Syrian Crisis Exposes Israeli Lobby; Israel Allied with Al Qaeda in Syria

• The reason Syria developed bio-weapons in the first place was for defense against Israeli nukes 

By Michael Collins Piper

Although Syria’s weapons of mass destruction—chemical weapons, in this instance—are now the focus of global media attention, what is largely suppressed in the mainstream media is the “back story” as to why Syria even has chemical weapons in the first place.

On April 17, 2003, veteran Washington Post correspondent Walter Pincus (who happens to be Jewish) acknowledged in a story relating to angry claims by the George W. Bush administration—relating to Syria’s alleged “weapons of mass destruction”—that Syria had built its arsenal as an “equalizer” and that “Israel’s arms spurred [Syria’s] fears.”

Although, at the time of Pincus’ story, Syria had asked for a United Nations resolution calling for nuclear arms inspections all across the Middle East—including Israel—few expected the United States would support Syria’s request. And, of course, the U.S. did not, despite its official position that, according to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, America wanted to see the entire region free of weapons of mass destruction.

Pincus’s article regarding Syria’s drive for a military arsenal designed to counter Israel’s nuclear weapons cache was instructive indeed. He wrote:

Syria’s current arsenal of chemical warheads and Scud missiles to deliver them was started more than 30 years ago to counter Israel’s development and possession of nuclear weapons, according to present and former U.S. intelligence officials.

“They have been developing chemical weapons as a force equalizer with the Israelis,” a former senior intelligence analyst said yesterday. “Hafez al-Assad, the present president’s father, saw chemicals as a way to threaten the Israelis and an equalizer for their nuclear program.”

 Assad knew, the former analyst said, that “military aid from the Soviets would never be able to match what Israel developed in the nuclear field and received from the U.S.”

Syria’s possession of chemical weapons was an important part of the Bush administration’s recent, week-long verbal offensive against Damascus. But it also has brought attention briefly to another highly sensitive issue: the impact that Israel’s nuclear arsenal has had on its enemies in the Middle East.

The consensus from Middle East experts is that almost every country in the region has pursued weapons of mass destruction programs—and they have done so primarily because of the arsenal that Israel has built up, said Joseph Cirincione, head of the nonproliferation program of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“You can’t get rid of chemical or biological or nuclear programs in Arab countries unless you also address the elimination of Israel’s nuclear and chemical programs,” Cirincione said yesterday.

Now, in recent days—despite overwhelming American popular opposition to an attack on Syria in retribution for its purported use of chemical weapons—we have seen the Jewish lobby in America loudly banging the drum for a U.S. military strike on Syria.


On September 3, The Washington Post bared the truth in a story quite candidly headlined: “Pro-Israel and Jewish groups strongly back military strike against Syria.”

The Post article noted that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center had all endorsed action against Syria.

Noting that, theretofore, there had been “intense discussion” among pro-Israel partisans about whether they should be open about their concerns, the Post pointed out that that many in the Jewish lobby were “worried” that critics of the proposed attack on Syria were casting it “as a move to protest Israel’s interests rather than an action to defend U.S. credibility.”

One pro-Israel activist, who spoke in what the newspaper described as “the condition of anonymity” admitted to the Post that “There is a desire to not make this about Israel.” In other words, the Jewish lobby would prefer the public not know Israel does indeed have an interest in seeing Syria subjected to American military might.

Later—even after President Barack Hussein Obama’s address to the nation in which polls show he failed to convince Americans of the need to strike Syria—the Post reported on September 9 that AIPAC had nonetheless mobilized its traditionally influential lobbying team—some 300 strong—to continue to besiege members of the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate demanding they support the attack.

However, despite the infamous Capitol Hill clout of the well-funded Jewish lobby groups, the good news is that public pressure on Congress against another Middle East war is so overwhelming that even the pro-Israel forces are being beaten back.

Now, with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s energetic intervention, setting the stage for an agreement which seems to be undercutting the Jewish lobby’s push for war, it appears that for the first time in many years, that powerful lobby will be defeated.

Nonetheless, many people are still concerned that an angry Israeli leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, may engage in some covert measure such as a “false flag” terrorist attack on America—to be blamed on Syria or Iran or groups friendly to Syria and Iran—designed to redirect American public opinion.

The bottom line is that recent events have brought into widespread attention the fact that the Jewish lobby in America stands in opposition to the vast majority of the American people who are saying: “No more U.S. intervention in the Middle East.” And many are beginning to see that those interventions have, in fact, been on behalf of Israel—not America.

Israel Allied with Al Qaeda in Syria

• Israelis admit they prefer U.S. enemies over Assad regime

• Now is the time to end American aid to Israeli terror state

By Michael Collins Piper

Israel has finally admitted publicly (what has long been known): it would prefer rebels aligned with the al Qaeda terror network seize control in Syria, rather than the secular regime of Bashar al-Assad retaining power.

This eye-opening revelation will shock those who perceive Israel as America’s closest ally, particularly in the “war on terror” (aimed at al Qaeda) waged in the 12 years following the 9-11 attacks which the United States government claims were al Qaeda’s doing (despite profound evidence to the contrary).

Returning American troops—who fought against al Qaeda—and families of the dead will now rightly have some serious doubts about Israel. And troops still abroad will surely ask why they are fighting al Qaeda if America’s “best friend” supports that terror network’s ambitions in Syria.

Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, told The Jerusalem Post why Israel supports the Al Qaeda-aligned forces. 

While noting—of the rebels loyal to al Qaeda—that while Israel understands “they are pretty bad guys,” Oren said Israel views Assad’s regime as “the keystone” in “the strategic arc between Syria and Iran, the nation Israel is eager to destroy: “We always wanted Assad to go. We always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran.” So Israel believes Al Qaeda-allied forces are useful for its own ends, America’s interests in the war on terrorism notwithstanding.

From an American perspective, the toll in the Afghan and Iraqi wars has been staggering: 2.5 million Americans were deployed, about half of them more than once. Some 6,650 died. Another 106,000 were wounded in action or evacuated for injury or disease. Some 675,000 veterans of the war on terror applied for disability. Suicides and other deaths among returning troops—drug overdoses, car crashes, etc.—are unusually high.

Academic estimates say the wars will ultimately cost U.S. taxpayers some $5 trillion. And that figure does not include untold trillions Americans give Israel, much of it for purported assistance in the war on terror that is being waged against al Qaeda, which Israel now supports.

Now that Israel has betrayed America and supports al Qaeda, America should cut off relations with Israel, expel its diplomats and citizens from the U.S., and henceforth consider Israel an enemy in the war on terror.

Michael Collins Piper

Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.

Zionists Behind Ouster of Egypt’s President

• Mohammed Morsi’s maneuvers behind-the-scenes prompted coup d’etat

By Mark Glenn

The recent overthrow of Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi had all the superficial appearances of being a “people’s revolution.” The real story is that Morsi—initially as much a carefully chosen puppet for Israeli and American interests as his predecessor, Hosni Mubarak—was taken down not by the “little people” in Cairo but rather by powerful players in Tel Aviv, Washington, D.C., New York and elsewhere who, after viewing recent developments in Morsi’s administration, saw Egypt falling out of their grasp were he to remain in power.

That Morsi was eyeing better horizons in search of brighter futures for his country was apparent from the very beginning of his administration. A mere month after he took office he broke with both precedent and protocol when he became the first Egyptian leader to visit Iran since that nation won its independence from the deadly grasp of Israel and the West in its 1979 revolution.

According to Israel’s online news source “Ynet,” while in Iran, Morsi met with then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—singularly hated by both Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C.—where the two discussed the danger that Israel poses to the region and, as Ynet stated, that perhaps Egypt would be better off abandoning its 30-year alliance with the West.


That a budding friendship had been formed during Morsi’s visit to Iran was further supported when Ahmadinejad returned the courtesy by also breaking with both protocol and precedent and becoming the first Iranian head of state to visit Egypt since the two countries broke off ties in 1979.

Hard Assets Alliance

That this political rapprochement between Egypt and Iran was headed in a direction deemed dangerous to both Israel and America was made plain in the aftermath of these meetings, when Morsi declared his opposition to any outside armed intervention in the Syrian crisis and then insisted that Iran be part of the contact group that would oversee a political solution to the carnage.

But Iran was not the only fly in the Zionist ointment leading to Morsi’s overthrow. Russia also loomed large, and particularly after Morsi sat down face-to-face with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss various items involving trade, economic development, the possibility of Russia building as many as four nuclear power plants and Russian assistance in developing Egypt’s various uranium mines.

As troubling as these topics may have been to Israel and America, the issue that more than likely caused the most political heartburn was reported by RT shortly after the meeting between Morsi and Putin: “The presidents agreed that diplomacy is the only solution to the Syrian crisis and that foreign intervention into Syria is unacceptable.”

Perhaps the final nail in the coffin for the political career of Morsi was his stated desire that Egypt join BRICS, the economic block consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa meant to challenge the dominance of Zionist interests in the area of international finance, coupled with Morsi’s polite refusal of a many-strings-attached loan offer from the International Monetary Fund.

That the fix was in and that the U.S. and her co-conspirators knew that bad political weather was on its way in Egypt is at least circumstantially apparent. In a piece appearing in The Washington Times 10 days before the uprisings that resulted in Morsi being removed, 400 American troops specially trained to “respond to any threats, including protests and riots, to the security of Israel or the peace agreement” were sent to Egypt.

The Lessons of 9-11; News Flash: It Wasn’t the Nazis

As the first American newspaper to reveal hidden truths regarding the events of September 11, 2001—not to mention carrying breaking updates over the past 12 years—AMERICAN FREE PRESS founded what later became known as the 9-11 truth movement. This week we illustrate how that heinous false-flag attack still affects our world today.

By Victor Thorn

ARLINGTON, Va.—Perched 15 floors atop Washington, D.C. inside the Sheraton Hotel, over 100 9-11 “truthers” gathered on September 13-15 to learn about the latest developments surrounding the 21st century’s greatest conspiracy. Not lost on any of these attendees was a supreme irony: directly following the supposed crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon, Federal Bureau of Investigation officials immediately seized videotapes from the Sheraton’s CCTV cameras.

To understand why 9-11 still remains relevant, AMERICAN FREE PRESS spoke with a number of attendees, researchers and speakers at this conference.

Jerry Policoff, executive director of the JFK assassination archives and senior editor of the website “Op-Ed News,” set the tone. “By studying JFK’s murder since the mid-1960s, 9-11 got my attention because there are plenty of common threads,” he said.

Professor Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., an author and talk radio host, debunked the idea of terrorism that government officials use to brainwash the public. “Statistically, terrorism is insignificant,” Barrett said. “You’re more likely to be struck by lightning or drown in your bathtub.”

Barrett spoke about how 9-11 has placed most of the populace under a spell. “The 9-11 ‘big lie’ has completely removed the American public from reality by placing them in fantasyland,” he said.

Legendary black comedian Dick Gregory, a longtime JFK scholar who first introduced TV viewers to the Zapruder film on Geraldo Rivera’s “Good Night America,” referred to September 11 as a magical incantation.

“9-11 is a trick,” said Gregory. “The numbers “9-1-1” [emergency] tells your brain to be scared.”

During an interview with this writer, Gregory described how deceptions revolving around 9-1-1 impact politics in 2013.

“I don’t get my news from NBC anymore,” he said. “Instead, I look for cracks in the fabric. That’s why I knew Obama would be president 10 years ago.”

Prompted for more details, Gregory explained, “Obama’s father and mother were both CIA. Everyone that f***s with him dies. I know all about that crooked nigga.”

Author Webster Tarpley, recognized for his books on George Bush and the topic of synthetic terrorism, said during his presentation, “We should use 9-11 as a premise to look forward and decipher new false-flags.”

As an example, Tarpley referred to recent “wag the dog” shenanigans in Syria.

“As supposed proof of Assad gassing his own people, we were shown videos of dead adolescents,” said Tarpley. “But these were actually Alawite children kidnapped from Latakia two weeks before this ‘chemical’ attack. They weren’t kids from Damascus.”

Tarpley offered a final suggestion. “The whole idea of conspiracy theories being bad arose from the CIA during the 1960s.”

Carrying this notion further, event organizer Matt Sullivan, the former publisher of the now defunct monthly newspaper The Rock Creek Free Press, issued a warning.

“Whenever the government may be complicit in a crime, you can’t trust any evidence coming from them,” he said. “We must instead rely on independently verifiable data.”

Of course, 9-11 also served as the impetus for a decade of perpetual wars that American troops are still fighting today.

Mark Gaffney, author of Black 9/11: Money, Motive and Technology, cited how the government and military-industrial complex have ballooned in stature.

“Some 263 new federal organizations have been created since 9-11, while over 2,000 private companies do intelligence work for the U.S. government,” he said.

Sadly, the U.S. war machine didn’t come to a grinding halt after the neocons left office. Isa Hodge, who spearheaded the 9-11 Million American March in D.C., complained to AFP, “Barack Obama has killed more Muslims in the past five years than George W. Bush did in eight years.”

Needless to say, ever-present dangers confront those willing to expose the crimes of this vast criminal network.

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen expanded upon the murder of author Phillip Marshall and his children.

“Marshall quoted intel sources that said the Osama bin Laden raid was a staged hoax, especially since the Saudis tried to poison him,” he said. “That’s why bin Laden died of kidney failure in late 2001.”

Although no mainstream media venues covered this pivotal symposium, AFP distributor Ned Delaney, who traveled all the way from Indiana, addressed the significance of these events:

“It’s important for national organizations to meet and keep cohesion among their group,” he told AFP. “It’s also an excellent opportunity to network with each other.”

Nazis Everywhere

Despite a plethora of never-before-heard news developments at this year’s commemorative conference, some 9-11 truthers still can’t escape the dreaded Nazi complex. Webster Tarpley, a huge admirer of Franklin D. Roosevelt, proclaimed that even in 2013, Nazism acts as a “fifth column.”

Even more so, Pentagon researcher Barbara Honegger, author of the book October Surprise, made a preposterous assertion:

“Neocons are Nazis. The U.S. government has been taken over by a neo-Nazi cult.”

After alluding to “big Hitlerian lies,” Ms. Honegger took it a step further:

“The Nazi thread continued to 9-11, even with Leo Strauss, who had ties to Hitler’s men. Strauss, the 9-11 neocons’ mentor, was influenced by Hitler’s justifier of evil, Nazi Carl Schmitt.”

For the record, Strauss was Jewish.

Ironically, in the next breath, Ms. Honegger named the individuals responsible for 9-11. The first five men she mentioned were Richard Perle, Dov Zakheim, Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Chertoff and 9-11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow. AFP readers are well aware that each of these deep insiders is Jewish.

Considering a wealth of data proving Israel’s involvement in this ritualistic massacre, how could the Nazis conceivably be behind it?

Finally, although Kevin Barrett correctly described Muslims as 9-11 patsies, he curiously added, “Jews have been pretty savagely and unfairly scapegoated throughout history.”

Architect Insists Pertinent Facts Censored by Feds

Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, stands as a persistently positive force in the 9-11 truth movement. In addition to distributing 9-11 literature to congressional members on Capitol Hill, he’s also instrumental in having “9-11 truth” billboards and ads placed in New York’s Times Square and 11 other cities.

During his September 13 speech at the Sheraton conference, Gage focused much of his attention on recent breakthroughs debunking the WTC 7 smokescreen. For instance, on the morning of September 11, 2001, liberal journalist Allan Dodds Frank announced on CNN at 11:07 a.m. that World Trade Center building 7 had already collapsed. In actuality, this 47-story skyscraper didn’t implode via controlled demolition until 5:20 p.m., over six hours later.

Moreover, Gage divulged that a total of 118 NYC firefighters have testified to hearing explosions and seeing flashes of light inside the twin towers before they fell.

As an architect with 23 years of experience, Gage is particularly disturbed by members of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) who’ve concealed pertinent facts regarding the deliberate destruction of WTC 1, 2 and 7.

“Physicists at NIST are lying through their teeth,” said Gage. “They’re paid by the Defense Department, and what they’re doing is worse than fraud. It’s criminal. At WTC7, there were dozens of operatives that required months of preparation. Why did they need to topple WTC7? Look at what agencies were housed inside it: the CIA, Secret Service, IRS, Department of Defense and Rudy Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management.”


Truth Won’t Be Silenced

Towering over Times Square in Manhattan stands a 54-foot by 46-foot billboard declaring: “Did you know a 3rd tower fell on 9-11?” Over a million people will see this sign every day throughout the month of September.

Although 12 years have passed since this false-flag attack forever changed the American landscape, a variety of strange occurrences still plague 9-11 truthers. For instance, in June B’nai B’rith International demanded that former MI5 officer Annie Machon be removed from a UN discussion panel. The reason: Ms. Machon insists that elements of the U.S. government were involved in orchestrating the 9-11 attacks “as a pretext for war [and] to erode our freedom.” She also cited the Mossad as being instrumental in the 1994 bombing of Israel’s London Embassy.

Then there’s former CIA and DEA pilot Phillip Marshall, who wrote a book entitled The Big Bamboozle: 9-11 and the War on Terror. On February 2, Marshall, his two teenage children and their family dog were all shot to death in their home. Did these gruesome executions result from inflammatory statements made by Marshall? These included quotes such as: “The official version about some ghost (Osama bin Laden) in a cave on the other side of the world defeating our entire military establishment on U.S. soil is absolutely preposterous . . . the true reason the attack was successful is because of an inside military stand-down.”

To combat continued revelations by whistleblowers, the government-corporate-media axis persists in characterizing 9-11 truthers as dangerous, even deadly. A case in point is alleged Boston Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who talking heads have already convicted due to his supposed status as a believer in 9-11 conspiracy theories.

However, despite an unending media campaign designed to label 9-11 truthers as crazy or deranged, on July 8 two UK psychologists, Michael Wood and Karen Douglas, published a study asserting that so-called conspiracy theorists appear saner than those desperately clinging to the official government version of events.

Similarly, 9-11 researcher Kevin Barrett cited psychologist Laurie Manwell in a July 12 article. “Anti-conspiracy people are unable to think clearly about such apparent state crimes against democracy as 9-11 due to their inability to process information that conflicts with preexisting beliefs.”

In an interview with AFP, 9-11 researcher Kevin Barrett cited an article by psychologist Laurie Manwell in the February 2010 edition of American Behavioral Scientist.

“Anti-conspiracy people are unable to think clearly about such apparent state crimes against democracy as 9-11 due to their inability to process information that conflicts with preexisting beliefs,” he said.

Fortunately, a handful of mainstream media members refuse to keep drinking the Kool-aid. On September 8, Dennis Maley of The Bradenton Times broke from the herd with this commentary:

“As Americans, our distrust of government is clearly well-justified. It is also obvious that many of us are fed up with the notion that we should accept being misled as a necessary component to our government keeping us safe.”

Maley concluded with these powerful words:

“A meaningful investigation into the events of September 11, 2001 would be a good place to start rectifying [this] toxic dynamite.”

Victor Thorn

Victor Thorn is a hard-hitting researcher, journalist and author of over 50 books.

AUDIO INTERVIEW & ARTICLE: High Gas Prices Here To Stay


Podcast Play Button

Antonia Juhasz, one of the nation’s leading oil and energy experts is a former congressional aide on Capitol Hill and an investigative journalist, as well as the author of three books and numerous articles which have appeared in many publications, including The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Nation, The Washington Post, and, among many others.

Antonia sat down with Dave Gahary to explain why gasoline prices remain historically high and why there’s no relief in sight, in this informative interview (38:26).


High Prices at the Pump to Remain in Place

  Leading petroleum analyst explains “energy traders” are responsible for permanent spike in prices

By Dave Gahary

One of the nation’s leading oil and energy experts sat down with AMERICAN FREE PRESS to explain why gasoline prices remain historically high and why there’s no relief in sight.

Antonia Juhasz, a former congressional aide on Capitol Hill, is an investigative journalist whose focus is on oil and energy issues, and the author of three books on the subject as well as numerous articles, which have appeared in many publications, including The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Nation, The Washington Post, and, among many others.

In preparation for the exclusive interview, this writer read The Tyranny of Oil, Ms. Juhasz’s second book, named after those same words delivered by then-Senator Barack H. Obama during a presidential campaign speech.

AFP asked if President Obama has delivered on his promise to reign in the oil industry.

Although the “Bush administration was, hands down, the most oil-influenced administration in the history of the United States,” [Obama] “certainly has not ended the tyranny of oil,” she said. “I . . . think he wasn’t intent on making the type of changes that people like myself would have wanted to see happen. This administration…is allowing the largest increase in domestic oil production in many, many, many years, certainly in fracking and offshore production, and those are all very problematic policies.”

Fracking, short for ‘hydraulic fracturing,’ “is the fracturing of rock by a pressurized liquid.” AFP has reported on this dangerous oil-extraction technique, which has many dangerous side effects, the most serious being the direct correlation between the procedure and earthquakes.

The main characters in the quest for oil are known as ‘Big Oil’: ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Valero and Marathon. In fact, John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, founded in 1870, “was the first truly multinational American corporation.”

Big Oil produces approximately 13% of the world’s oil while the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) produces about 40%. Additionally, said Ms. Juhasz, “the dramatic emergence onto the scene of the Chinese…and Russian oil companies . . . have certainly entered into the fold of Big Oil.”

Today’s high oil prices can be traced to the first few days of Ronald Reagan’s presidency, the last few months of Bill Clinton’s, and the legal battles being waged by Big Oil to prevent implementation of the 2010 Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

“Deregulation of refineries and gas pricing…that happened under the Reagan Administration,” she explained, “has had the largest impacts on pricing of gasoline and oil consolidation within the industry. The deregulation that began under Reagan also includes the shifting of the pricing of oil onto oil futures markets and once that happened…we really saw pricing of oil shift out of the hands of OPEC and into the hands of futures traders. And that may be one of the more significant of many changes that were begun under the Reagan Administration.”


“A futures contract,” Ms. Juhasz explained, “is a commitment to buy a good in the future for a price set in the present. Bankers and oil companies and hedge funds are betting on . . . which way the prices will go to make money off of the trade…not really an actual willingness to exchange a good at the end of the day. It’s really just about speculating and making money on what direction the price is going to go in the future.”

Two of the main culprits responsible for the misery millions of Americans are experiencing while trying to keep their tanks filled in their homes and their cars, are the husband and wife team of Phil and Wendy Gramm.

William Philip “Phil” Gramm, economist and former Representative and Senator from Texas, was the main sponsor of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which many feel opened the floodgates to all the financial crises that have followed its signing by Bill Clinton in his waning days. Significantly, the Act allowed the creation of unregulated futures exchanges. Gramm joined scandal-wracked Swiss global financial services company UBS AG in 2002 immediately after retiring from the Senate. His wife, Wendy Lee, an economist advocating deregulation of the energy industry, “held several positions in the Reagan Administration, including heading the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from 1988 to 1993,” followed by a position on the board of directors of the bankrupt energy company Enron.

“Through Wendy . . . and Phil Gramm, the trading in oil futures was severely deregulated and the government essentially removed itself from the process of regulating these trades,” explained Juhasz. “But while Enron was brought down, its methods continued, including its energy traders, many of which who went to work for oil companies.”

Through “what’s forever now referred to as the ‘Enron loophole,’ the price of oil went up and up and up and up, because you have this rampant speculation that was feeding on itself and that was creating a false demand. That run-up in the price eventually, I believe, broke the global economy, because we are so hardwired to the price of oil, that this dramatic and really unprecedented run-up in the price of oil [in 2008].”

Ms. Juhasz feels that “one of the reasons why we’ve also stayed . . . in a global recession is that we’ve been stuck at this price of $100 a barrel of oil without any support to get us off of oil as rapidly as the price has risen. So this deregulation is a pretty fundamental and dramatic one and the Gramms are right at the heart of it.”

So why aren’t prices much lower since the available supply of oil far surpasses demand, AFP asked.

“The policies that began during the Bush Administration . . . continued by the Obama Administration, such that we’re producing more domestically of oil and gas than we have in decades; also internationally. The Iraq War opened up an enormous spigot of oil in Iraq. There’s tar sands, there’s offshore production; the globe is booming in oil production. So you’ve got increased production, in many cases reduced demand, including in the United States, and yet increased price and that clearly isn’t how supply and demand is supposed to work. And that is clear evidence of manipulation of price.”

Juhasz revealed in Tyranny that economists and analysts have determined that the price of oil is increased by 20 to 50% because of energy traders, something known as the ‘speculative premium.’

Besides the price manipulation of oil, Juhasz pointed to another area that’s rife with financial chicanery.

“There’s a tremendous amount of concentration and consolidation within the domestic refining and selling of gasoline market that also adds to control the price,” she added. “I certainly believe that there’s manipulation happening at the level of the pricing of gasoline. When the price of gasoline is manipulated and pushed up and people have to pay $4 a gallon and literally choosing between eating breakfast in the morning and driving to work . . . that’s hugely problematic.”

AFP asked what the future holds in store for your average American at the pump.

“I don’t see those prices lessening,” she concluded.

Donate to us

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s ‘Underground Interview’ series.

Be sure to check out all of AFP’s free audio interviews. You’ll find them on the HOME PAGE, in the ARCHIVES & in the AUDIO section.

Females Leading Fight for Gun Rights in U.S.

• Bevy of brave gals battling for right of self-defense for all women

By Keith Johnson

Many of the patriotic American women who’ve been pushing back against the enemies of the Second Amendment can also be counted among the thousands of grassroots activists who just recently handed the gun grabbers their latest major defeat.

On September 10, angry Colorado voters, who cherish their inalienable right to keep and bear arms, took to the polls and successfully ousted two democratic state legislators who helped push through a series of unconstitutional gun-control laws earlier in the year.

In the state’s first ever legislative recall, state Senate President John Morse and Senator Angela Giron were both handed their walking papers despite $3 million in financial backing from deep pocket anti-gunners like outgoing New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who personally forked out $350K to counter the recall campaign.

While the Colorado voters are certainly worthy of considerable praise for this historic victory, due credit must be given to the brave Colorado women who championed the cause early on. Among them is Kimberly Weeks, who joined with several other women in March to testify before the Colorado State Judiciary Committee in opposition to the proposed gun-control laws.


“It was very difficult, but I shared the night I was raped,” Weeks said in a recent radio ad produced by the Colorado Woman’s Alliance. “I begged Senator Morse and Senator Giron not to strip me of my right to legally defend myself and family. I was stunned at the arrogant response we received…It seemed like they were not remotely interested in what we had to say…We have a right to choose how we protect ourselves and our families—but Senators Morse and Giron didn’t think twice about taking that right away.”

Hard Assets Alliance

This AMERICAN FREE PRESS reporter recently reached out to another patriotic woman whose efforts were instrumental in defeating Colorado’s powerful anti-gun lobby.

Linda Elliott is coordinator for the Colorado chapter of 1 Million Moms Against Gun Control (1MMAGC), a pro-Second Amendment women’s organization that was formed early this year in response to the anti-gun hysteria that arose out of the Sandy Hook tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut.

“I went to the capitol and sat there for 12 hours watching these laws get bullied through,” Mrs. Elliott told AFP. “It made me so angry that there were so many people opposed but [the Democrats] couldn’t take the time to listen. They already had their minds made up.”

Mrs. Elliott goes on to describe the farce she witnessed on the senate floor: “On one side of the aisle, there were Republicans fighting tooth and nail [in opposition to the legislation] while the democrats were playing games on their laptops. A couple were even braiding each others hair. When it came time for a voice vote, Republicans were screaming ‘No!’ and the Democrats just arrogantly nodded or mumbled ‘yes’ –but the laws passed anyway. There was such uproar [from the audience] that they almost had to clear the seating above [the senate floor].”

From that day forward, Mrs. Elliott dedicated herself to righting the wrongs she witnessed at her state capitol. “I told myself that if these laws passed, I have to do something or at least be able to say that I tried,” she says.

Over the past several months, Mrs. Elliott has helped to organize, and participated in, about half a dozen armed marches.

“We do this to make people aware of what’s going on,” says Mrs. Elliott. “And that has had a big impact. Even in a small town like Westcliffe, Colorado [pop. 568], we were able to attract 500 gun owners who marched with us in support of our local sheriff, who has joined 55 of the 62 Colorado sheriffs in a lawsuit to repeal these gun laws.”

When asked to describe the gun-control laws that are being targeted in the suit, Mrs. Elliott replies: The laws require a $10 fee for each gun transfer…a background check for every transfer, whether public or private…[and] limits magazine capacity to 15 rounds.”

In the days leading up to the recall, Mrs. Elliott concentrated her efforts on getting voters to the polls. “I’m close to Pueblo, so I did a lot more work for the Giron recall,” she says. “We were knocking on doors up to the last day to remind people who signed the recall petition to get out and vote. And if they needed a ride, we helped them get there.”

Mrs. Elliott stressed that all her activities pertaining to the Colorado recall are done as a private citizen and independent of her affiliation with 1MMAGC, which she describes as a place where women can find support, training and advice on how to exercise their constitutional right to defend their families with firearms.

“After Sandy Hook we saw that there was only a voice for one side of the debate,” says Mrs. Elliott. “We want women to know that supporting gun rights doesn’t make you a bad mom. Many women are fearful for their lives. They’re easy targets. We are the weaker sex. And sometimes, the protection of our children rests on our shoulders.”

Keith Johnson in an investigative journalist and creator of the Revolt of the Plebs.

Black Leaders Advocating Genocide of ‘White Devils’; DHS Official Booted for Advocating White Genocide

Anti-white hatred a mainstay of black nationalist rhetoric

By Pete Papaherakles

Although many Americans like to think that race relations today are the best they have ever been, nothing could be further from the truth. Whites are assaulted and murdered by blacks on a daily basis, while the media and government mostly look the other way.

On August 19, Christopher Lane, a 22-year-old Australian baseball player, was killed by two blacks while jogging in Duncan, Oklahoma. The two thugs, 15 and 16, said they killed him because they were “bored.”

On August 21, Delbert Belton, an 88-year-old WW II veteran wounded at the Battle of Okinawa, on his way to shoot pool, was beaten to death outside the Eagles Lodge in Spokane, Washington, for absolutely no reason, by two black teenagers.

On September 1, a 31-year-old black man in New York’s Union Square said he “hated all white people” and announced “I’m going to punch the first white man I see.” Jeffrey Babbit, 62, was the unfortunate victim, who was punched so hard, he hit the ground and lapsed into a coma, being pronounced brain dead at the hospital. Babbit was actually offering the murderer a sandwich before he got fatally punched.

The recent trial of George Zimmerman revealed that black leaders and celebrities, such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, unconditionally supported Trayvon Martin. Although the evidence has conclusively proven that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, even ex-Secretary of State Colin Powell, himself of mixed ancestry, called the verdict “questionable.” Many whites have been targeted and killed by blacks in retaliation.

Before Zimmerman was even indicted, a leader of the New Black Panthers, “King” Samir Shabazz, placed a $10,000 bounty on Zimmerman’s head and Attorney General Eric Holder did nothing about it.

Interestingly, Holder had refused to indict Shabazz for voter intimidation on Election Day in 2008—even after Shabazz was accused of threatening voters with a billy club at a north Philly polling place.


Shabazz, who sports a “kill whitey” tattoo, says black people should create militias to exterminate whites, skin them alive, pour acid on them, sic pit bulls on them, smash their heads with rocks and even raid nurseries to “kill everything white in sight.”

“I would love nothing more than to come home with a cracker’s head in my book bag,” Shabazz said on a black-power radio show.

Speaking at a street rally in Philadelphia, he said: “I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate him. You want freedom? You going to have to kill some crackers. You’re going to have to kill some of their babies!” But even that didn’t get him arrested.

Shabazz is not alone in advocating these violent views.

Speaking at Howard University, author and professor Dr. Kamau Kambon said that after much research he found that the main problem in the world is that whites want to kill all blacks. He proposed an urgent solution to the problem: “We are going to have to exterminate white people off of the face of the planet.” The audience applauded.

The media greatly contributes to this twisted viewpoint by enacting a total blackout of the black-on-white crime epidemic and hyper-focusing instead on the few cases of white-on-black crime.

The entertainment industry is even worse.

For over 20 years, black rappers, elevated to super-stardom by the music industry, have been echoing similar sentiments throughout songs with lyrics like “kill whitey all nighty,” “slit the cracker’s throat,” and “snatching [white] devils up by the hair, then cut his head off.”

From 1991 to 1998, there were over 50 songs performed by major Grammy award-winning rap groups such as Menace Clan and Brand Nubian that advocate the brutal murder of whites by blacks. The hair-raising lyrics are available on the Internet to anyone interested, but be forewarned: Most are not appropriate for civilized discussion, let alone a family newspaper.

Donate to us

Pete Papaherakles is a writer and political cartoonist for AFP and is also AFP’s outreach director. Pete is interested in getting AFP writers and editors on the podium at patriotic events. Call him at 202-544-5977 if you know of an event you think AFP should attend.

Homeland Security Official Booted for Advocating Genocide of Whites

• Ayo Kimathi calling for “righteous black dominion over planet Earth”

By John Friend

Ayo Kimathi, who uses the pseudonym the “Irritated Genie” on his extreme black nationalist website War on the Horizon, was a small business specialist working for the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) before his superiors discovered his radical website and Internet postings.

Mr. Kimathi was placed on paid administrative leave shortly after the August 21 publication of a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) HateWatch division, which “monitors the evolving problem of online bigotry.”

HateWatch is notorious for targeting Constitutionalists, patriots, and pro-white activists, however, in this case at least, its attention was drawn to a black man working directly for the federal government with extremely radical, controversial, and quite unsettling views on race, homosexuality, history, and a variety of other subjects.

Mr. Kimathi describes the white race as a “bitter enemy” of blacks everywhere whose primary aim is to “exterminate Afrikan people in all corners of the Earth.”

The War on the Horizon “Creed” advocates that blacks around the world unite in order to “eradicate the system of racism white supremacy and its benefactors in order to establish righteous Black Dominion over Planet Earth.” The creed goes on to say that blacks are “mandated by [their] Creator to return to [their] proper status as rulers of this world.”

Mr. Kimathi is extremely critical of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his legacy, especially forced integration—views that many pro-white activists share, ironically enough.


HateWatch and other mainstream media outlets reported that Mr. Kimathi’s website explicitly stated, “Warfare is eminent [sic], and in order for black people to survive the 21st century, we are going to have to kill a lot of whites – more than our Christian hearts can possibly count.”

Following his placement on paid administrative leave, Kimathi declared on his Facebook page, “The war is on! The smallhats (white so-called jews) have stepped it up,” according to HateWatch’s most recent report.

As if this story wasn’t bizarre enough, Kimathi was actually a public representative of DHS and the unit of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency he worked for. His primary job duties consisted of representing the agency at various public events, advocating for small business owners—“white, black, historically disadvantaged, disabled, veteran-owned, everybody,” his former supervisor was quoted as stating in the SPLC report.

Kimathi’s former supervisor went on to explain: “He fights for the little guy. And he’s very good at it. He has a commanding presence. He’s very suave. It’s almost as if he has a split personality.”

Repeated calls to Kimathi and an email sent to his website were not returned as of this writing.

Kimathi’s radical views are not restricted to the white race. He has written and spoken extensively about homosexuals, individuals of mixed racial ancestry, and leaders in the organized black community, usually in an extremely vitriolic, repugnant manner.

The question most Americans want answered is how did an individual such as Kimathi come to work for the taxpayer-supported DHS anyway?

Donate to us

John Friend is a writer who lives in California.

AFP PODCAST & ARTICLE: Disappearing Palestine, Coming to a Train Station and Bus Near You


Podcast Play Button

Marty Roth, a 79-year-old youthful Canadian Jew,  explains his organization’s role in the successful drive to counter Jewish near-complete control of the Canadian mainstream media, by placing the iconic “Disappearing Palestine” ads on a Canadian train station and 15 buses.

Marty, a member of a coalition of pro-Palestinian groups concerned with the rapid, relentless and illegal encroachment by Israel against the indigenous Palestinians, discusses the successful campaign and its fighting off of an attempt by pro-Israel Canadian Jews to scuttle their plans to display the images, in this insightful interview (11:37).

AFP Newpaper Banner

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s ‘Underground Interview’ series.

Be sure to check out all of AFP’s free podcasts. You’ll find them on the HOME PAGE, ARCHIVES & PODCAST section.

Hard Assets Alliance


Canadian Coalition Victorious in Displaying ‘Disappearing Palestine’ Ads on Buses

• Ads displaying diminished Palestinian territory set to run in other Canadian cities

By Dave Gahary

Following the cue of their neighbor to the south, a coalition of pro-Palestinian groups concerned with the rapid, relentless and illegal encroachment by Israel against the indigenous Palestinians, have successfully fought off an attempt by pro-Israel Canadian Jews to scuttle their plans to display the iconic images of “DISAPPEARING PALESTINE” on a train station and buses.  The ads are on display in Vancouver, British Columbia on one SkyTrain station and 15 city buses.

A group called Palestine Awareness Coalition purchased the ads from the mass transit entity in Vancouver known as TransLink, who announced they will not pull the ads launched by the coalition, after threats of legal action and the usual screeching and wailing by those organized Jews who feel they are constantly being persecuted by the truth.

The Palestine Awareness Coalition consists of seven pro-Palestinian groups:

Building Bridges Vancouver, Canada Palestine Support Network, Boycott Israeli Apartheid Campaign, Seriously Free Speech Committee, Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, Canadian Friends of Sabeel, and Independent Jewish Voices Canada.

To gain further insight into this ad campaign, AMERICAN FREE PRESS conducted an exclusive interview with Marty Roth, Professor Emeritus, University of Minnesota, and a member of Independent Jewish Voices Canada, one of the seven in the coalition.

Mr. Roth, a 79-year-old youthful Canadian Jew, was active in the campaign, and explained his organization’s part in the successful drive to counter Jewish near-complete control of the Canadian mainstream media.

“Independent Jewish Voices… [is] concerned with many issues,” said Mr. Roth, “but among them is the awful and deteriorating situation in the Middle East. Our primary purpose is to make it very clear to the Canadian public that the Jewish community does not speak with one voice. Not all Jews approve of the behavior of Israel in respect to the Palestinians who live in the occupied territories.”

AFP asked why he felt TransLink didn’t cave to the Jewish pressure groups, which have a stellar track record in stifling open and honest discussion of Israel’s horrendous human rights record.

“We fall within every one of the guidelines laid down by the Advertising Council of Canada and by the Canadian Charter,” he explained.

Mr. Roth detailed the battle his group faced and continues to face.

“The response has been, in my opinion, hysterical and venomous,” he began. “We have been accused of hate speech, we have been accused of putting up attack ads, we have been accused of wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, and of endangering the security of the Vancouver Jewish population. I mean it’s simply unbelievable.”

The irony of Jews claiming to be a target of removal of the entire Zionist state is laughable, because the ad clearly shows Palestine being wiped off the face of the map. AFP suggested that Jews shouldn’t put themselves in the position that even the slightest bit of legitimate criticism would endanger their lives. Mr. Roth agreed.

“Mainstream Jewish resistance is fierce, in Canada the United States in France in Great Britain in most of the Western countries; in South Africa,” he explained. “Fierce in opposition to any voice that is critical of the way the Israelis treat the Palestinians.”

AFP asked if he was comfortable with the veracity of what’s displayed on that map.

“The ads are based on UN documents,” he said. “We stand behind the actuality of the graphics and of course the statement is simply a statement issued by the UN and it’s very easily documentable.”

An ad campaign such as this is key to educating people of Israel’s true nature that the mainstream media in the U.S. and Canada does not freely bring to the public. This campaign is so important because it could change, literally in one day, thousands of minds, just by displaying this one little bit of information. It is for this reason that organized Jewry relentlessly fights efforts to educate the world’s populace to the plight of the Palestinians.

Canadian author and journalist Greg Felton, who has seen and photographed the ad on one of the buses, feels this type of campaign was bound to happen.

“This is symptomatic of the increasing acceptance of public displays of support for Palestine, now that the Internet has opened the world’s eyes to the true horrors of Jewish fascism, and the crimes of Israel are no longer deniable,” said Mr. Felton.

Mr. Roth explained that “the ads will run for four weeks,” and “our first run cost us $15,000.” “We are still fundraising,” he explained, “and we hope to extend the life of the ads if we raise enough money.”

AFP asked how they raised the money for the four weeks of ads.

“We were lucky to have the support of the major donor,” he explained.

The donor wishes to remain anonymous, he added when asked by AFP who he was.

Significantly, Mr. Roth added, “Canadians for Peace and Justice in the Middle East who are centered in Ottawa…are planning to have a similar ad campaign in both Toronto and Calgary.”


50 Years Later, They’re Still Lying About the JFK Assassination!

But here is Pat Shannan to set the record straight in a new blockbuster book of conspiracy fact . . .


The barrage of disinformation has begun. In recent weeks, CNN has aired separate one-hour presentations of half-truths portraying the innocence of federal agents at Waco and Oklahoma City, while further demonizing David Koresh and Tim McVeigh. The History Channel continues the 9-11 myth.

Beginning soon and coming to a TV near you will be the furthering of the propaganda surrounding the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. At least two movies are being produced—one for TV starring Rob Lowe as JFK and another made for the theaters with Tom Hanks in the starring role. Both will perpetuate the 50-year-old lie that a Marxist-leaning loner named Lee Harvey Oswald shot the President from a Dallas warehouse.





The John F. Kennedy assassination and the people’s deception over the past half-century is the classic example of disinformation, as it was probably the most efficiently performed coup d’etat and cover-up in world history.

At around 11:30 a.m. on November 22, 1963, Julia Ann Mercer was stalled momentarily in traffic at Dealey Plaza and saw a man emerge from a car carrying a rifle case in front of the grassy knoll, just 50 yards west of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). It was driven by a man that she later IDed as Jack Ruby, after his picture was plastered on TV to the world two days later.

On November 20 and 22, while “Lee Harvey Oswald” was working at the TSBD, he was IDed by multiple witnesses at the Dobbs House Restaurant, the Top Ten Record Store in Oak Cliff and the Jiffy Store on Industrial Boulevard. He was also positively IDed as being seated with Jack Ruby after midnight, some 10 hours after he was jailed on November 22.

Moments after Officer J.D. Tippitt was shot dead, detectives conveniently found a wallet containing the ID cards of both Lee Harvey Oswald and Alek Hidell.  Also found on the street were five ejected .38 caliber shell casings. When Harvey was arrested in the Texas Theater some 40 minutes later, he was carrying a .38 revolver which, of course, does not eject its shells. Astonishing to detectives, Harvey was also carrying in his wallet at the same time the exact two ID cards.

This is just the tip of the iceberg in the case of the “two Oswalds.”

Inside The JFK Assassination and the Uncensored Story of the Two Oswalds you will see for yourself the mountain of forensics and photographic evidence proving that there were two Oswalds, the truth of which leads us to even more attempted cover-ups.

Softcover, 158 pages, $20


Also available from AFP:

JFK’s Gay Slayers


Recently, while reading an article about the JFK assassination, a particular quote leapt out at me. The source – Rose Cheramie, a stripper in the employ of Jack Ruby (Rubinstein) – exclaimed after reading a headline about her boss and his possible relationship to Lee Harvey Oswald, “Them two queer sons-of-a-bitches, they’ve been shacking up for years.”

Ms. Cheramie uttered these words only days after Ruby had shot and killed Oswald with a .38 revolver in the basement of Dallas police headquarters. Major networks broadcast this harrowing event live to millions of viewers.

At any rate, I’d previously heard these gay rumors, but had never investigated them any further. After all, wasn’t every conceivable angle of JFK’s murder already addressed in hundreds of books and documentaries? Depending on which author you read, either the CIA killed the president, or else it was Israel, Texas oilmen, bankers, Cubans and/or Fidel Castro, the Russians, Mafia mobsters, the military-industrial complex,  Lyndon Johnson, Freemasons, or Vatican assassins. There are even some that claim George Bush, Sr. played a pivotal role, or that Kennedy was eliminated because he tried to open top-secret UFO files.

But no book has been entirely devoted to the predominance of gays and/or bisexuals in what is still, to this day, one of the greatest conspiracies of all-time. Of course, various journalists have penned articles on this subject, but none of them expanded their scope to an all-encompassing level. Therefore, this publication will examine one of the most under-reported aspects of the November 22, 1963 slaying that, quite literally, changed the world and forever altered America’s innocence.

Saddle-stitched booklet, 40 pages

Buy Book Button

Get both The JFK Assassination and the Uncensored Story of the Two Oswalds and JFK’s Gay Slayers for only $25, save $5!

Get This Deal Button

AUDIO INTERVIEW: Million American March Against Fear Wrap-Up


Podcast Play Button

Dr. Kevin Barrett provides a wrap-up to the Million American March Against Fear in Washington, D.C. held on September 11, 2013.

Dave Gahary sits down with Kevin, who discusses the propaganda spewed from the mainstream media, specifically Fox News, the group’s confrontations with the biker gang Hells Angels, and plans for future events, in this informative interview (7:25).


Prior Interview:

AUDIO INTERVIEW: March Against Fear, Washington, D.C., 9/11/13, High Noon

Donate to us

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s ‘Underground Interview’ series.

Be sure to check out all of AFP’s free audio interviews. You’ll find them on the HOME PAGE, in the ARCHIVES & in the AUDIO section.

Israeli Students Push Propaganda; Iraq/Iran Déjà Vu; USS Liberty Survivors Speak

• Army of willing, young Zionists paid to smear Israel’s critics

By Victor Thorn

Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet, especially since its been confirmed that the Israeli government—working in unison with the National Union of Israeli Students (NUIS)—pays Jewish college students upwards of $2,000 per year to disseminate state propaganda online.

Concealing their identity under an assortment of generic-sounding corporate names, NUIS teaches recruits how to smear opponents of Israel, photo-shop images, alter news reports, and muddy the water of chat room conversations with ridiculous claims.

The NUIS approach is so complex that participants are provided with specific scripts to use on enemies, complete with details involving sensationalized accusations against enemies, divide-and-conquer strategies where one individual is pitted against another, plus a variety of distraction techniques and the marginalization of opinions that differ from the official Jewish party line. Other tactics include denying inconvenient facts, refusing dialogue by sending conversations off into absurd directions, or dishonestly manipulating sources to entrap a foe.

Fool Me Once

• Americans smell a red, white and blue rat in Syria

By Victor Thorn

The Obama administration tried to justify an attack on Syria based on information that was handed to it largely by Israeli intelligence. After two decades of unnecessary wars in Asia and the Middle East, Americans are weary of more interventions and overwhelmingly opposed the White House plan. But if all Americans knew Israel’s long history of false-flag deceptions and disinformation, even more would stand up against efforts to drag the United States into yet another war that is not in our national interest.

As “proof” of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his enemies, the Obama administration is relying on intelligence provided by the most suspicious of all sources.

In an August 28 article for the UK’s Guardian newspaper, Harriet Sherwood pinpointed the shadowy culprit pushing so-called evidence of poison gas missiles. “The 8200 unit of the Israel Defense Force [IDF], which specializes in electronic surveillance, intercepted a conversation between Syrian officials regarding the use of chemical weapons, [according to] an unnamed former Mossad official. The content of this conversation was relayed to the U.S.”

Although no verifiable data has yet been substantiated or publicly vetted, the Obama administration is justifying an armed response against Assad based on the IDF’s 8200 unit, which is America’s equivalent of the National Security Agency. The 8200 unit also represents the single largest agency within the IDF.

The details surrounding this situation are still so murky that United States Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated during September 3 congressional testimony, “I can’t answer…what we’re seeking in Syria.”

Astute AMERICAN FREE PRESS readers will recall a similar situation in 2012, when “highly placed Israeli sources” leaked fraudulent diagrams to the International Atomic Energy Agency that supposedly showed Iranian computer simulations of nuclear explosions. Even though these models were eventually exposed as poor forgeries, the Obama administration still used this incident to enact even tougher economic sanctions against Iran.

Similarly, in December 2009, London’s Times newspaper released a story exposing Iran’s alleged development of neutron initiators that could trigger nuclear warheads. However, respected former Central Intelligence Agency counter-terrorism expert Philip Giraldi surmised, “The document published recently by the Times . . . is a fabrication.” Later, Giraldi outed the prime suspect behind the ruse: Israel.

These “top secret” files provided to the Times were so flimsy that they contained no issuance date, confidentiality markings, or names of the officials sanctioning or receiving them, said Giraldi.


Iraqi Déjà Vu

• Case for War Against Syria Specious at Best

By Victor Thorn

In 2002, an assortment of neoconservative ideologues and Israel-firsters in and out of the federal government worked behind the scenes to convince President George W. Bush to launch an ill-fated invasion of Iraq. Today, similar voices are operating in the shadows, calling for an attack on Syria

These high priests of war include the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the National Jewish Democratic Council, Jewish political fundraiser and gambling czar, Sheldon Adelson, United States Representative Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and U.S. Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who all support Barack Obama’s push for a military strike against Syria.

In this latest drumbeat for war, many lies similar to those told about Iraq are being invoked to justify going after Syria.

In 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld assured Americans that profits from Iraqi oil would cover the expenses of a U.S. attack. Today, Secretary of State John Kerry claims Arab countries would be willing to foot the entire bill for a full-scale invasion of Syria.

Even more reminiscent of the Iraqi debacle are the words of Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who on April 27, 2007, made a confession to Sean Lengell of The Washington Times.

“[Durbin] knew that the American public was being misled into the Iraqi war, but remained silent because he was sworn to secrecy as a member of the intelligence committee,” Lengell wrote.

“The information we had in the intelligence committee was not the same information being given to the American people,” said Durbin.

Painfully aware of this past deception, Durbin, as a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, voted in favor of Barack Obama’s offensive against Syria on September 4.

Curiously that same day, Representative Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) bravely stated that the Obama administration was manipulating intelligence as a way of pushing America into war.

Considering that Israeli spook organizations are the ones funneling intelligence to the Obama administration, how different is this scenario from Israel-firsters in the Bush administration such as former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and Defense Department consultant Michael Ledeen fabricating letters about Saddam Hussein buying uranium from Niger? Interestingly, it seems former Skull & Bones initiate John Kerry has become an updated version of then-Secretary of State of State Colin Powell, who testified before the United Nations Security Council that two mobile trailers discovered in Iraq were used to store biological weapons.

In 2003, everyone in the U.S. and UK governments knew Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, CIA Director George Tenet and Vice President Dick Cheney. Yet all of them kept repeating lies to convince the world that the U.S. needed to intervene in Iraq for “humanitarian purposes” and to “protect U.S. national security.”

Recently, these same lines were regurgitated on Capitol Hill and at the G-20 meeting in Russia when it came to Syria.

Since the vast majority of Americans are highly suspicious of the Obama administration’s incoherent Syria foreign policy, could it be a coincidence that they’re noticing eerie similarities to the script that was trotted out for Iraq in 2003?

Attack Survivors Liken LBJ to Obama

• Crewmen from USS Liberty say both presidents abandoned U.S. servicemen under attack

By Victor Thorn

As the Six Day War unfolded, on June 8, 1967, USS Liberty crewmen suffered the most shameful betrayal in U.S. history following a deliberate, prolonged attacked by the Israel Defense Forces. As this assault proceeded for nearly two hours, President Lyndon Johnson twice recalled fighter jets en route to rescue this imperiled ship.

On September 3, this reporter spoke with three surviving Liberty crew-members, all of whom made comparisons between their hellish ordeal and recent political events in the Middle East.

When asked how he viewed Obama’s military competency, petty officer Phil Tourney, author of WHAT I SAW THAT DAY: Israel’s June 8, 1967 Holocaust of U.S. Servicemen Aboard the USS Liberty and its Aftermath, replied, “Obama left our men out there to die in Benghazi [Libya, at the U.S. consulate on September 11, 2012] just like Johnson did with the Liberty. Benghazi and the Liberty are very similar because both presidents called back air fighters who were already in flight. You don’t let fellow countrymen out there to die.”

Tourney harbored other doubts, as well.

“My suspicion is that chemical weapons were a false flag by either the Mossad or al Qaeda as away of drawing America into Syria so that we can get the big prize, which is Iran,” he said. “Syria significantly resembles Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, especially if the rebels got chemical weapons that came straight across the border from Israel.”

In regard to the possibility of war, Tourney stated: “Obama put his red line out there, but I don’t think he has the equipment to be President of the United States, especially with a cagey guy like [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, who’ll beat him every time. Obama can’t run anything, especially a war.”

Dave Lewis was a lieutenant commander on the Liberty. He was temporarily blinded after an Israeli torpedo detonated 10’ away from him when striking the Liberty. He echoed similar sentiments to Tourney.

“I wouldn’t put it past Obama to say Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons, even if he knew it was al Qaeda, just to get permission to intervene,” said Lewis.

Petty officer Gary Brummett also doesn’t trust Obama’s judgment as a commander in chief.

“Benghazi smells just like the Liberty because Obama denied reinforcements to our men. I heard that fighter jets could have reached Benghazi in 30 minutes. I don’t trust government in any capacity.”

As for chemical weapons attacks, Brummett observed, “If the rebels were responsible, did they get them from a third party? I want someone to tell me who manufactured these weapons. I’m always suspicious whenever we get involved in that part of the world.”

Getting more specific, Brummett noted, “No matter how much treasure we send to the Middle East, we’re still not liked because the U.S. sides with Israel against everyone else. If Israel is our only friend over there, we sure don’t need any enemies.”

Brummett made a final significant point. “There are already 120,000 dead in Syria. Dead is still dead, whether it’s from chemical weapons, torture, gunshot, or getting beat over the head with a hammer.”

Lastly, this reporter contacted Ted Arens, a mobile radar operator who served one tour in Vietnam. Arens is currently representing Liberty survivors in their quest to open a congressional investigation into Israel’s bloodthirsty attack.

When asked about how Obama, Hillary Clinton, White House spokesman Jay Carney, and then U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice all stated with 100% certainty that the Benghazi attacks resulted from a YouTube video, Arens snapped, “I don’t trust anything those bastards say. Why should we trust them now in Syria? Obama is controlled by multibillionaires, and there are lots of Jewish billionaires.”

“The Middle East’s future is all about a Greater Israel, and America will pay for it with blood and money,” he concluded.

“Greater Israel” refers to the Jewish-held belief that the borders of Israel should extend from the Nile to the Euphrates and include Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan and, of course, Syria.

Victor Thorn

Victor Thorn is a hard-hitting researcher, journalist and author of over 50 books.

Free Speaking Students Under Attack

• Conservative, Christian, politically incorrect students being targeted by thought police

By Keith Johnson

Young, constitutionally-minded American students are on the front-lines of an ongoing battle to preserve our cherished First Amendment right to speak freely on college and university campuses across the nation.

For far too long, administrative speech codes and arbitrary school policies have been used to silence students with conservative or Christian viewpoints while their more liberal counterparts are not only given a free pass, but are also allowed to participate in the silencing process.

On August 26, the undergraduate student government at the University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) unanimously passed a resolution “calling for the end of the use of the phrase ‘illegal immigrant,’ saying it violates human rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution,” according to college investigative group Campus Reform.

In other words, liberal students, with no real-world legal experience, are now extra-judicially interpreting the Constitution and creating their own laws, which can then be used to punish the minority of student activists fighting to stem the tide of illegal aliens flooding across U.S. borders.

While the UCLA resolution remains to be challenged, students elsewhere are taking a stand against these constitutionally restrictive policies.


VIDEO: Student Banned from Passing Out Constitutions on Constitution Day at Modesto Junior College

Hard Assets Alliance

In Ohio, Christian advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) recently filed suit against Columbus State Community College for violating the constitutional rights of Spencer Anderson, a student who was restricted from handing out fliers for a pro-life club he wanted to start on campus.

“The college has a policy restricting when and where students can speak,” said ADF senior legal council David J. Hacker during a recent interview with this AMERICAN FREE PRESS reporter. “Our client had to get permission 48 hours in advance and was then assigned to one of two very small ‘speech zones.’”

Hacker went on to say that college officials forbade his client him from exiting the speech zone, which, according to the complaint, measures a mere “800 square feet” and “occupies approximately 0.02%” of the college’s 80-plus acre campus.

“This is a very onerous restriction on free speech,” said Hacker. “It’s unacceptable for the marketplace of ideas. We should be encouraging students to speak and get each other involved in activities rather than stifling them.”

At the same time limitations were being placed on Anderson’s activities, other student activists were allowed to roam freely about the campus.

“My client has watched two other groups promoting their causes outside of these speech zones,” said Hacker. “One was handing out fliers for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the other for a student diversity issue.”

When asked to cite another example of this kind of discrimination, Hacker replied: “We had a case at the University at Buffalo, where a pro-life student group wanted to hold a debate on the morality of abortion. They went so far as getting the proper reservations for a classroom and setting up the event before being told [by school officials] that they needed to have university police present. They were essentially forced to have this security, despite any evidence of an anticipated disruption, and pay [campus police] over $650 out of their own pockets. Meanwhile, an atheist group was holding a debate in the same building and there was no security.”

Although stories like this are disturbing, many have been resolved in favor of the persecuted student thanks to Hacker and his organization.

“[ADF] has litigated many cases over the years that have resulted in major victories,” said Hacker. “We were one of the first to bring a “speech code” case before the U.S. Court of Appeals and ended up winning [on behalf of the plaintiff] against Temple University.”

Hacker continued: “In California, we represented a group of students who challenged a very oppressive speech code that applied to every state-run campus. We ultimately had that struck down and liberated half a million students on 23 campuses.”

Despite these victories, Hacker said that there is much work left to be done, and that those fighting to protect free speech on campus will face a major challenge in the months ahead thanks to the federal government.

“After investigating a sexual harassment case at the University of Montana, the Departments of Justice and Education have come up with a sexual harassment “blueprint” for colleges and universities throughout the country,” said Hacker. “If a female simply didn’t like what a male student said, she could report it and that student could be punished.”

Hacker went on to say that the blueprint, which would apply to every college receiving federal funding, gives such a broad definition of sexual harassment that it could be used to prohibit all manner of speech.

“This will give administrator’s unbridled authority to interpret speech and decide if it’s offensive,” said Hacker. “Unfortunately, what we’re seeing is that all too often, it’s the Christian, conservative and pro-life students who are accused and punished for so-called ‘offensive,’ speech.

Keith Johnson in an investigative journalist and creator of the Revolt of the Plebs.

Northern Californians Seek Independent State

By John Friend

Residents in northern California moved in early September to form their own state separate from the Golden State, specifically citing the need for local control, smaller government and gun rights in their formal declaration of secession. It’s part of a growing number of movements across the United States that not only seek to break away from oppressive state governments but even to leave the U.S. entirely.*

On September 3, the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors took the first step in a long journey aimed at withdrawing from the state of Calif. The Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 in support of a citizen-led initiative “to commence the Constitution’s Article 4, section 3 process of carving out a new state from an existing state just like the state of Maine was created out of the state of Massachusetts,” Supervisor Marcia Armstrong told this reporter.

“This was a grassroots citizen movement,” Ms. Armstrong explained. “A resolution was placed on our agenda by a group of citizens for discussion. After dialogue, we made it a declaration to be read into the record of the state legislature.”

Mark Baird, a rancher in Siskiyou County who also serves as president of Scott Valley Protect Our Water and vice president of the Siskiyou Water Users Association, is a leading proponent of withdrawing from the state of Calif. with the long-term goal of forming the state of Jefferson, which would consist of rural counties in northern Calif. and southern Oregon.

“We have to have government that’s local, understands our issues and has empathy” for those affected, Baird explained during the Board of Supervisors meeting.


Hard Assets Alliance

Rural residents of northern Calif. and southern Oregon have long sought to establish an independent state called Jefferson. Efforts to form the state of Jefferson go back to the 1940s, and have gained momentum in recent years under the leadership of Mr. Baird and many others who are concerned about the future of their rural communities. Most of the residents in rural northern Calif. have deep connections to their communities, farms, and ranches.

“Many of my constituents are descendants of the California pioneers who came here in the 1850s during the Gold Rush,” Armstrong explained to this newspaper. “Many remain on those very same ranches established by their ancestors and are 5th and 6th generation Californians.”

Rural folk in northern Calif. feel disconnected from the Calif. state government centered in Sacramento, which they contend is often dominated by more heavily-populated urban areas in the southern part of the state. They say that their interests are not being properly represented or championed in Sacramento. Water rights issues, the rural fire prevention fee, lack of representation in Sacramento, and other burdensome state regulations imposed on rural residents top the list of grievances of those wishing to withdraw from the state.

Gabe Garrison, a local resident, expressed a popular sentiment: “Many proposed laws are unconstitutional and deny us our God-given rights. We need our own state so we can make laws that fit our way of life.”

Ms. Armstrong explained that her vote in support for the declaration to withdraw from the state of Calif. was based on five key factors: over-regulation by the state government, restrictions on rights specifically protected by the U.S. Constitution particularly relating to the Second Amendment, inadequate representation of rural residents in Sacramento, the dominance of regional boards and associations over locally elected government institutions, and the need to return to limited government.

“The ultimate goal of our initiative is nothing less than state hood,” Mr. Baird stated to this reporter. “Americans and particularly pioneers and westerners are known for doing difficult things.  My wife and I built our ranch with our own…hands.  We built our own house.  We grow our own food.  We built our business, against a regulatory environment which has done everything in its power to stifle free enterprise and the American Dream.”

“People in Southern California tend to dismiss this as unachievable,” Baird continued. “Let me remind you that this very thing has been done four times in the history of our country.  Also, remember a very small group of individuals with the grit to stand up for what is right founded the United States of America.”

Mr. Baird and others working for the establishment of the state of Jefferson are seeking to “start over” and “get back to the basics of good government.”

“We are a moral people and we need a moral government,” explained Baird, who has expressed outrage at some of the extremely liberal policies coming from Sacramento, including the Calif. state law recently passed granting transgender children the right to choose which bathroom they wish to use regardless of their biological gender.

“People in the south do not understand who we are much less how we live,” Mr. Baird went on to say.

Siskiyou County’s declaration for withdrawing from the state of Calif. must be approved by both the state legislature and the U.S. Congress. Readers of AFP are encouraged to visit California Rural counties for equal representation to learn more about this initiative.

“We must do this or we will perish,” Mr. Baird concluded. “Many of us are in dire straits. We must win in order to improve our lives and the lives of our families.”

* While the Jefferson plan only calls for seceding from the states of Calif. and Oreg., there are currently proposals in 15 states to secede from the U.S. entirely. From Vermont all the way to Alaska, different grassroots groups have mobilized to get out from under the heavy hand of the federal government. This includes the Cascadian Independence Project, which seeks to form a new country out of British Columbia, Washington, Oreg., parts of southern Alaska and northern Calif., as well as the League of the South, which is a Southern nationalist organization that seeks a “free and independent Southern republic.”

AFP Newpaper Banner

John Friend is a writer who lives in California.

Supreme Test for Monsanto

• Organic seed growers act to force agri-giant into court

By Mark Anderson

The Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association (OSGATA) has firmly stood its ground in perhaps the most important legal action ever taken against agri-giant Monsanto. But more legal work remains to be done.

As AMERICAN FREE PRESS just learned, this grassroots group of 73 American organic and conventional family farmers, public advocacy groups and seed businesses asked the United States Supreme Court on September 5 to hear their concerns and move this lawsuit to the next level.

OSGATA’s over-arching goal is to maintain and expand the freedom to farm—and ideally to feed the population with food that not only is generally healthy, but which also is free of genetically modified organism (GMO) contamination.


In a formal statement, OSGATA President Jim Gerritsen, a Maine organic farmer, recalled that in a June 10, 2013 ruling, a three-judge federal court of appeals panel in Washington ruled that the plaintiffs are not entitled to bring a lawsuit to protect themselves from Monsanto’s transgenic seed patents because “Monsanto has made binding assurances that it will not ‘take legal action against growers whose crops might inadvertently contain traces of Monsanto biotech genes.’ ”

Hard Assets Alliance

Gerritsen, who distrusts Monsanto’s assurances, told AFP that ascending to the Supreme Court to challenge Monsanto concerns an important “point of law.” This may inspire the court to hear OSGATA’s case, he reasoned, since asserting such an “important point of law,” not the perceived severity of past rulings, is a major criterion the high court uses in deciding which cases to hear. “The court hears just 80 to 100 of the 8,000 cases it’s asked to each year,” Gerritsen noted.

OSGATA’s lead counsel, Daniel Ravicher, explained: “While the Court of Appeals correctly found that the farmers and seed sellers had standing to challenge Monsanto’s invalid patents, it incorrectly found that statements made by Monsanto’s lawyers during the lawsuit mooted the case. We have asked the Supreme Court to . . . reinstate the right of the plaintiffs to seek full protection from Monsanto’s invalid transgenic seed patents.”

As AFP first reported early in 2012, Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association et al. vs. Monsanto was launched because Monsanto’s genetically engineered seed, via wind-borne pollen and insects, was discovered to be contaminating neighboring non-GMO farms. Monsanto paradoxically claimed that even though the affected non-GMO farmers had no control over the patented GMO transgenic seed materials blowing onto their crops, the farmers were somehow guilty of  “patent infringement.”

As Gerritsen told AFP earlier in the process: “We don’t want one penny from Monsanto. American farmers deserve their day in court, to prove that farmers deserve protection from Monsanto’s abuse, and that Monsanto’s genetically engineered patents are not valid.”

Evidence cited in the plaintiffs’ court filings argues that “genetically engineered seed has negative economic and health effects, and that the promised benefits of genetically engineered seed—increased production and decreased herbicide use—are false,” OSGATA noted, in announcing its new Supreme Court effort.

Gerritsen noted that in 1817, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote that, to be patentable, an invention must not be “injurious to the well-being, good policy, or sound morals of society,” and “a new invention to poison people . . . is not a patentable invention.”

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving reporter. Listen to Mark’s weekly radio show on the AMERICAN FREE PRESS RADIO NETWORK.

AUDIO INTERVIEW: DAV Donor Pulls the Plug


Podcast Play Button

After reading an article in AMERICAN FREE PRESS entitled “Disabled Vets Charity Takes Care of its Leaders While Thousands Left Homeless,” subscriber and Disabled American Veterans member Parmenio A. Inglesias was outraged and decided to do something about it.

Mr. Iglesias describes his reaction to the discovery that the executives of the non-profit charity he had been donating his meager sums to for many decades, are taking home hundreds of thousands of dollars every year, while nearly 200,000 veterans are homeless and hungry on the streets of America, in this authentic interview (13:23).


Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s ‘Underground Interview’ series.

Be sure to check out all of AFP’s free audio interviews. You’ll find them on the HOME PAGE, in the ARCHIVES & in the AUDIO section.


Donate to us


Lack of Leadership Blamed for Demise of Pro-White Group

• Members of National Alliance concerned about future viability

By Pete Papaherakles

The National Alliance (NA), once the best-financed and best-organized white nationalist organization of its kind in the United States, is now on the verge of extinction as NA headquarters in West Virginia are up for sale. Founded by Dr. William Pierce in 1974, NA membership in 2002, the year of Pierce’s untimely death, was estimated at 2,500, with an income of $1 million annually. By 2012 that number declined to less than 100, and today it is doubtful that even a handful of members remains.

The blame for the demise of NA has been placed on Erich Gliebe, who became chairman in 2002 after Pierce’s death. Unlike Pierce, a physicist whose many books, lectures and lifelong dedication to the cause has inspired thousands, if not millions, Gliebe has been referred to by fellow members as uncharismatic, incompetent, a poor leader —and even a thief.

In an August 12 interview with AMERICAN FREE PRESS, Jim Ring, the No. 2 man in NA who resigned last October, explained: “I resigned because I realized that Erich Gliebe is not only incompetent but he is also dishonest. He has put up for sale most of NA’s headquarters, the proceeds of which will go to him personally.”

Ring added that “unit coordinators like me and other leaders started resigning after the 2012 National Alliance Leadership Conference in October 2012 and most other members resigned after the reactivating of my website in January of this year.”

Gliebe reportedly stopped paying property taxes on some of NA’s headquarters property in 2012.

“The sad result is the demise and loss of NA’s headquarters that thousands of ex-members put their own sweat and hard-earned money into creating for what now appears to be all for naught,” said Ring.

Asking price for 289 acres and the Pierce Memorial Hall is nearly $700,000.

“With the sale of this acreage Gliebe will certainly sell off the remaining property shortly after and move the inventory to his suburban Cleveland home,” explained Ring. “Erich’s annual salary from NA has gone from $65,000 in 2004 to $22,000 in 2012. But for the past few years Erich has held another full time job in Cleveland. He has also been pocketing donations and sales of whatever he could liquidate.”


Resistance Records, once a thriving music company acquired and built up by Pierce, had recording deals on both sides of the Atlantic and produced most of NA’s income.

“Gliebe drove the company out of business through mismanagement [and] shady deals,” said Ring. “The previous board appointed by Dr. Pierce had accused him of embezzlement. Erich even sold Dr. Pierce’s gun collection for personal gain, as well as having sold a sizable amount of timber from the property to a logging company for $38,000, keeping much of that money for himself. “

Of particular significance is a bequest worth anywhere from $160,000 to $1 million left to NA by Robert McCorkill, a Canadian chemist and NA member who died in 2004. It included a collection of ancient Greek and Roman coins.

An injunction currently tying up this money in court could be lifted when the matter goes to trial on September 10, at which point NA may receive the bequest. Gliebe would have control over that money once the court rules.

Even Pierce’s own brother, Sanders Pierce, resigned from NA on April 2013. “I feel it necessary to explain my resignation from the organization my brother built in protest to Erich remaining as chairman,” he said, citing Gliebe’s “severe neglect” of NA business. “I simply feel he should turn over the chairmanship to someone who will devote full time to NA.”

Although Gliebe may have acted in an incompetent and unethical manner, it is unclear to what extent his actions have been illegal.

NA’s board of directors consists of Gliebe, Jayne Cartwright and Ryan Miziarka.

All three are equally culpable for what is happening with NA. Not only can Gliebe not do anything without the approval of the other two, but Ms. Cartwright and Miziarka can actually have Gliebe removed as chairman if they choose.

A March 30 post on stated that even after receiving dozens of letters of concern from NA members across the country both Cartwright and Miziarka have remained silent.

When Sanders Pierce finally placed a call to Miziarka, the board member told him that he does not pay attention to the goings-on within the organization and therefore could offer no comment on the situation.

Donate to us

Pete Papaherakles is a writer and political cartoonist for AFP and is also AFP’s outreach director. Pete is interested in getting AFP writers and editors on the podium at patriotic events. Call him at 202-544-5977 if you know of an event you think AFP should attend.