5 Spit like rain: Reporter feels mob's hate in the Holy City

(1) Spit like rain: Reporter feels mob's hate in the Holy City
(2) Netanyahu's father says Bibi doesn't want a Palestinian state, set conditions Palestinians would reject
(3) West Bank cannot be 'Judenrein': Netanyahu to German foreign minister
(4) US, Israel settlement deal emerging
(5) Peter Power & London Bombings - Bollyn & Jones letting Moslem suicide bombers off the hook
(6) Ostrovsky: Mossad planned to assassinate Bush1 in Madrid, in the name of Palestinians, and kill the "perpetrators"
(7) Ari Ben-Menashe on Mossad posing as "Palestinian  Terrorists"

(1) Spit like rain: Reporter feels mob's hate in the Holy City
From: Kristoffer Larsson <kristoffer.larsson@sobernet.nu> Date: 09.07.2009 09:13 PM

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/06/2617502.htm

Reporter feels mob's hate in the Holy City

By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker

Posted Mon Jul 6, 2009 9:02am AEST
Updated Tue Jul 7, 2009 6:10am AEST

The ABC's Middle East correspondent Anne Barker became caught in violent street protests involving ultra-Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem at the weekend. This is her graphic account of her ordeal.

As a journalist I've covered more than my share of protests. Political protests in Canberra. Unions protesting for better conditions. Angry, loud protests against governments, or against perceived abuses of human rights.

I've been at violent rallies in East Timor. I've had rocks and metal darts thrown my way. I've come up against riot police.

But I have to admit no protest - indeed no story in my career - has distressed me in the way I was distressed at a protest in Jerusalem on Saturday involving several hundred ultra-Orthodox Jews.

This particular protest has been going on for weeks.

Orthodox Jews are angry at the local council's decision to open a municipal carpark on Saturdays - or Shabbat, the day of rest for Jews.

It's a day when Jews are not supposed to do anything resembling work, which can include something as simple as flicking a switch, turning on a light or driving.

So even opening a simple carpark to accommodate the increasing number of tourists visiting Jerusalem's Old City is highly offensive to Orthodox Jews because it's seen as a desecration of the Shabbat, by encouraging people to drive.

I was aware that earlier protests had erupted into violence on previous weekends - Orthodox Jews throwing rocks at police, or setting rubbish bins alight, even throwing dirty nappies or rotting rubbish at anyone they perceive to be desecrating the Shabbat.

But I never expected their anger would be directed at me.

I was mindful I would need to dress conservatively and keep out of harm's way. But I made my mistake when I parked the car and started walking towards the protest, not fully sure which street was which.

By the time I realised I'd come up the wrong street it was too late.

I suddenly found myself in the thick of the protest - in the midst of hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews in their long coats and sable-fur hats.

They might be supremely religious, but their behaviour - to me - was far from charitable or benevolent.

As the protest became noisier and the crowd began yelling, I took my recorder and microphone out of my bag to record the sound.

Suddenly the crowd turned on me, screaming in my face. Dozens of angry men began spitting on me.
Spit like rain

I found myself herded against a brick wall as they kept on spitting - on my face, my hair, my clothes, my arms.

It was like rain, coming at me from all directions - hitting my recorder, my bag, my shoes, even my glasses.

Big gobs of spit landed on me like heavy raindrops. I could even smell it as it fell on my face.

Somewhere behind me - I didn't see him - a man on a stairway either kicked me in the head or knocked something heavy against me.

I wasn't even sure why the mob was angry with me. Was it because I was a journalist? Or a woman? Because I wasn't Jewish in an Orthodox area? Was I not dressed conservatively enough?

In fact, I was later told, it was because using a tape-recorder is itself a desecration of the Shabbat even though I'm not Jewish and don't observe the Sabbath.

It was lucky that I don't speak Yiddish. At least I was spared the knowledge of whatever filth they were screaming at me.

As I tried to get away I found myself up against the line of riot police blocking the crowd from going any further.
Reassurance

Israeli police in their flak jackets and helmets, with rifles and shields, were yelling just as loudly back at the protesting crowd.

I found them something of a reassurance against the angry, spitting mob.

I was allowed through, away from the main protest, although there were still Orthodox Jews on the other side, some of whom also yelled at me, in English, to take my recorder away.

Normally I should have stayed on the sidelines to watch the protest develop.

But when you've suffered the humiliation and degradation of being spat on so many times - and you're covered in other people's spit - it's not easy to put it to the back of your mind and get on with the job.

I left down a side street and walked the long way back to the car, struggling to hold back the tears.

(2) Netanyahu's father says Bibi doesn't want a Palestinian state, set conditions Palestinians would reject
From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 10.07.2009 02:08 PM

http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/07/netanyahus-father-says-bibi-doesnt-want-a-palestinian-state-and-acted-to-assure-that-outcome.html

July 09, 2009
Netanyahu's father says Bibi doesn't want a Palestinian state, and acted to assure that outcome

From JPost, at the bottom of an article on an emerging deal between US and Israel on settlements (I have great moles):
Channel 2 reported Wednesday night that the prime minister had told his father, 100-year-old historian Benzion Netanyahu, that he purposely set the conditions knowing that the Palestinians would never agree to them.

"He doesn't support [a Palestinian state]," the father said in a phone interview. "He set conditions that they won't ever accept. That's what he told me. He set the conditions and they won't accept even one of them."

http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/07/mr-netanyahu-step-away-from-the-mic-bibi-defends-settlers-to-germans-with-holocaust-analogy.html

July 09, 2009
Mr. Netanyahu, step away from the mic: Bibi defends settlers to Germans with Holocaust analogy

Wow, Benjamin Netanyahu is really on a roll. First, his dad spills the beans on his true intentions for the peace process, then he gets quoted calling Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod "self-hating Jews," and now this from Reuters:

    Hosting the German foreign minister this week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used an especially tainted term to condemn the Palestinian demand that Israel's settlements in the occupied West Bank be removed.

    "Judea and Samaria cannot be Judenrein," a Netanyahu confidant quoted him as telling Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

    Asked how Germany's top diplomat responded to hearing the Nazi Holocaust term for areas "cleansed of Jews," the confidant said, "What could he do? He basically just nodded."

    Protocol might have indicated that a representative of the country that carried out the World War Two genocide, and which has since made much effort to atone, be spared such invocations.

    But these are not normal times for the right-wing Netanyahu coalition.

Um, so who are the Nazis here? The Palestinians who want the West Bank as part of their state (which Jews are welcome to stay in with equal rights)? Or the international community who might be pressing Israel to leave the occupied territories?

While it would be nice to consider this an unfortunate slip of the tongue, Reuters reports that it's actually the Netanyahu government's new communications strategy! The report adds that "some diplomats have quietly questioned the propriety of applying such comparisons," while "German officials made no comment on the terminology." Israeli hasbara isn't what it used to be.

Posted by Philip Weiss at 03:04 PM

(3) West Bank cannot be 'Judenrein': Netanyahu to German foreign minister
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5imw27sU3WlHfkNimwR9C3mCSz5KA

West Bank should not be 'Judenrein': Israel PM

July 10, 2009

JERUSALEM (AFP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the German foreign minister the West Bank "cannot be Judenrein" -- a Nazi expression meaning "cleansed of Jews" -- a senior official said on Friday.

The hawkish premier made the remarks during a visit by Frank Walter Steinmeier earlier this week, according to the official who asked not to be named.

Using Israel's normal terminology for the occupied West Bank, Netanyahu said: "Judaea and Samaria cannot be Judenrein."

There has been mounting EU and US pressure for Israel to halt Jewish settlement expansion in the Palestinian territory.

Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved. ==

http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/10/1006449/netanyahu-tells-german-official-west-bank-cant-be-judenrein

‘Judenrein’

July 10, 2009

(JTA) -- Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly used the Nazi term "Judenrein" in a meeting with the German foreign minister while discussing the possible removal of West Bank settlements.

Reuters quoted a "confidant" of Netanyahu saying that the Israeli prime minister told Frank-Walter Steinmeier earlier this week that "Judea and Samaria" -- the West Bank -- cannot be Judenrein." The term was used by Nazis to refer to areas "cleansed of Jews."

Asked by Reuters how Steinmeier reacted to the term, the confidant said, "What could he do? He basically just nodded."

The source said Netanyahu had been encouraging others in the Cabinet to use the word in defending settlements.

Meanwhile, Steinmeier said Friday that settlements remain an obstacle to peace.

"A solution has to be found," Steinmeier said on Friday, "but a solution will not be found as long as the settlements continue to be expanded," according to media reports.

Steinmeier said chances for a peace deal are the best in 15 years, saying that a "historic window" was open but that states could not hold back for "tactical reasons."

(4) US, Israel settlement deal emerging

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443757019&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Jul 8, 2009 20:59 | Updated Jul 9, 2009 17:56

By HERB KEINON AND GIL HOFFMAN

Israel and the US are moving toward a compromise solution on the settlement issue that might allow both sides to claim "victory," The Jerusalem Post has learned.

Israel-US dispute over settlements flares up again; EU apologizes for comment

According to senior government officials, under this type of solution, Israel would declare a moratorium of a few months on the settlement issue, possibly half a year, while the US would give Israel a green light to complete a still-to-be-determined number of housing units in the settlements that are in advanced stages of construction.

Officials in the Prime Minister's Office would not confirm media reports that work on some 2,500 housing units in the settlements would continue.

Under this type of arrangement, US President Barack Obama would be able to claim a victory in getting Israel to agree to a moratorium on any new housing starts in the settlements, while Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu could claim that he did not agree to a complete freeze, and that housing construction would continue.

In addition, US Mideast envoy George Mitchell would continue efforts to extract normalization gestures from at least some countries in the Arab world.

Israeli officials said that Obama was continuing pushing hard on the settlement issue because of a feeling he needed some breakthrough here to be able to go to the Arab world and build coalitions to help the US deal with mounting problems in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran.

Once agreement is reached on the settlement issue, and the US gets some gestures from the Arab world, the next step would possibly be an event - likely an international conference - where a "to do" list would be presented regarding what needed to be done to move the diplomatic process forward.

This "to do" list, according to one well-placed source, was shaping up as a revamped edition of the road map, with sequential phases and a stronger regional component, meaning that the Arab states would be asked to become involved in the normalization of ties in the early stages, rather than at the end, of the process.

In addition, any new road map would have take into consideration - and deal with in detail - something that did not exist when the original road map was launched in 2003: Hamas control of the Gaza Strip.

Diplomatic sources said that the US, interested in shoring up its relations with Russia, is now much more amenable than in the past to the idea of an international conference in Moscow to launch the new initiative.

The sources said the issue was discussed during Obama's recent visit to Moscow, and that it will also be raised at the G8 meeting that opened Wednesday in Italy.

According to National Security Adviser Uzi Arad, speaking at a Knesset press conference marking Netanyahu's 100th day in office, Netanyahu expects Obama to honor the agreements reached with the Bush administration on West Bank construction,

Arad revealed that ahead of Netanyahu's meeting with Obama in May, the National Security Council prepared reports that articulated the American commitments in great detail. Netanyahu also quizzed his predecessor, Ehud Olmert, in a meeting on Friday about the agreements he had reached with president George W. Bush behind the scenes.

"The problem is that Americans saw the situation from a different perspective than we did and it required convergence that we are working on now," Arad said in response to a question from The Jerusalem Post.

"The US didn't see itself obligated by the agreements. Our demand to respect previous standpoints has necessitated the dialogue with the US continuing to this very day. Israel expects agreements to be honored."

Arad said the policy review period that the Netanyahu and Obama administrations embarked on when the two new leaders took over did not end when they met in Washington and would continue until a framework is agreed on how to proceed on the diplomatic front.

Netanyahu's policy planning director Ron Dermer vowed at the press conference that no compromises would be made on Israel's insistence that a Palestinian state be demilitarized. He promised that the prime minister would never utter the words "Palestinian state" without the word "demilitarized" preceding them.

When asked why Netanyahu waited to say those words in an address at Bar-Ilan University rather than already uttering them in Washington, Dermer said that Netanyahu purposely did so in order to emphasize his conditions for a Palestinian state before committing himself to establishing it.

Channel 2 reported Wednesday night that the prime minister had told his father, 100-year-old historian Benzion Netanyahu, that he purposely set the conditions knowing that the Palestinians would never agree to them.

"He doesn't support [a Palestinian state]," the father said in a phone interview. "He set conditions that they won't ever accept. That's what he told me. He set the conditions and they won't accept even one of them."

Netanyahu's office responded by accusing Channel 2 of "maliciously tricking a 100-year-old man."

Kadima released a statement saying that the interview proved that Netanyahu did not endorse a Palestinian state in good faith.

(5) Peter Power & London Bombings - Bollyn & Jones letting Moslem suicide bombers off the hook

From:  Ian Henshall <crisisnewsletter@pro-net.co.uk> [ + Add to address book ] Date:  09.07.2009 05:22 AM

The issue at the heart of The Ripple Effect and the London bombings is that some people are saying the presumed suicide bombers are completely innocent. Many of these people are saying that there cannot be any Muslim suicide bombers because it is against Islam.

To address the latter point first: this is like saying that the US is not killing innocents in Afghanistan because the bible says thou shalt not kill. In other words there could be a faction of the very varied versions of the Muslim faith which would support suicide attacks. A corollary of this is that this faction could be ultimately controlled by the CIA or Mossad or anyone else and be manipulated for its own ends. I discussed this with Kevin Barret, a US Muslim and 9/11 sceptic on his noliesradio show this week, and I think it's fair to say he accepted this point.

As for the London terror drills, Power has stated unequivocally on the BBC that these were command drills ie just a handful of people in an office. Based on this there may be a link (eg planners of 7/7 worked off a script created by Power) but it would be nothing like the sort of intimate link that many of us suspect occurred with the Pentagon hijack exercise on 9/11 which at the least helped to paralyse the NORAD response. (If of course someone could prove that Power is lying, we would have a real bombshell, but so far as far as I know, no-one has up to now).

Most sceptics here in the UK think that simple theories like The Ripple Effect scenario simply do not fit the facts. Why for instance is it impossible to find any eyewitness corroboration for the very thin press reports, since retracted, that the accused suicide bombers were gunned down in Canary Wharf, a place were thousands of people mingle on their way to work? Why indeed would the police have to gun them down when no-one in the UK except police and criminal lowlife carries a gun?

There are many very fatal objections to the official 7/7 story, but as often happens the Chris Bolyns and Alex Jones of this world are not helping by jumping to conclusions and proposing theories that cannot be substantiated, not to mention that they have delighted the BBC debunkers, grabbed mainstream attention away from more serious researchers, and allowed them to smear us all as hotheads at best and nazis at worst.

Reply (Peter M.):

The Bali Bombings are another case. The Moslems on trial in Indonesia smiled for the cameras, showing no remorse - they certainly did not come across as innocent. Yet Joe Vialls claimed that a mini-nuke had gone off there, meaning that it was done by the US.

Crying Wolf too often harms us in the long run. If we accept EVERY conspiracy theory that comes along, we lose our credibility over the big ones. We should discriminate between 9/11 and minor, more peripheral ones.

The Bali and London bombings were fairly ordinary events compared to 9/11.

Palestinian, Arab and Moslem activists have been engaging in hijackings, bombings and the like for decades. They were not hi-tech, were small-scale, and did not require much sophistication, unlike 9/11.

I believe Victor Ostrovsky and Ari Ben-Menashe had it right. These Israel insiders said, before 9/11, that Mossad periodically using Palestinians to unknowingly carry out terrorist attacks for Israel, attacks which killed Israeli targets, or attacks which descredited Palestinians & Moslems (provoking Western hostility to them).

(6) Ostrovsky: Mossad planned to assassinate Bush1 in Madrid, in the name of Palestinians, and kill the "perpetrators"

Victor Ostrovsky, The Other Side of Deception
HarperCollinsPublishers New York 1994

http://mailstar.net/ostrovsky.html

{p. 28} The Madrid Royal Palace would be the safest place on the planet at the time, unless you  had the security plans and could find a flaw in them. That was exactly what the Mossad  planned to do. It was clear from the start that the assassination would be blamed  on the Palestinians - perhaps ending once and for all their irritating resistance and  making them the people most hated by all Americans.

Three Palestinian extremists were taken by a Kidon unit from their hiding place in Beirut  and relocated incommunicado in a special detention location in the Negev desert. The  three were Beijdun Salameh, Mohammed Hussein, and Hussein Shahin.

At the same time, various threats, some real and some not, were made against the  president. The Mossad clique added its share, in order to more precisely  define the threat as if it were coming from a group affiliated with none  other than Abu Nidal. They knew that name carried with it a certain guarantee of  getting attention and keeping it. So if something were to happen, the media would be  quick to react and say, "We knew about it, and don't forget where you saw  it first."

Several days before the event, it was leaked to the Spanish police that the three  terrorists were on their way to Madrid and that they were probably planning some  extravagant action. Since the Mossad had all the security arrangements in hand, it  would not be a problem for this particular clique to bring the "killers" as close as they  might want to the president and then stage a killing. In the ensuing confusion, the  Mossad people would kill the "perpetrators," scoring yet another victory for the  Mossad. They'd be very sorry that they hadn't been able to save the president, but  protecting him was not their job to begin with. With all the security forces involved and  the assassins dead, it would be very difficult to discover where the security breach had  been, except that several of the countries involved in the confer-

{p. 281} ence, such as Syria, were regarded as countries that assisted terrorists. With  that in mind, it would be a foregone conclusion where the breach was.

As far as this Mossad clique was concerned, it was a win-win situation.

(7) Ari Ben-Menashe on Mossad posing as "Palestinian  Terrorists"
Ari Ben-Menashe, Profits of War: The Sensational Story of the  World-Wide Arms Conspiracy, Allen & Unwin, Sydney 1992.

 http://mailstar.net/vanunu.html

{p. 44} AT 12:30 P.M. on January 16, 1979, four helicopters had lifted off from the  grounds of Tehran's Niavaran Palace, their rotors sweeping aside the snow. There was  nothing to indicate to a would-be assassin which aircraft carried His Imperial Majesty  Mohammad Reza Pahlavi Aryamehr, Shahanshah of Iran, King of Kings, Shadow of the  Almighty, Center of the Universe.

The Shah's departure from Iran would bring about a tumultuous upheaval in the  Middle East. It would also lead to a new threat to the existence of Israel, and ultimately  bring my country into fierce conflict with the United States.

{p. 45} Oil production had come to a standstill. Scores of freighters lay idle in the  Persian Gulf, waiting for customs of ficials to return to work. Moscow had sent an  aircraft to pick up 70 Soviet oil researchers and their families. Arnericans and other  foreign nationals crammed onto U.S. Air Force planes. Iran was out of control; for each  fanatical white-shrouded protester the troops had shot down, another had sprung up to  fill the gap.

As their Imperial Majesties walked toward their silver and blue Boeing 707, two officers  spontaneously turned to face each other, holding up a copy of the Koran for them to  pass under. Then, as the street mobs shouted with joy and smashed the statues  erected in his honor, the King of Kings, a small parcel of Iranian soil tucked in his  pocket, took the controls of the aircraft and flew off into the sunless sky. The Shah's  rule was over.

Israel decided to act fast to protect its interests. On board one of the last  flights that El Al made into Tehran before the airport was closed were 48  Israeli aircrews, all wearing civilian clothes.

A few days later, with the full cooperation of the commander of the Iranian  Air Force - who was later executed - 48 F-14 jets were flown out of Iran to  an air force base in northern Sinai. (They were later sold by Israel to the  Taiwanese.) As proof of the Carter administration's blindness, the U.S. had delivered  these planes to the Shah in September 1978, even before the U.S. Air Force was  supplied with its own. The Shah, whose regime was crumbling around him, had paid  through the nose for them. The U.S. was relieved that the F14s had not fallen  into the "wrong hands." The Israelis had corrected the situation.

{The following begins with some quotes from later in the book, to introduce the  background to the Iran-Iraq war.}

{p. 172} While publicly mouthing words of peace, Peres had privately agreed  to participate in the American double-game of arming both the Iranians and  the Iraqis.

{p. 126} From March 1981 to the end of 1987 Iran spent the incredible sum  of more than $82 billion on equipment sent from the United States, Israel, Europe,  South America (especially Brazil and Argentina), and South Africa. The Iranians  gratefully received it all - old tanks, aircraft (including old French Mirages from  Argentina), TOWs, electronics, radar systems, small arms, artillery, Hawk air-to-ground  missiles, Chinese Silkworm missiles, North Korean Scud missiles, Katusha shells  captured in Lebanon by Israel, cannons - hundreds of thousands of tons of weaponry,  whether it came straight from the factory or was the remnant of some long-dead war.  Vast profits were made by the middlemen.

Iran, maintaining an army of approximately 800,000 men, faced a formidable Iraqi  military force which was adding to its already well-equipped arsenal from  the Soviet Union and France. Iraq was soaking up sophisticated weapons -  MiG fighters, SU fighters, and French Mirage 2000s. Like the Iranians, they too were  spending a fortune. As arms suppliers, the Western world and the Soviet Union could  rub their hands together in glee.

As someone has pointed out, if a question had been put to a computer about what  needed to be done to: 1) get the Arabs off Israel's back; 2) part the Arabs from their  money; 3) keep the Iranians contained - and part them from their money; 4) keep the oil  flowing; 5) make sure the world recycled its old military equipment; 6) keep the Soviets  happy; and 7) make a lot of arms dealers and defense contractors rich, it could not  have come up with a better solution than the Iraq-Iran war.

{p. 68} It would be in Israel's interest to flood Iran with military equipment, but we had  to be cautious. Much of the material we had was American, and if that went to Tehran  without the release of the hostages and Carter's okay, there could be serious  repurcussions in the U.S. Congress with its Democratic majority.

{p. 91} ... the U.S. embargo against Iran covered even commercial engines. The  embargo had not been lifted, but now, to boost the airline, the Iranians were not only  looking for spare parts for the old fleet but hoping to buy British Tristars.

I added up the bill. The grand total was one billion dollars, give or take a  million. Israel's profit - 50 percent. The slush fund looked like it was going  to do very well.

The Iranians screwed up their faces at the price. They knew Israel was ripping them off.  But they had little choice.

{p. 120} In February 1987 a "contribution" was made to the West Australian Labor  Party by our U.S. counterparts in the CIA. In gratitude for the use of Australian soil  for the transfer of arms to Iran, Richard Babayan, a contract operative for the  CIA, received a check for $6 million U.S. from Earl Brian, who was acting on behalf of  Hadron, a CIA "cut-out." Babayan traveled to Perth and stayed at the home of Yosef  Goldberg, an Australian businessman of Israeli origin who was well connected to Israeli  intelligence and to the local Labor Party headed by Brian Burke, then premier of  Western Australia. Babayan handed the check to Goldberg, who in turn gave it to Alan  Bond in his role as the guardian of the John Curtin Foundation funds. This money was  passed on by one of Robert Maxwell's companies in Australia to be held by the Pergamon  Press Trust Fund in Moscow. Babayan later corroborated the details of this operation in  a sworn affidavit.

Despite the high costs involved, profits were still made on the sales to Iran. At  various times the fund reached peaks of more than $1 billion. At its height it  stood at $1.8 billion, with money constantly coming in and going out - a huge turnover  that would have made a successful conventional enterprise very envious. The Likud  leaders running the government intended to use the money for three main purposes.

The first was to finance activities of Yitzhak Shamir's faction of the Likud Party.  Between 1984 and 1989 no less than $160 million was funneled to Shamir's faction,  handled by the deputy minister in the Prime Minister's Office, Ehud Ulmart, who was  very close to the prime minister. Other funds were contributed to the whole Likud  Party, especially to its 1984 and 1988 election campaigns. That amount totaled about  $90 million.

Second, the slush fund helped finance the intelligence community's "black"  operations around the world. These included funding Israeli-controlled  "Palestinian terrorists" who would commit crimes in the name of the  Palestinian revolution but were actually pulling them off, usually  unwittingly, as part of the Israeli propaganda machine.

A key player in some of these operations was the former Jorda-

{p. 121} nian Army Col. Mohammed Radi Abdullah, the man who was with Pearson and  Davies when I made our approach to Davies. Today in his early 50s, Radi was decorated  by King Hussein of Jordan for his bravery in the 1967 Middle East war. However, his  family fell out with the king because they were not willing to participate in the mass  slaughter of Palestinians by the Jordanian Army in 1970. The family emigrated to  London. The colonel married a woman related to Saddam Hussein and went about setting  up a number of companies, including shipping offices in Cyprus and Sicily.

Radi became known as a businessman who championed Arab and Palestinian causes in  Europe. But he missed his homeland and the days when he was lauded as a hero. He fell  to the ways of the West, started drinking heavily and spent a fortune on gambling and  women.

In the mid-1970s, to recoup his losses, Radi went to work for Pearson, who was  supplying intelligence information to Israel. With Radi's unwitting help, Pearson began to  acquire intelligence about Palestinian organizations in Europe. The way he did it was by  selling arms to those organizations. An arms dealer named John Knight, who ran a  company called Dynavest Limited, located at 8 Waterloo Place, London SW1, and  another dealer who operated out of Sidem International Limited, Appleby House, 40 St.  James' Place, St. James' Street, London SW1, acquired arms from Yugoslavia. They  would sell them to Radi, who would in turn sell them to the Palestinian terrorist, Abu  Nidal, and other Palestinian groups. Radi was unaware of Pearson's Israeli connection, as  were the others involved.

While it may seem curious that Pearson, a man working with Mossad, was  encouraging a Jordanian to sell weapons to Israel's enemies, it was actually all  part of a very cunning plot. In doing business with these groups, Radi learned  what they were going to use their weapons for and unsuspectingly passed  the information on to Pearson. Pearson, in turn, passed on to Mossad the  intelligence about the movements of the groups and the number of weapons they had.

Based on Radi's unwitting tips, over a two-month period 14 or 15 Palestinians  were wiped out. Word went out among the

{p. 122} Palestinian groups that Radi was working for Israeli intelligence and, fearing for  his life, he took a trip to Baghdad and presented his case to Abu Nidal himself. Abu Nidal  believed his story that he had been used - which he had - and put the word out that Radi  was "clean." The blame was placed on Yasser Arafat's group - Palestinian factions at  that time were warring among themselves.

Radi went back to his drinking and womanizing, and the money he made selling arms for  Pearson all drained away. At that very vulnerable point, in 1978, Pearson stepped in  again and offered Radi a 200,000 loan. This time, Pearson made it quite clear to him  that the money was coming from an Israeli source. The desperate Radi accepted the  loan and was recruited to work for an antiterrorist group in Israel run by Rafi Eitan.

The group's methods were rather unconventional, one could say heinous, but it had  operated successfully for years. An example is the case of the "Palestinian"  attack on the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985. That was, in fact, an Israeli  "black" propaganda operation to show what a deadly, cutthroat bunch the  Palestinians were.

The operation worked like this: Eitan passed instructions to Radi that it was  time for the Palestinians to make an attack and do something cruel, though  no specifics were laid out. Radi passed orders on to Abu'l Abbas, who, to follow such  orders, was receiving millions from Israeli intelligence officers posing as Sicilian  dons. Abbas then gathered a team to attack the cruise ship. The team was  told to make it bad, to show the world what lay in store for other unsuspecting  citizens if Palestinian demands were not met. As the world knows, the group picked  on an elderly American Jewish man in a wheelchair, killed him, and threw his  body overboard. They made their point. But for Israel it was the best kind  of anti-Palestinian propaganda.

In 1986, Radi was involved in another slush-fund black operation - the well-documented  attempt to blow up an El Al plane. Or at least what was publicly perceived to be an  attempt. In fact, it was a cold, calculated plan conceived by Rafi Eitan to discredit the  Syrians. At a secret meeting in Paris, Eitan told Radi that he wanted to implicate the  Syrian Embassy in London in terrorism and have all the Syrian diplomats thrown out of  Eng-

{p. 123} land. Radi had a 35-year-old cousin, Nezar Hindawi, living in London, who had two  things going for him - he was friendly with the Syrian Air Force intelligence attache in  London; and he had a problem with an Irish girlfriend who told him she was pregnant.

Radi went to his cousin and offered him $50,000. At the same time he told Hindawi that  he wanted him to do some work on behalf of Palestine that would also rid him of his  troublesome girlfriend.

"This money I'm offering you," Radi told Hindawi, "is from our Syrian brothers on behalf  of the Palestinians. We want to blow up a Zionist plane. All you have to do is  make sure the girl gets onto an El Al plane with explosives in her bag."