "representative of the
gloves-off manner in which American and Israeli officials now talk about
each other behind closed doors. The relationship between these two
administrations ... is now the worst it's ever been," Goldberg wrote.

Israel announced this week its intention to create more settlements in
East Jerusalem, angering some U.S. senior politicians.

"The United States is deeply concerned by reports the Israeli government
has moved forward" with planning for settlements in a "sensitive area"
of east Jerusalem, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said earlier
this month. The U.N. political chief Jeffrey Feltman said that the
settlements would raise doubts about Israel's plans to create peace with
the Palestinians.

695 Ebola Cures

Ebola Cures

Newsletter published on 29 October 2014

(1) Rehydration fixes Ebola! Water, salt and sugar
(2) Tobacco plants genetically engineered to fight Ebola
(3) Favipiravir - Ebola Drug From Japan
(4) JK-05 - Chinese drug similar to Favipiravir
(5) Thai hospital develops antibody to cure Ebola patients
(6) British Ebola survivor to donate blood plasma in search for cure
(7) Israeli BioPharm company Protalix can produce the ZMapp Ebola drug
(8) Fear of Litigation delays release of Ebola drugs; companies seek
limited liability
(9) US Army withheld promise from Germany that Ebola virus wouldn’t be

(1) Rehydration fixes Ebola! Water, salt and sugar
From: "Mel" <bmelvi@tpg.com.au> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 10:49:08 +1000
Subject: Rehydration fixes ebola!


Nigeria Declared Ebola-Free; 'Spectacular Success'

ABUJA, Nigeria — Oct 20, 2014, 2:34 PM ET


Water laced with salt and sugar, and gallons of the nasty-tasting stuff.

Doctors who survived Ebola in Nigeria credited heavy doses of fluids
with saving their lives as the World Health Organization declared the
country Ebola-free Monday, a rare victory in the battle against the
disease that is ravaging West Africa.

In the end, Nigeria — the most populous country in Africa, with 160
million people — had just 20 cases, including eight deaths, a lower
death rate than the 70 percent seen elsewhere across the stricken region.

Officials are crediting strong tracking and isolation of people exposed
to the virus, and aggressive rehydration of infected patients to counter
the effects of vomiting, diarrhea and other symptoms.

Nigeria's containment of Ebola is a "spectacular success story," said
Rui Gama Vaz, WHO director for Nigeria.

Survivor Dr. Adaora Igonoh said the treatment is not easy. It entails
drinking, as she did, at least five liters (1.3 gallons) of the solution
every day for five or six days when you have mouth sores and a sore
throat and feel depressed.

"You don't want to drink anything. You're too weak, and with the sore
throat it's difficult to swallow, but you know when you have just
vomited, you need it," she told The Associated Press. "I had to mentally
tell myself, 'You have got to drink this fluid, whether it tastes nice
or not.'"

Some 9,000 people have been infected with Ebola, and about 4,500 have
died, mostly in hard-hit Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia, with the
number of cases expected to increase exponentially in the coming weeks.

Dr. Simon Mardel, one of the world's leading experts on viral
hemorrhagic fevers, said the number of deaths could be cut in half if
infected people were taught to properly hydrate themselves and do not
take anti-inflammatory drugs, which can actually harm Ebola victims. [...]

Mardel, of Britain’s University Hospital of South Manchester, called
rehydration a low-tech approach that has been neglected by a medical
system focused on groundbreaking research. [...]

(2) Tobacco plants genetically engineered to fight Ebola

Tobacco-derived 'plantibodies' enter the fight against Ebola

By Sharon Begley

NEW YORK Wed Aug 6, 2014 12:05am EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Drugmakers' use of the tobacco plant as a fast and
cheap way to produce novel biotechnology treatments is gaining global
attention because of its role in an experimental Ebola therapy.

The treatment, which had been tested only in lab animals before being
given to two American medical workers in Liberia, consists of proteins
called monoclonal antibodies that bind to and inactivate the Ebola virus.

For decades biotech companies have produced such antibodies by growing
genetically engineered mouse cells in enormous metal bioreactors. But in
the case of the new Ebola treatment ZMapp, developed by Mapp
Pharmaceuticals, the antibodies were produced in tobacco plants at
Kentucky Bioprocessing, a unit of tobacco giant Reynolds American.

The tobacco-plant-produced monoclonals have been dubbed "plantibodies."

"Tobacco makes for a good vehicle to express the antibodies because it
is inexpensive and it can produce a lot," said Erica Ollmann Saphire, a
professor at The Scripps Research Institute and a prominent researcher
in viral hemorrhagic fever diseases like Ebola. "It is grown in a
greenhouse and you can manufacture kilograms of the materials. It is
much less expensive than cell culture."

In the standard method of genetic engineering, DNA is slipped into
bacteria, and the microbes produce a protein that can be used to combat
a disease.

A competing approach called molecular "pharming" uses a plant instead of
bacteria. In the case of the Ebola treatment, Mapp uses the common
tobacco plant, Nicotiana benthanmianas.

The process is very similar. A gene is inserted into a virus that is
then used to infect the tobacco plant. The virus acts like a
micro-Trojan Horse, ferrying the engineered DNA into the plant.

Cells infected with the virus and the gene it is carrying produce the
target protein. The tobacco leaves are then harvested and processed to
extract the protein, which is purified.

ZMapp's protein is a monoclonal antibody, which resembles ordinary
disease-fighting antibodies but has a highly specific affinity for
particular cells, including viruses such as Ebola. It attaches itself to
the virus cells and inactivates them. [...]

(3) Favipiravir - Ebola Drug From Japan


Ebola Drug From Japan May Emerge Among Key Candidates

By Cynthia Koons, Kanoko Matsuyama and Robert Langreth 2014-08-07T15:17:37Z

Aug. 5 -- U.S. government researchers are working hard to get an
experimental flu drug from Japan’s Fujifilm Holdings Corp. quickly
approved to treat Ebola, as the death toll rises in West Africa.

Fujifilm’s U.S. partner MediVector Inc. in Boston is in talks with the
Food and Drug Administration to submit an application to use the drug in
humans for Ebola, according to Department of Defense spokeswoman Amy
Derrick-Frost. If successful, the treatment drug would be one of the
first allowed by U.S. regulators to fight the disease in humans.

The Department of Defense has prioritized the completion of a study that
tests the drug called favipiravir in Ebola-infected monkeys,
Derrick-Frost said. The drug can be fast-tracked through the regulatory
review process after the studies are complete, she said. Preliminary
monkey data are expected in mid-September, she said.

The advantage of using favipiravir in an Ebola outbreak is that it has
already been extensively tested for use as an anti-viral in human trials
for influenza. The drug is now in a U.S. final-stage trial for treating

In addition, the drug is a pill, unlike the cocktail of injected
antibodies administered to two Americans who got Ebola. This means it
may be easier to use in rural locations with limited medical
infrastructure. [...]

Favipiravir was discovered by Yousuke Furuta at the Toyama Chemical unit
of Tokyo-based Fujifilm in 1998. It targets polymerase, an enzyme
viruses use to replicate inside the body, to stop the viruses from

The Department of Defense in 2012 awarded a $138.5 million contract to
MediVector to further develop favipiravir against multiple influenza
viruses. Fujifilm retains the rights to the drug.

While human tests in influenza are far along, two studies in mice
published earlier this year suggested that favipiravir could protect the
animals against Ebola. [...]

(4) JK-05 - Chinese drug similar to Favipiravir

Chinese company says its Ebola drug could get early approval


     * Oct 15, 2014

SHANGHAI – A Chinese drugmaker with close military ties is seeking
fast-track approval for a drug that it says can cure Ebola as China
joins the race to help treat a deadly outbreak of the disease, which has
spread from Africa to the United States and Europe.

Sihuan Pharmaceutical Holdings Group Ltd. signed a tie-up with Chinese
research Academy of Military Medical Sciences last week to help push the
drug, called JK-05, through the approval process in China and bring it
to market.

The drug, developed by the academy, is currently approved for emergency
military use only.

“We believe that we can file to the Chinese Food and Drug Administration
before the end of the year,” Sihuan’s chairman, Che Fengsheng, said
during an investor call last week. “They are looking at this very
seriously . . . and we could get on the green-light track,” he added. [...]

China’s Ebola cure bid still lags U.S.-developed ZMapp and TKM-Ebola,
but Sihuan management said the drug has proven effective during animal
testing on mice.

The drug, which AMMS has been studying and developing already for five
years, is similar to the Japanese flu drug favipiravir, developed by
Fujifilm Holdings Corp., which has been used effectively to treat
patients with Ebola.

ZMapp and TKM-Ebola have been tested on monkeys, which give a closer
immune response to that of humans, and have been used to treat human
patients with the disease.

JK-05 has not yet undergone clinical trials, but Sihuan management said
the firm is actively working toward clinical tests of the drug, which
could be shorter than normally required. The drug has also shown promise
against diseases such as influenza and yellow fever.

Chinese military doctor Wang Hongquan, credited with inventing the drug,
said in the investors’ call that JK-05 would first be used to treat
Chinese who are working in Africa and have the disease, but treating
other nationals would require further international approval.

There are millions of Chinese living in Africa, with around 10,000 in
the worst-affected countries: Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia.

JK-05 could also be used if Ebola spreads to China.

“We can’t rule out the possibility that it will spread to Asia.
Particularly in China now, we have lots of connections with different
international cities and many people coming and going across our
borders,” he said in the call.

Company management and analysts said an Ebola outbreak in China would
further speed up the approval process and development of the drug.

“It is highly likely the Ebola indication could be approved very quickly
if Ebola was to spread to China,” said Deutsche Bank analyst Jack Hu in
an analyst note on Sunday.

(5) Thai hospital develops antibody to cure Ebola patients


Thai hospital says it has Ebola cure, could be mass produced within a year

     * By Panu Wongcha-um
     * POSTED: 02 Oct 2014 12:32
     * UPDATED: 03 Oct 2014 00:42

BANGKOK: Doctors at the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hosptial, Mahidol
University in Bangkok, Thailand claim that they have developed a new
antibody that could cure Ebola patients. The antibody could be a year
away from being produced on a large scale, they said.

In a press conference on Thursday (Oct 2), the hospital announced that
it has produced antibodies against Ebola that are small enough to enter
infected cells, and also access the virus proteins within the cell.

Dr Wanpen Chaicumpa, head of the Ebola research team at Siriraj
Hosptial, said: "Conventional antibody that works against virus was to
prevent the entry of virus into cells. But our antibody, because it is
small and cell penetrable, it can follow the virus that already enters
the cell, like in an infected patient. And it can block ... the virus
replication process."

The research will also result in a cure that is more efficient and
effective than other potential cures, say the doctors. There is
currently no vaccine or cure for Ebola, but an experimental drug, ZMapp,
is currently undergoing testing.

Saying that the discovery is a breakthrough from a research standpoint,
the doctors say their prototype antibodies were developed using human
genes. The samples used are viruses similar to the five Ebola strands
and no live Ebola viruses were used, they added.

The doctors say the next step is to conduct animal testing before moving
on to testing the vaccine on humans. Dr Udom Kachintorn, Dean of the
Faculty of Medicine at Siriraj Hospital, said: "In theory, we are 100
per cent confident of our antibody research. But there are two more
steps in the scientific process - first, is testing it for safety and
efficacy in animals. Then, a clinical trial with humans." If the tests
are successful, the antibody would then need to be manufactured on a
large scale.

While Siriraj doctors warn that this could be a year away, they also
insist that the Thai pharmaceutical sector could help rush the
development, pending more tests. Currently, the research will be
followed up by Siam Bioscience, a joint Thai-Cuban pharmaceutical
launched this year.

Ebola is spread by close contact with the bodily fluids of an infected
person who is showing symptoms, or by touching the corpse of a person
who died from the hemorrhagic virus. The fast-growing Ebola outbreak in
West Africa has killed more than 3,000 people since the start of the year.

(6) British Ebola survivor to donate blood plasma in search for cure


22:35 GMT, Sep 25, 2014

Published time: September 23, 2014 16:01

William Pooley, the first Briton to contract Ebola who later fully
recovered from the disease, has agreed to donate blood plasma to treat

On Monday, the World Health Organization reported that 2,811 people have
so far died from this year’s outbreak of the deadly virus.

Experts now hope that Pooley’s blood could play a vital part in fighting
the deadly disease, the Telegraph reports.

The blood of survivors contains natural antibodies that can protect
against Ebola.

When transferred to another patient, doctors say, the infected person
seemingly benefits from the boost to their immune system.

British nurse Pooley, 29, contracted Ebola while treating victims of the
virus in Sierra Leone. He made a full recovery at a London hospital
after been given the experimental drug ZMapp. Blood plasma contains
antibodies that fight diseases and has been injected into Ebola victims
before. Pooley's blood is said to now contain natural antibodies that
could help protect against the virus. [...]

The virus is transmitted through sweat, blood and saliva, and there is
no proven cure.

British scientists are now preparing to test potential drugs and
vaccines in Africa by November with a £3.2m grant from the Wellcome
Trust in collaboration with the WHO, Oxford University and others. The
first few volunteers were injected with a vaccine in Oxford last week.

Pharmaceutical companies are already scaling up production of the
vaccines, anti-viral drugs and other treatments that will be tested so
large numbers of doses are ready as soon as the first trial results are

Last week, Pooley travelled to Atlanta, in the United States, in the
hope of helping an Ebola victim. He reportedly offered to undergo a
blood transfusion to help the American, who has not been identified.

(7) Israeli BioPharm company Protalix can produce the ZMapp Ebola drug


By By Times of Israel Staff September 12, 2014 0 Comments

This article was first published on The Times of Israel and was
re-posted with permission.

Protalix, an Israeli biopharmaceutical company located outside of the
northern city of Carmiel, said Saturday that it has the resources to
produce the experimental Ebola vaccine, ZMapp, which has recently run out.

In an interview with Channel 2, Protalix’s Dr. Yossi Shaaltiel, the
executive vice president of research and development said: “Today our
production capacity exceeds our needs, and we would certainly be happy
to have the company producing the Ebola drug have us produce the drug
for them. We would know how to do it effectively, in large quantities,
and in a relatively short period of time.”

Israeli BioPharm Company Protalix Can Produce The ZMapp Ebola Drug

Shaaltiel said the company is more proficient in the genetic engineering
of tobacco plants — from which the ZMapp medication is drawn — than any
other plant. The TV report maintained that the facilities in northern
Israel were more advanced, and better equipped than the greenhouses in
the US where production of the ZMapp drug takes place.

When the company started out, Shaaltiel said, “We were considered crazy.”

“Now we are proving that we are the only ones working with the [kind of]
plants that [are developed into] pharmaceutical drugs which are
approved,” he said.

(8) Fear of Litigation delays release of Ebola drugs; companies seek
limited liability


As World Health Organization, drug companies meet

Why is there no vaccine for Ebola?

By Patrick Martin
25 October 2014

The chief executive of the World Health Organization met with
representatives of major drug manufacturers in Geneva Thursday to
discuss efforts to develop a vaccine for the Ebola virus. The meeting
took place as the number of confirmed victims of the outbreak in
Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea topped 10,000, with nearly 5,000 deaths.

The disease has penetrated a sixth country in West Africa, with a single
case reported in Mali. There have been isolated cases in Senegal and
Nigeria, but health authorities in both countries claimed to have halted
the outbreaks with only a handful of deaths.

A fourth US Ebola victim was reported Thursday, when a doctor at
Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, who had been working as
a volunteer in West Africa for Doctors Without Borders, came down with a
high fever and was quarantined for treatment.

According to press reports, the European Union has agreed to finance
clinical trials of a vaccine, earmarking $31 million for research. The
drug companies were focused on their bottom lines, insisting on limiting
liability for any potential damage if a vaccine is rushed into
production with less than normal testing.

Andrew Witty, CEO of GlaxoSmithKline, told the BBC, “I think it is
reasonable that there should be some level of indemnification because
the vaccine is essentially being used in an emergency situation before
we’ve all had the chance to confirm” that it is safe to use.

Other top executives in attendance included Charles Link, the CEO of
Iowa-based NewLink Genetics, and Paul Stoffels, chief scientific officer
and worldwide chairman of Johnson & Johnson. Both companies have
vaccines in development.

The WHO said Tuesday that two vaccines would be tested in large-scale
studies in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, the three countries that
are the focus of the epidemic, beginning in January. One was developed
by the US National Institutes of Health and GlaxoSmithKline, the other
by the Public Health Agency of Canada and NewLink.

The process is slow compared to the speed of propagation of the disease,
with preliminary results likely by the end of 2015.

Three other vaccines will begin safety testing for possible side effects
in the first quarter of 2015, using healthy volunteers outside the Ebola

These discussions are overshadowed by two US press reports that
demonstrate the role of the drug companies in blocking any progress on
stopping Ebola for the past 15 years because they saw no way to make a
profit from a vaccine for a disease that killed only poor African villagers.

The New York Times article was published October 24 under the headline,
“Ebola Vaccine, Ready for Test, Sat on the Shelf.” It reported that
Canadian and US scientists several years ago developed a vaccine that
was 100 percent effective in protecting monkeys from Ebola. “The
researchers said tests in people might start within two years, and a
product could potentially be ready for licensing by 2010 or 2011,” the
Times said.

“It never happened. The vaccine sat on a shelf. Only now is it
undergoing the most basic safety tests in humans with nearly 5,000
people dead from Ebola and an epidemic raging out of control in West

The article noted that the development of the vaccine to the
monkey-trial stage cost only a modest amount, but comprehensive trials
of effectiveness and safety in humans, plus the development of
manufacturing techniques to produce sizeable quantities of vaccine,
would cost up to $1.5 billion.

“Most drug companies have resisted spending the enormous sums needed to
develop products useful mostly to countries with little ability to pay,”
the Times continued.

The vaccine in question was patented by the Canadian Public Health
Agency and is now being developed for human use by NewLink Genetics.

Five days before, on October 19, the Wall Street Journal published an
equally devastating indictment of the pharmaceutical industry, profiling
the work of Dr. Nancy J. Sullivan at NIH, who worked on the other
most-promising vaccine candidate, now being brought to market by

Sullivan began working on Ebola in 1997, after a 1995 outbreak in Zaire,
and by late 1998 had developed a vaccine candidate that the Centers for
Disease Control tested on monkeys, confirming 100 percent success by
July 1999. According to the Journal account, “Unvaccinated monkeys
became sick and died within about a week. The four vaccinated monkeys
had no detectable virus—something science had never before accomplished.”

The results were published in the prestigious journal Nature in 2000.
But the pharmaceutical industry was not interested in developing an
Ebola vaccine. The Journal account explains why: “The recently retired
chief of vaccines at Merck & Co. said ‘there’s no market for this.’ The
Wall Street Journal wrote of ‘the relatively tiny risk posed by Ebola.’”

These accounts demonstrate that there is no Ebola vaccine today, even
though the virus has been analyzed systematically for several decades
and promising initial steps were taken in government research
laboratories, because the private drug monopolies that control the
development and manufacture of vaccines did not find it profitable.

This underscores the fact that the 5,000 deaths from Ebola in West
Africa were completely avoidable. The blood is on the hands of Merck,
Pfizer, Glaxo and the other multinational companies which have a
vampire-like grip on the production of all forms of medication vital for
public health care.

The various governments that act as agents of the drug companies—in the
US, Britain, Germany and other imperialist countries—are equally culpable.

Meanwhile, the impact of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa is so dire
that public health measures alone may prove insufficient to stamp it
out. The WHO warned Tuesday that 19,000 doctors and nurses would be
needed by December 1 in the region, compared to less than a thousand
today, along with 500 burial teams, compared to only 50 now in operation.

Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIH warned that a vaccine may prove to be the
only viable means of fighting the Ebola outbreak. Tragically, that would
mean millions of deaths during the period that the long-delayed vaccine
is developed into a usable medication capable of mass production.

(9) US Army withheld promise from Germany that Ebola virus wouldn’t be

Published time: October 20, 2014 17:17


The United States has withheld assurances from Germany that the Ebola
virus - among other related diseases - would not be weaponized in the
event of Germany exporting it to the US Army Medical Research Institute
for Infectious Diseases.

German MFA Deputy Head of Division for Export Control Markus Klinger
provided a paper to the US consulate's Economics Office (Econoff),
"seeking additional assurances related to a proposed export of extremely
dangerous pathogens."

Germany subsequently made two follow-up requests and clarifications to
the Army, according to the unclassified Wikileaks cable.

"This matter concerns the complete genome of viruses such as the Zaire
Ebola virus, the Lake Victoria Marburg virus, the Machupo virus and the
Lassa virus, which are absolutely among the most dangerous pathogens in
the world," the request notes.

The Zaire Ebola virus was the same strain of Ebola virus which has been
rampaging through West Africa in recent months.

"The delivery would place the recipient in the position of being able to
create replicating recombinant infectious species of these viruses," the
cable notes.

However, it also points out that Germany has in place an "exceptionally
restrictive policy," adding that approval would not be granted to the
export until US assurance was provided.

"A decision about the export has not yet been made. Given the foregoing,
we would appreciate confirmation that the end use certificate really is
from the Department of the Army and of the accuracy of the data
contained therein," the document stated.

There is no follow-up document available to confirm whether the US Army
eventually provided Germany with the necessary guarantees.

Bioweapons were outlawed in the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972
and was signed and ratified by 179 signatories, including Germany, the
US and Russia.

It dictates that signatories, "under all circumstances the use of
bacteriological (biological) and toxin weapons is effectively prohibited
by the Convention" and "the determination of States parties to condemn
any use of biological agents or toxins other than for peaceful purposes,
by anyone at any time."