noworldsystem.com


Lebanon fires at Israeli jets violating its airspace

Lebanon fires at Israeli jets violating its airspace

Press TV
January 11, 2010

The Lebanese army says its anti-aircraft artillery fired at four Israeli fighter jets flying over the country’s southern airspace at low altitude on Monday.

“The army’s anti-aircraft guns fired at four enemy Israeli planes that had been overflying the (southern) area of Marjayoun this morning,” an army spokesman told AFP.

According to the report, about 70 rounds had been fired at the Israeli aircraft.

The Lebanese army reports almost every day violations of its airspace by Israeli warplanes.

It, however, avoids military response, unless they fly within range of the army guns.

A spokesman for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) warned about Israel’s violation of Lebanese airspace saying they were in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended a 33-day Israeli war against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in the summer of 2006.

“We have been noticing a significant number of Israeli overflights into Lebanese airspace over the last week, which constitutes a violation of Resolution 1701,” UNIFIL deputy spokesman Andrea Tenenti said.

Israel, however, claims that it carries out the overflights to monitor what it calls “massive arms smuggling by Hezbollah.”

After a unity government that included Hezbollah was formed in Lebanon, the cabinet adopted a policy statement granting Hezbollah the right to keep its arms.

The move, however, provoked anger among Israeli officials who are always concerned about the movement’s military possessions.

 



U.S. History They Won’t Teach In Schools

U.S. History They Won’t Teach In Schools

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-U5EZ-J75o

U.S. Military Kidnaps Honduran President

Morales: U.S. Planning Coups in Latin America

Iran Finds US-Backed Terrorists in Riots

 



Biden Predicts “International Crisis” Under Obama

Biden Predicts “International Crisis” Within First 6 Months Of Obama Presidency

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
October 20, 2008

In a striking moment of candor, Joe Biden tells us would-be president Obama will face “an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions,” Matthew Jaffe reports on ABC News’ Political Radar blog. Speaking at a Seattle fundraiser, Biden said this “test” would likely unfold in the Middle East or Russia. It would likely be coupled with the economy.

“Gird your loins,” Biden told the crowd. “We’re gonna win with your help, God willing, we’re gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It’s like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy.”

It is interesting Biden would mention Greek mythology to make his point. Augeas, one of the Argonauts, is best known for his stables, which housed the single greatest number of cattle in the country and had never been cleaned until the great hero Heracles came along. Apparently Biden would have us believe Obama is Heracles, the son of Zeus, know for his extraordinary strength, courage, ingenuity, and sexual prowess with both males and females. Biden also put the senator from Illinois in the same league as John F. Kennedy.

Biden said Obama, if elected, will do something extremely unpopular within the next year and will trend down in the polls. “I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?’ We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us,” said Biden.

 

What Will Obama’s “International Crisis” Be?

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
October 22, 2008

Joe Biden’s “guarantee” that an “international crisis” will unfold shortly after President Obama takes office conjures up several different possibilities, but it seems the likely outcome will revolve around an announcement that Iran has developed a nuclear bomb, prompting a potential military attack.

“It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy,” Biden told an audience in Seattle this past weekend.

“Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

The assured tone with which Biden delivered his forecast was staggeringly convincing, and left the observer in no doubt that there will be a major world crisis shortly after Obama takes office. “Mark my words, mark my words,” Biden stressed, adding that “tough” and “unpopular” foreign policy decisions will have to be made.

“I promise you it will occur,” Biden added, “As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it is going to happen.”

Biden’s use of the word “generated” is even more startling. One of the dictionary definitions we find for the word “generated” is “to bring into existence; cause to be; produce,” which begs the question, will this be another staged and manufactured crisis like the 9/11 attacks, which occurred less than 8 months after Bush took office?

Or will it be something even more serious, a nuclear conflagration involving Russia or Iran?

John McCain raised the specter of nuclear war yesterday when he warned that the United States faces “many challenges here at home, and many enemies abroad in this dangerous world,” before mentioning the 1962 Cuban Missile crisis.

Echoing Biden’s comments, McCain said the next president “won’t have time to get used to the office” and “I know how close we came to a nuclear war and I will not be a president that needs to be tested. I have been tested. Senator Obama has not.”

What is the test to which McCain and Biden refer, and how can they be so sure that it will arrive shortly after Obama takes office should he win the election as expected? What was Colin Powell referring to on Meet The Press when he said, “There’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.”

The most likely scenario seems to revolve around Iran announcing, or the U.S. government claiming, that they are ready to build their first nuclear bomb.

Indeed, the Mossad front news outlet Debka File reported yesterday that “Iran will be ready to build its first bomb just one month after the next US president is sworn in.” The very next sentence of the report ties this in with Biden’s promise of an international crisis immediately after Obama takes office.

“DEBKAfile’s military sources cite the new US timeline: By late January, 2009, Iran will have accumulated enough low-grade enriched uranium (up to 5%) for its “break-out” to weapons grade (90%) material within a short time. For this, the Iranians have achieved the necessary technology. In February, they can move on to start building their first nuclear bomb,” according to the report.

Of course, the legitimacy of these claims are likely to be completely fabricated – the official U.S. National Intelligence Estimate concluded in December that Iran had suspended its nuclear weapons campaign in late 2003 – but the Israelis may be laying the groundwork for a propaganda offensive similar to the “weapons of mass destruction” scam that preceded the invasion of Iraq.

Will the military assault on Iran occur not under the highly unpopular Bush administration, as many had predicted, but under an Obama presidency? Riding into office on a wave of popular approval and support, Obama will have the political capital to get the country behind the attack if the threat of imminent danger is cited – or at least stand by and allow Israel to do the dirty work.

Will a nuclear flash point on the scale of the Cuban Missile Crisis turn out to be the “international crisis” that Biden so vehemently promised? Or will the event take on a different characteristic.

Bush exploited 9/11 to realize the pre-set agenda of his Neo-Con masters months after he was inaugurated and Bill Clinton seized upon the Oklahoma City Bombing shortly into his second term to expand federal power. What will Obama’s crisis be that enables him to offer his contribution to building the American police state?

– A terror attack, or a series of attacks, on major American cities, possibly involving crudely designed nuclear bombs or dirty bombs?

– A complete economic collapse and a new great depression leading to food riots and the imposition of martial law?

– A military showdown with Russia should Russia attempt to invade Georgia or another pro-U.S. Russian satellite country?

– A nuclear showdown with Russia should Russia start a nuclear war with Ukraine, as has been threatened?

– The necessity for another military attack on Afghanistan should the Taliban continue to regain control of the country?

– A confrontation with Venezuela should it be revealed that Hugo Chavez is receiving nuclear bomb technology from Russia or Iran?

– A new escalation in the Middle East should Israel deploy its nuclear arsenal to attack Iran, Syria Lebanon, or even Egypt?

Whatever the new “international crisis” that we have been guaranteed turns out to be, you can bet your bottom dollar that the response to it will ultimately lead to more carnage and a further assault on the fast-disappearing freedoms that we still enjoy – and in that sense under an Obama presidency, the more things “change,” the more they will stay the same.

 

National Intelligence Spooks Promise Terror Attack For New President
Both Clinton and Bush exploited bombings within first year of taking office, Obama or McCain likely to enjoy the same opportunity

Prison Planet
May 27, 2008

National intelligence spooks are all but promising that history will be repeated for a third time running, and the new President of the United States – likely Barack Obama or John McCain – will be welcomed into office by a terror attack that will occur within the first year of his tenure.

“When the next president takes office in January, he or she will likely receive an intelligence brief warning that Islamic terrorists will attempt to exploit the transition in power by planning an attack on America, intelligence experts say,” according to a report in the Washington Times.

“Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton’s second month as president. Al Qaeda’s Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency’s first year….The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack.”

Naturally, the Washington Times article makes out as if a terror attack within the early stages of a new presidency is a bad thing, but both Clinton and Bush exploited terror in America to realize preconceived domestic and geopolitical agendas.

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing was an inside job from start to finish – it did not come as a “surprise” to the U.S. government since they ran the entire operation, having cooked the bomb for the “Islamic terrorists” that they had groomed for the attack.

In 1993 the FBI planted their informant, Emad A. Salem, within a radical Arab group in New York led by Ramzi Yousef. Salem was ordered to encourage the group to carry out a bombing targeting the World Trade Center’s twin towers. Under the illusion that the project was a sting operation, Salem asked the FBI for harmless dummy explosives which he would use to assemble the bomb and then pass on to the group. At this point the FBI cut Salem out of the loop and provided the group with real explosives, leading to the attack on February 26 that killed six and injured over a thousand people. The FBI’s failure to prevent the bombing was reported on by the New York Times in October 1993.

“Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in February 1993, in Mr. Clinton’s second month as president. Al Qaeda’s Sept. 11 attacks came in the Bush presidency’s first year….The pattern is clear to some national security experts. Terrorists pay particular attention to a government in transition as the most opportune window to launch an attack.”

Naturally, the Washington Times article makes out as if a terror attack within the early stages of a new presidency is a bad thing, but both Clinton and Bush exploited terror in America to realize preconceived domestic and geopolitical agendas.

Read Full Article Here

 

Powell Warns Of Coming Crisis “which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now”.
Echoes Biden comments that Obama will be tested in early days of his term

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
October 21, 2008

Colin Powell has made bizarre comments that echo the recent declaration by Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden that there will be an “international crisis” early into Barack Obama’s presidency that will test the new president by forcing him to make unpopular decisions.

Speaking on meet the press two days ago, Powell officially endorsed Obama and also made the following statement:

“The problems will always be there and there’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.

So I think what the President has to start to do is to start using the power of the oval office and the power of his personality to convince the American people and convince the world that America is solid, that America is going to move forward, we are going to fix our economic problems, we’re going to meet out overseas obligations.”

Watch Powell make the comment at 2.35 into the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LDBOPcHpeo

Is Colin Powell referring to a theoretical crisis that could occur at any time? If so why does he choose a specific date, within the first two days after the inauguration? Also why does he refer to general problems that the new president will have to deal with in a separate context? We are already in an economic crisis, everyone knows that, so what new crisis is Powell talking about?

Read Full Article Here

 

Chertoff: Change In President Fuels Vulnerability

Bloomberg
October 21, 2008

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the U.S. may be vulnerable to a terrorist attack during the next six months, with violent groups more likely to try to take advantage of a new president and administration.

“Any period of transition creates a greater vulnerability, meaning there’s more likelihood of distraction,’’ Chertoff said in an interview. “You have to be concerned it will create an operational opportunity for terrorists.’’

Read Full Article Here

 

Albright Agrees with Biden: Obama Will Face Unexpected Test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD_EAe1N9-M

Biden “Predicted” 9/11 Attack On September 10, 2001
http://blacklistednews.com/news-1974-0-20-20–.html

Obama Wants U.S. Troop Surge In Afghanistan
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/se..AM.20081022.wcampaign_speech23

Low priority for Palestinian issue if Obama elected US president
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5655

 



Georgia admits to dropping cluster bombs in S. Ossetia

most cluster bomblets don’t explode on impact and could end up in the hands of curious children
Georgia admits to dropping cluster bombs in S. Ossetia

Boston
September 1, 2008

A prominent human rights group says Georgia has admitted dropping cluster bombs in its military offensive to assert control over the restive province of South Ossetia.

Human Rights Watch says it has received an official letter from Georgia’s Defense Ministry that acknowledges use of the M85 cluster munition near the Roki tunnel that connects South Ossetia with Russia.

The M85 is the same weapon that was used extensively by Israel in its 2006 war with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

HRW arms division researcher Bonnie Docherty told reporters in Geneva on Monday that Russia undoubtedly used cluster munition in several places during the conflict. However, Russia has denied using the weapon.

 



Obama: ’No Choice’ But To Serve New World Order

Media Hails Obama’s Speech As Call For “New World Order”

Prison Planet
July 25, 2008

The media hailed Obama’s Berlin speech in front of hundreds of thousands yesterday as a call for a vision of America as part of a “new world order”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc

Excerpts from The International Herald Tribune:

“I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before,” Obama said, confronting the delicate issue of campaigning abroad. “Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen — a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.”

Obama was warmly embraced by the German press, which frequently referred to his aura, or as the newspaper Bild put it in Thursday’s paper, the “political pop star.”

“Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe,” Obama said. “No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more — not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.”

 

Will Media Report Concert Before Obama’s Berlin Speech?

News Busters
July 24, 2008

Remember back in May when media gushed and fawned over a huge crowd in Portland, Oregon — supposedly gathered to hear the words of Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama — but chose not to report the free concert given before his speech?

Well, it has been learned that before the presumptive Democrat nominee spoke to a crowd in Berlin Thursday, two popular German acts — reggae artist Patrice and rock band Reamonn — entertained the gathering audience.

Will media report this tonight, or just gush and fawn over the huge crowd again?

Read Full Article Here

 

Obama Promises Path to World Government

Daniel Taylor
Old Thinker News
July 25, 2008

Barack Obama’s July 24th speech in Berlin brought to light the Democratic Presidential candidates’ globalist views, mirroring those of the Council on Foreign Relations and other globalist think tanks. Obama’s praise of the European Union, calls for the “tearing down” of walls between nations and religions, and finally for world unity against climate change and terrorism reveal that an Obama Presidency will not bring change, but rather a continued erosion of national sovereignty and steps closer to world government.

Interestingly, Obama’s speech was delivered beneath the “victory angel” statue in Berlin. As the Guardian reported on the 21st,

“The centrepiece of the European leg of Obama’s visit will be his Berlin speech. Liberal and conservative politicians in Germany expressed consternation that Obama plans to address the crowds from beneath the golden angel statue which graces Berlin’s Siegessäule, a landmark which Hitler moved to its present location as part of his bid to transform Berlin into the world capital Germania.”

Obama’s speech stated in part:

“That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another. The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down.”

“Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more — not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.”

“The terrorists of September 11th plotted in Hamburg and trained in Kandahar and Karachi before killing thousands from all over the globe on American soil.

As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.

In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone. None of us can deny these threats, or escape responsibility in meeting them. Yet, in the absence of Soviet tanks and a terrible wall, it has become easy to forget this truth. And if we’re honest with each other, we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart, and forgotten our shared destiny.”

Barack Obama’s remarks mirror those of Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, who stated that the problems of climate change and terrorism would require a surrender of national sovereignty and ultimately the formation of a world government. “Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change,” stated Haass. “The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalization, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy.”

Obama is not the only presidential candidate with globalist ideals. John McCain’s proposed League of Democracies and support of North American integration is one example. Hillary Clinton’s open support for world government is another.

Obama’s promise of “change” will bring no such thing. A continuation of globalist policy towards world government and weakened national sovereignty will undoubtedly be pursued.

 

Full Transcript

More Interesting Highlights:

That is why America cannot turn inward. That is why Europe cannot turn inward. America has no better partner than Europe. Now is the time to build new bridges across the globe as strong as the one that bound us across the Atlantic. Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

..

This is the moment when we must defeat terror and dry up the well of extremism that supports it. This threat is real and we cannot shrink from our responsibility to combat it. If we could create NATO to face down the Soviet Union, we can join in a new and global partnership to dismantle the networks that have struck in Madrid and Amman; in London and Bali; in Washington and New York. If we could win a battle of ideas against the communists, we can stand with the vast majority of Muslims who reject the extremism that leads to hate instead of hope.

This is the moment when we must renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan, and the traffickers who sell drugs on your streets. No one welcomes war. I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan. But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO’s first mission beyond Europe’s borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done. America cannot do this alone. The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation. We have too much at stake to turn back now.

This is the moment when we must renew the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. The two superpowers that faced each other across the wall of this city came too close too often to destroying all we have built and all that we love. With that wall gone, we need not stand idly by and watch the further spread of the deadly atom. It is time to secure all loose nuclear materials; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to reduce the arsenals from another era. This is the moment to begin the work of seeking the peace of a world without nuclear weapons.

This is the moment when every nation in Europe must have the chance to choose its own tomorrow free from the shadows of yesterday. In this century, we need a strong European Union that deepens the security and prosperity of this continent, while extending a hand abroad. In this century – in this city of all cities – we must reject the Cold War mind-set of the past, and resolve to work with Russia when we can, to stand up for our values when we must, and to seek a partnership that extends across this entire continent.

..

This is the moment we must help answer the call for a new dawn in the Middle East. My country must stand with yours and with Europe in sending a direct message to Iran that it must abandon its nuclear ambitions. We must support the Lebanese who have marched and bled for democracy, and the Israelis and Palestinians who seek a secure and lasting peace. And despite past differences, this is the moment when the world should support the millions of Iraqis who seek to rebuild their lives, even as we pass responsibility to the Iraqi government and finally bring this war to a close.

This is the moment when we must come together to save this planet. Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands. Let us resolve that all nations – including my own – will act with the same seriousness of purpose as has your nation, and reduce the carbon we send into our atmosphere. This is the moment to give our children back their future. This is the moment to stand as one.

Ich bin ein tool for the NWO
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ich-bin-ein-tool-for-the-nwo.html

 



Obama: No Option Off The Table On Iran

Obama: No Option Off The Table On Iran

Reuters
July 23, 2008

U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Wednesday a nuclear Iran would pose a “grave threat” and that the world must stop Tehran from obtaining an atomic weapon.

Obama told reporters during a visit to Israel that if elected, he would take “no options off the table” in dealing with the Iran issue and said tougher sanctions could be imposed.

“A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” Obama told reporters after visiting the Israeli town of Sderot, which lies close to the border with the Hamas-run Gaza Strip.

He said the international community should immediately offer “big sticks and big carrots” to persuade Iran to halt its nuclear program. The West suspects Iran wants to build atom bombs but the Islamic Republic says its aims are peaceful.

“Iranians need to understand that whether it’s the Bush administration or the Obama administration, this is a paramount concern to the United States,” he said in Sderot, which has been hit by cross-border rockets fired by Gaza-based militants.

Read Full Article Here

 

McCain, Obama agree: U.S. must dominate Middle East

PSL Web
July 26, 2008

Senators John McCain and Barack Obama differ in their proposals for when and how the United States should begin a major troop withdrawal from Iraq, and under what conditions they would enter into negotiations with the government of Iran.

On just about every other issue related to U.S policy in the Middle East, the presumptive presidential candidates of the Republican and Democratic parties are in near total agreement. And when it comes to the goal, the word “near” can be deleted. Both share—as must all ruling class-approved candidates for the position of CEO of the empire—an unquestioning dedication to U.S. domination of that key strategic region. Seventy percent of known global oil reserves are located in the Middle East.

Both Obama and McCain have expressed a limitless devotion to the state of Israel. Both have emerged as leading voices in the chorus of demonization against the governments of Iran, Syria and Sudan, and popular movements such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas and other Palestinian resistance organizations.

Read Full Article Here

 

Obama: air strike on Iran useless

Press TV
July 24, 2008

The White House hopeful Barack Obama says an air strike on Iran will not halt its nuclear program, calling for tougher Iran sanctions.

“Iran is a big country. They have dispersed their nuclear capabilities in a way that you are not going to see smooth, surgical strikes solving the problem entirely the way that Israel was able to deal with Iraq’s nuclear threat,” he told ABC News.

The Illinois senator called for “tough sanctions” coupled with “tough diplomacy that makes the calculus for the Iranians different.”

While insisting that “war is not a good option,” Obama maintained that he “would not take military options off the table when it comes to Iran and dealing with their nuclear capacity.”

The US has set a two-week deadline for Tehran to halt its nuclear program, after their talks on Iran’s nuclear program.

Envoys from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council–China, Russia, the US, Britain and France–plus Germany held a meeting in Geneva on Saturday to discuss Iran’s nuclear program.

 

In Israel—Obama Flip-Flops on Iran (…Again)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3IH5pmoDHsA

Obama in Iraq underscores his commitment to US militarism
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/obam-j23.shtml

Obama ’virtually indistinguishable from any U.S. politician’
http://www.bloomberg.co..d=amiQZ8aYhNMM&refer=us

 



U.S. Will Invade 7 Countries in 5 Years

U.S. Will Invade 7 Countries in 5 Years – Wesley Clark

http://youtube.com/watch?v=iuVVml5Dp2s