The Victory Hour July 13, 2013

Download Here


  1. #1 by bigcree1 on 07/14/2013 - 9:34

    As always, you both make this a very informative show with all sorts of shares, Articles and overviews of Geopolitics regarding the jewish matrix of control. Dr Barrett nails it with his synopsis of jew Bankster Fraudster wars against Nations who resist their takeover such as Libya, Syria, Egypt and now Iran. Egeria, you came up with a good name for them ‘jewish Imperial Complex. Max I like the SS story of ‘Aud & Delila’. Fantastic! It illustrates the extreme opposites these two represent. One loyal and honorable with an unshakable love for her husband, and the other quite the opposite in every way, Polar opposites.

  2. #2 by Ghazi Al Hind on 07/14/2013 - 9:34

    “Outspoken Israel supporter” gets UK minister post

    …it’s all very well maximizing shareholder value and seeking partners for innovation but, without ethics, this could easily become complicity in crime.”

    by Nureddin Sabir

    Editor, Redress Information & Analysis

    Imagine if British Prime Minister David Cameron had appointed a Muslim and self-confessed “outspoken supporter of Palestine” to a ministerial post and then went on to joke that there are so many Muslims in his ruling Conservative Party that it might as well be called “the Party of Muhammad”.

    One doesn’t need to live in the UK to predict with confidence that there would be public outrage, with the media leading the charge.

    Yet this is precisely what has happened, except that no Muslims are involved and there’s not a murmur from the British media.

    On 19 June Agent Cameron appointed Ian Livingston, the 48-year-old chief executive of the BT Group, as trade and investment minister and elevated him to the House of Lords, the unelected upper chamber of the British Parliament.

    Livingston is no ordinary figure – and it’s not the almost GBP10 million he pocketed from the telecommunications giant last year that makes him stand out.

    He is, as the Times of Israel reports, possibly the British government’s “most committed Jew” and “certainly its most outspoken supporter of Israel”, which Livingston has called “the most amazing state in the world”.

    The “Torah party”

    Livingston joins many other top Jewish figures in the Conservative Party, including co-chairs Lord Feldman and Grant Shapps MP, who has defined himself as “quite observant”; senior treasurer Howard Leigh, a member of the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC); and former party treasurers Richard Harrington MP and Lord Fink, another member of the JLC.

    In fact, there are so many Jews at the top of Britain’s Conservative Party that Agent Cameron once quipped it should be known as the Torah party rather than the Tory party.

    But it’s not just the top of the Conservative Party that’s infested with Israeli pimps and stooges. One reputable British source says that up to 80 per cent of Conservative members of Parliament belong to the Conservative Friends of Israel lobby group.

    According to the Times of Israel,

    Livingston leads an active Jewish life, regularly attending an Orthodox shul [synagogue], Borehamwood and Elstree United Synagogue just outside London. He is a well-known supporter of Israel and of Jewish charities, in recent years hosting or speaking at events for high school Yavneh College, the United Jewish Israel Appeal, human rights NGO Rene Cassin, and Jewish business incubator TraidE, among other causes.

    In October 2011, in a pre-Rosh Hashanah roundtable discussion for the Jewish Chronicle newspaper, Livingston said that he keeps a kosher home and that his two children, Alastair and Emma, “have chosen a reasonably Orthodox path”. Asked to describe and rank the three key determinants of his identity, he replied, “Jewish, Scot, male”.

    Partner in crimes against humanity

    As with all Israeli stooges, Livingston is an ardent opponent of the growing movement that campaigns to end the Israeli occupation and change Israel’s criminal and racist policies through economic sanctions.

    …it’s all very well maximizing shareholder value and seeking partners for innovation but, without ethics, this could easily become complicity in crime.

    Shortly after his appointment as chief executive of BT in 2008, he hosted a dinner for 19 Israeli hi-tech firms which showcased their products in the BT Tower.

    “The relationship with Israel is good for BT because it means making money,” he told guests. “It is not just Israel as a partner for innovation, but as a partner for business”.

    The Times of Israel reports that in BT Livingston dismissed calls by the charity War on Want for BT to disassociate itself from the Israeli telecommunications company Bezeq. His reasons, relayed to the Jewish Chronicle, were rather disingenuous:

    I have not received a single email from anyone in War on Want expressing any concerns about a relationship we may or many not have had in Syria, in Libya or anywhere else. You wonder and ask yourself repeatedly: Why is it? Is it anti-Americanism? Is it anti-Semitism? Is it anti-Zionism where they treat Israel differently? … That is a discomfort I feel just now. It is not a personal discomfort. It is a discomfort about something in society.

    This is a common refrain of Israeli stooges and pimps desperate to distract attention from the truth of history that underlines the opposition to having normal relations with an abnormal, criminal, pariah state. It’s a trick, a ruse, intended to smear opponents of Israel with the stigma of “anti-Semitism” in order to draw attention away from the facts, namely, the thousands of villages erased by Israel in order to implant itself in the land of the Palestinian people, the systematic ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, undertaken to make lebensraum for foreign Jews, the criminal occupation of additional Arab territories in the 1967 war and the racist discrimination against non-Jewish citizens of Israel, to mention but a few of the Jews-only state’s crimes. (For more about the criminal foundations of the state of Israel, see Alan Hart’s “Israel: 65 years of war crimes” and Stuart Littlewood’s “Zionism’s diabolical blueprint“.)

    Furthermore, it’s all very well maximizing shareholder value and seeking partners for innovation but, without ethics, this could easily become complicity in crime. As Yotam Feldman’s documentary “The Lab” shows, Israeli business and innovation can be inextricably bound with crimes against humanity, for in Israel the fruits of “innovations” are often the outcome of tests carried out on Palestinian guinea pigs living under Israel’s illegal occupation.

    But, ultimately, one cannot help but feel sorry for the British people who don’t seem to have a clue – or don’t care – about what’s happening at the top echelons of power in their country.

    Britain has been hijacked by people – not just Jews, but also Christians and others of no faith – whose principal loyalty is not to their own country but to a foreign power, Israel, and who don’t seem to consider themselves accountable to their constituents but to political lobbies promoting Israeli, not British, interests.

    It says a lot about the courage and integrity of the British media, foremost the state broadcaster, the BBC, that the story of the appointment of Ian Livingtson, the “outspoken supporter of Israel”, was broken by an Israeli, not a British, media outlet.

  3. #3 by Ghazi Al Hind on 07/14/2013 - 9:34

    Should the British Government be considered Occupied?

    Ten years ago Tam Dalyell, the ‘Father of the House’ (i.e. the most senior member of the House of Commons in the British Parliament), sparked a huge row by accusing the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, of “being unduly influenced by a cabal of Jewish advisers” .

    In an interview with Vanity Fair, Dalyell named Lord Levy (Blair’s personal envoy on the Middle East), Peter Mandelson (whose father was Jewish), and Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary (who has Jewish ancestry), as three of the leading figures who had influenced Blair’s policies on the Middle East. He told The Telegraph: “If it is a question of launching an assault on Syria or Iran…. then one has to be candid.” Blair, he said, was also indirectly influenced by Jewish people in the Bush administration, including Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser, Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defence secretary, and Ari Fleischer, the President’s press secretary.

    Dalyell’s remarks were sad and unfounded, said Lord Janner, chairman of the Holocaust Education Trust. “Tony Blair is his own man. He will follow advice if he considers it correct and not otherwise. He has been a good friend of the Jewish people and the Jewish state.”

    Dalyell was misguided, said Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, a spokesman for Britain’s Reform Synagogues. “Concerning Iraq it was crystal clear that Tony Blair was not swayed by popularity or anyone else but by his own deep convictions. It is also obvious that the majority of President Bush’s circle are Christian Evangelicals rather than Jews.”

    Ned Temko, the American-born editor of the Jewish Chronicle, said: “I just think these sort of comments are offensive and are a profound misunderstanding of the way foreign policy is made in the United States or here.”

    Dalyell also told The Scotsman on Sunday : “Blair and Straw have become far too close to these people and Lord Levy, who is an unaccountable ambassador in the Middle East, is part of this group. They are acting on an extremely Zionist, Likud-nik agenda. In particular I am concerned that some of them are pushing for an attack on Syria, for reasons of Israeli security. ”

    MP Louise Ellman, a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-Semitism, said: “This absurd proposition implies a Jewish plot in high places…”

    Former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a senior member of Scotland’s Jewish community, was rudely dismissive: “We all know that Tam gets bees in his bonnet and eight times out of 10 they are nuts but the other two are brilliant. This is, I’m afraid, one of the nutty ones.”

    Next day the Guardian reported that Dalyell could face an investigation for inciting racial hatred Eric Moonman, president of the Zionist Federation, was seeking advice on whether there was a case for referral. “I believe there is,” he said.

    Today it is obvious that old Tam was neither nutty nor misguided. He joined the dots and saw the danger, as did many others.
    “So many Jews that the Tory party should be known as the Torah party”

    Meanwhile the Jewish cabal flourishes. A week ago Ian Livingston was handpicked by prime minister David Cameron for the trade minister job. Cameron, who had previously broken with traditional wisdom and appointed the first Jewish ambassador to Israel, was reported by an ecstatic Times of Israel as having now decided to bring into the government possibly its most committed Jew yet, and certainly its most outspoken supporter of Israel, which Livingston called “the most amazing state in the world.”

    Livingston is not elected. He’s appointed… and created a Lord to make it look kosher.

    The newspaper went on to name other top Jewish figures in the Conservative party such as co-chairs Lord Feldman and Grant Shapps MP, senior treasurer Howard Leigh, a member of the Jewish Leadership Council; and former party treasurers Richard Harrington MP and Lord Fink, another member of the JLC.

    “There are so many Jews at the top of Britain’s Conservative party, Prime Minister David Cameron once quipped, that it should be known as the Torah party rather than the Tory party,” crowed the paper.

    And to make the Prime Minister feel thoroughly at home in his Torah party a Jewish scholar, after tracing Cameron’s ancestry, claimed he could be “a direct descendant of Moses or, at least, a cousin”.

    In case our American friends are puzzled by this Torah/Tory business, ‘Tory’ is an old 17th century name for the modern Conservative party founded in the 1830s.

    While nobody is suggesting, I hope, that Jews have no place in our law-making, it is not unreasonable to wish the number to reflect their presence in the population. Three years ago The Jewish Chronicle published a list of Jewish MPs in Britain’s parliament, naming 24. The Jewish population in the UK at that time was – and probably still is – around 280,000 or just under 0.5%. There are 650 seats in the House of Commons so, on a proportional basis, Jews could expect 3 seats. But with 24 they were 8 times over-represented. Which meant, of course, that other groups were under-represented.

    The UK’s Muslim population is about 2.4 million or nearly 4%. Similarly, their quota would be 25 seats but they had only 8 – a serious shortfall. If Muslims were over-represented to the same extent as Jews (i.e. 8 times) they’d have 200 seats. Imagine the hullabaloo.

    Israeli flag-waving a stepping-stone to high office

    Over-representation in the House of Commons is only part of the picture. Many more Jews have been inserted into the House of Lords and other non-elected and unaccountable positions. An even bigger worry is the huge number of non-Jewish Zionists that have infiltrated every level of political and institutional life. They swell the pro-Israel lobby to such an extent that it is believed to account for 80% of the Parliamentary Conservative Party, which now rules with the Liberal Democrats as their junior coalition partner.

    Too many pro-Israel MPs speak and act as if they’d rather wave the Israeli flag than the Union Jack. These ‘Israel-firsters’ never condemn the regime’s illegal occupation, apartheid-style policies, war crimes and refusal to sign up to nuclear non-proliferation, inspection and safeguards. They lock Britain (and British foreign policy) into Israel’s sickening ambitions and immorality. Defending the indefensible, as they do, inevitably raises questions for our national security, a deadly serious issue given the sheer number of Zionists now in British public life and the enemies they have made across the world, and continually provoke.

    The Jewish Chronicle, in its 2006 special report ‘Team Cameron’s big Jewish backers’, revealed the support that enabled Cameron to suddenly burst into the political limelight, almost unknown, to take the Conservative leadership. With no significant achievement under his belt he was then able to manoeuvre, with the help of his backers, into Britain’s PM slot.

    He is also a self-declared Zionist and voted for the war in Iraq, so how trustworthy does that make him? In a speech to Jewish fundraisers in London last year he declared: “There is no contradiction between being a proud Jew, a committed Zionist and a loyal British citizen.” How can someone who so closely aligns himself with a belligerent foreign military power like Israel hope to convince us that he’s 100 percent loyal to Britain and her interests, while once again drawing us unwillingly into conflict with Israel’s enemies, this time Iran and Syria, with whom we have no quarrel?

    Cameron’s Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has been a member of Conservative Friends of Israel since he was 15. Hague once said: “The unbroken thread of Conservative Party support for Israel that has run for nearly a century from the Balfour Declaration to the present day will continue.”

    Alistair Burt, a former officer of the Parliamentary group of Conservative Friends of Israel, is Foreign Office minister for the Middle East. And David Lidington, who has spoken of being a “staunch defender” of the State of Israel, is Foreign Office minister for Europe.

    So the key stooges are safely installed and activated.
    Powerless to deliver justice

    It is said that becoming a Friend of Israel is a necessary stepping-stone to high office. Consequently fans of Israel are embedded at all levels in the fabric of British political life and at the heart of the Government.

    When a group of concerned academics wrote to the Committee on Standards in Public Life complaining about Israel’s “deep penetration”, they were told it was not something the committee could investigate. A closer look revealed that some members of the committee had close links with Friends of Israel.

    How do these Israeli flag wavers think it looks, standing shoulder to shoulder with religious fanatics and psychopaths who horribly persecute the Christian and Muslim communities of the Holy Land? It is especially offensive to see them endorsing a pseudo democracy that dishes out thuggish treatment even to children who, says the UN, are arrested by Israeli military and police and systematically subjected to degrading treatment, and often tortured. Read the report and weep

    Thanks to its misplaced admiration for Israel, the British government fails to intervene and stand up for justice. The disgrace is unbearable. Here is just one of many appalling examples. Right now Christians in that once beautiful country are under imminent threat of losing their land, their livelihood, and their way of life because an emergency law cooked up by the illegal occupier Israel, and upheld by an Israeli court, allows the Israelis to seize territory in the Cremisan Valley near Bethlehem. This brazen land-grab opens the way for the hated separation wall (ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice) to be extended across the valley, connecting two Israeli settlements built on stolen Palestinian land in the eastern suburbs of Jerusalem.

    The onward construction of the barrier will divide a Salesian Catholic monastery from the neighbouring Salesian Catholic convent, confiscate most of the convent’s property, and cut off 58 Palestinian families from their agricultural lands – including vineyards, olive groves, and pastures. The barrier will also separate families and surround an elementary school on three sides, forcing young children to pass through a checkpoint to go to class.

    The ICJ (International criminal Justice) required the wall to be dismantled, not extended. And it reminded all States party to the Fourth Geneva Convention that they are under an obligation “to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention”. That was 9 years ago. The world is still waiting. The States never act. Compliance never happens. Non-compliance is rife, and highly profitable to Israel.

    And Israel’s allies, including Britain, perversely reward its non-compliance. Across the West Bank, continuing restrictions on Palestinian access to agricultural lands have led to the slow abandonment and eventual confiscation of those lands by Israeli authorities.

    As I write, Israel’s Knesset have approved the first reading of the Prawer Plan to remove 40,000 indigenous Bedouin people from their ancestral homeland in the Negev. This evil scheme clears the way for the $4 billion “Blueprint Negev” project intended to transform the Negev into a majority-Jewish area even though the Bedouin have lived there for thousands of years.

    At the same time one of Israel’s most dangerous lunatics, Avigdor Lieberman (chairman of the foreign affairs and defence committee), is calling for Israel, after imposing a vicious 7-year blockade, to conquer the Gaza Strip and carry out “a thorough cleansing”, just because Hamas still hasn’t succumbed to Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian homeland.

    Britain could, at a stroke, bring Israel to heel and force the regime to conform to international law or face massive trade penalties. But the prancing posers who pass for our leaders have sold out.

    Cameron’s ‘Torah’ party rules!

    Stuart Littlewood is writer-photographer in the UK. His articles are published widely on the web. He is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation.

  4. #4 by Ghazi Al Hind on 07/14/2013 - 9:34

    A lot of useful information on current affairs at :

  5. #5 by Ghazi Al Hind on 07/14/2013 - 9:34


    NEW DELHI: In what is certain to escalate the already vicious fight between the CBI and the IB over the IshratJahan “fake encounter case”, a former home ministry officer has alleged that a member of the CBI-SIT team had accused incumbent governments of “orchestrating” the terror attack on Parliament and the 26/11 carnage in Mumbai.

    R V S Mani, who as home ministry under-secretary signed the affidavits submitted in court in the alleged encounter case, has said that Satish Verma, until recently a part of the CBI-SIT probe team, told him that both the terror attacks were set up “with the objective of strengthening the counter-terror legislation (sic)”.

    Mani has said that Verma “…narrated that the 13.12. 2001(attack on Parliament) was followed by Pota (Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act) and 26/11 2008 (terrorists’ siege of Mumbai) was followed by amendment to the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act).”

    The official has alleged Verma levelled the damaging charge while debunking IB’s inputs labelling the three killed with Ishrat in the June 2004 encounter as Lashkar terrorists.

    Contacted by TOI, Verma refused to comment. “I don’t know what the complaint is, made when and to whom. Nor am I interested in knowing. I cannot speak to the media on such matters. Ask the CBI,” said the Gujarat cadre IPS officer who after being relieved from the SIT is working as principal of the Junagadh Police Training College.

    Mani, currently posted as deputy land and development officer in the urban development ministry, has written to his seniors that he retorted to Verma’s comments telling the IPS officer that he was articulating the views of Pakistani intelligence agency ISI.

    According to him, the charge was levelled by Verma in Gandhinagar on June 22 while questioning Mani about the two home ministry affidavits in the alleged encounter case.

    In his letter to the joint secretary in the urban development ministry, Mani has accused Verma of “coercing” him into signing a statement that is at odds with facts as he knew them. He said Verma wanted him to sign a statement saying that the home ministry’s first affidavit in the Ishrat case was drafted by two IB officers. “Knowing fully well that this would tantamount to falsely indicting of (sic) my seniors at the extant time, I declined to sign any statement.”

    Giving the context in which Verma allegedly levelled the serious charge against the government, Mani said the IPS officer, while questioning him, had raised doubts about the genuineness of IB’s counter-terror intelligence. He disputed the veracity of the input on the antecedents of the three killed in June 2004 on the outskirts of Ahmedabad with Ishrat in the alleged encounter which has since become a polarizing issue while fuelling Congress’s fight with Gujarat CM Narendra Modi.

    Gujarat Police has justified the encounter citing the IB report that Pakistani nationals Zeeshan Zohar, Amzad Ali Rana and Javed Sheikh were part of a Lashkar module which had reached Gujarat to target Modi and carry out terrorist attacks.

    In its first affidavit, filed in August 2009, the home ministry had cited IB inputs that those killed with Ishrat in the alleged encounter were part of a Lashkar sleeper cell, and had objected to a CBI probe into the “encounter”.

    In its second affidavit, filed in September 2009, the home ministry, irked by the Gujarat government treating the first affidavit as justification of the encounter, said the IB input did not constitute conclusive proof of the terrorist antecedents of those killed. It supported the demand for a CBI probe.

    Mani said Verma doubted the input saying MHA’s first affidavit was actually drafted by IB officer Rajinder Kumar, who looked after IB’s operations in Gujarat at the time of Ishrat “encounter” and now runs the serious risk of being chargesheeted by the CBI for hatching the conspiracy behind the alleged extra-judicial killings.

    Mani said Verma stuck to his guns even after being told that the home ministry did not need outside help. The former home ministry official said Verma insisted that the “input” was prepared after the encounter.

  6. #6 by Ingrid B on 07/14/2013 - 9:34

    Remember BAFS? he said that the way to beat the JWO is through finance..
    re. Kevin Barret, he was in a debate yesterday, on Press TV, his opponent was a raging pro-Israel type, Barret had him redfaced, threatening, and spluttering..
    re. infamous jews who go by the name of Zimmerman, the thug who stalked, and murdered Treyvon Martin, has, in a kangaroo court, been found not guilty by claiming the usual jew defence, of “self defence”..
    re. Syria, there are reports of Al Quaida threatening the FSA..

  7. #7 by aj on 07/14/2013 - 9:34

    Ingrid, the press reporting on the Martin case was and is as deficient and suspect as their reporting on most other items. The American Free Press Roundtable last week covered a numbered of the points and is well worth people’s time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: