noworldsystem.com


Potential False Flag Attack To Be Blamed On Muslims Foiled

Potential False Flag Attack To Be Blamed On Muslims Foiled

Paul Joseph Watson
Prisonplanet.com
January 26, 2010

A possible false flag terror attack to be blamed on Muslims has been foiled after a Navy vet was busted with a grenade launcher, assault rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, as well as Arab headdress, in New Jersey yesterday. Initial media reports speculated that the man was planning a terrorist attack on a U.S. military base in the area.

“Lloyd Woodson, 43, whose last known address was Reston, Va., today faces multiple offenses, including second-degree unlawful weapons possession and fourth-degree possession of prohibited weapons, Somerset County Prosecutor Wayne Forrest said,” reports the New Jersey Star Ledger.

“Branchburg police confronted Woodson at 3:55 a.m. at the Quick Chek convenience store on Route 28 after receiving a call reporting a suspicious person. Branchburg Patrolman Steven Cronce noticed a large bulge beneath the green, military-style jacket that Woodson was wearing, which was later determined to be the assault rifle with a defaced serial number, Forrest said.”

After searching his hotel room, police found a grenade launcher, hundreds .50-caliber and .308-caliber rounds, a police scanner, as well as “Middle Eastern red and white traditional headdress”.

“The man may have had plans to attack a U.S. military base,” reported Fox New Jersey, adding that the amount of weapons he had led police to suspect he was a terrorist.

The FBI were remarkably swift in distancing the man from any link with terrorists, despite the fact that his deadly arsenal was accompanied by maps of a military facility.

“The FBI said a man charged with multiple weapons offenses after a cache of weapons and maps of a military facility were found in his New Jersey motel room has no known terrorism link,” reported the Associated Press this morning.

Imagine if a Muslim had been busted with grenade launchers, assault rifles, and maps of military facilities. Authorities and the media would instantly claim he was part of an Al-Qaeda conspiracy and launch all kinds of fearmongering about the inevitability of getting hit again by terrorists unless we give up our rights – just as they did in the aftermath of the failed underwear bombing incident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkS1L1kly-o

Read Full Article Here

 



Obama authorizes covert economic war against Venezuela

Obama authorizes covert economic war against Venezuela

Wayne Madsen
Online Journal
January 21, 2010

WMR’s intelligence sources have reported that the Obama administration has authorized an economic war against Venezuela in order to destabilize the government of President Hugo Chavez.

After a successful coup against Chavez ally, President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras, and the very thin 51-49 percent electoral win by Chile’s billionaire right-winger Sebastian Pinera on January 17, a buoyed Obama White House has given a green light for political operatives in Venezuela, many of whom operate under the cover of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), to set the stage for massive street demonstrations to protest Chavez’s devaluation of the bolivar, Venezuela’s currency.

Chavez devalued the bolivar by 50 percent to make Venezuelan oil exports less expensive, thus boosting revenue for his country. However, the devaluation has also seen price rises and inflation in Venezuela and the CIA and its subservient NGOs have wasted little time in putting out stories about consumers rushing to the stories ahead of an increase in consumer products, with imported flat-screen televisions being the favorite consumer item being hyped by the corporate media as seeing a huge price increase and long lines at shopping malls favored by the Venezuelan elites.

The state has exempted certain consumer goods such as food, medicines, school supplies, and industrial machinery from being affected by the bolivar’s devaluation through a different exchange rate and price controls, but it is the price increases on televisions, tobacco, alcohol, cell phones, and computers that has the anti-Chavez forces in Venezuela and abroad hyping the ill-effects on the Venezuelan consumer.

To battle against businessmen who are trying to capitalize on the devaluation of the bolivar, Chavez has threatened to close and possibly seize any business that gouges the consumer by inordinately raising prices. The first target of a temporary closure was a Caracas store owned by the French firm Exito.

International investment analysts praised Chavez’s decision to devalue the bolivar and said the decision was overdue considering the fall of oil prices worldwide. However, the CIA and NGOs, many aligned with George Soros’s Open Society Institute and the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy are planning large street demonstrations against Chavez’s handling of the economy.

National Assembly elections are scheduled for September but the Obama administration has decided that if Chavez can be removed now, his allies in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, and some Caribbean island states will quickly abandon Chavez’s alternative to American-led Western Hemisphere financial contrivances and free trade pacts, the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA).

The Obama planners then see Cuba, once again, being isolated in the hemisphere and ripe for increased U.S. political pressure. Cuba was placed on the list of 14 countries requiring additional airline passenger screening as part of the policy to pressure and isolate Cuba. There is a possibility that with the outbreak of U.S.-inspired violence in the streets of Venezuela, that nation could join Cuba on the list as the 15th country.

The Obama administration’s assault is two-fold: economic and political. Pressure is being applied against the gasoline chain Citgo, which is owned by the Venezuelan state oil company, PDVSA, and Venezuelan investment favorability ratings. Politically, the U.S. is overtly and covertly funneling money to anti-Chavez groups through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and groups affiliated with George Soros.

There is also a small military component to Obama’s strategy of undermining Chavez. U.S., P-3 Orion overflights of Venezuelan airspace from bases in Aruba and Curacao are designed to intimidate Chavez and activate Venezuelan radar and command, control, communications, and intelligence (C3I) systems to gather electronic and signals intelligence data that would be used by the United States to jam Venezuelan military networks in the event of a U.S.-inspired uprising against Chavez by U.S. loyalists embedded in the Venezuelan military, police, PDVSA, and media. The U.S. is also stoking cross-border incursions into Venezuela by Colombian paramilitaries to gauge Venezuela’s border defenses. Last November, Colombian right-wing paramilitary units killed two Venezuelan National Guardsmen inside Venezuela in Tachira state. Weapons caches maintained by Colombians inside Venezuela have been seized by Venezuelan authorities. Venezuela has also arrested a number of Colombian DAS intelligence agents inside Venezuela.

Obama signed a military agreement with Colombia that allows the United States to establish seven air and naval bases in Colombia. An additional agreement by Obama with Panama will see the U.S. military return to that nation to set up two military bases.

It is estimated that some 25 percent of Venezuelans are likely Fifth Columnists who would take part in a revolt against Chavez. Many of them based in the Venezuelan oil-producing state of Zulia and the capital of Maracaibo, where successive U.S. ambassadors in Caracas have stoked secessionist embers and where the CIA and U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency have concentrated much of their efforts. In November, Venezuelan police arrested in Maracaibo, Magaly Janeth Moreno Vega, also known as “The Pearl,” the leader of the right-wing United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), which has been directly linked to Colombia’s pro-U.S. President Alvaro Uribe and members of his government, including former Colombian Attorney General Luis Camilo Osorio Isaza, appointed by Uribe as Colombia’s ambassador to Mexico.

U.S. Provoking War With Venezuela

 



U.S. Provoking War With Venezuela

Netherlands has Granted U.S. Military Use of its Islands in the Caribbean

globalresearch.ca
January 14, 2010

The government of the Netherlands recently granted the US military use of its islands in the Caribbean, with the excuse that this is to help in the “war against drugs”. In reality, this is a direct threat to the Chavez government in Venezuela.

In the Dutch media articles have appeared about the “war-mongering” president of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, who is “preparing a war against Colombia”. Now Chávez has accused the Netherlands of supporting aggression against Venezuela, because the Netherlands has given permission to the American armed forces to use the military bases on the Dutch Caribbean islands of Aruba and Curaçao[1].

In the media Hugo Chávez, as always, has been presented like some “crazy populist”, and of course the “civilised Netherlands” are presented as being totally innocent.

Later Maxime Verhagen, the Dutch minister of foreign affairs, said the American military were on Aruba and Curaçao, as part of the “war against drugs”. He remains silent about what is really happening on Aruba and Curaçao.

Authors such as Noam Chomsky and Eva Golinger have pointed out in different articles that the so-called “war against drugs” has nothing to do with any battle against drug smuggling, but has been used for other causes such as fighting against guerrilla movements and the spying of other countries. Since the start of the “war against drugs” there has only been more smuggling and consumption of drugs.

The fact that the Netherlands are participating in this is quite normal, because the Dutch government has a tradition of supporting American imperialism. After Britain the Netherlands are the biggest ally of the U.S. in Western Europe. The cabinet of Prime Minister Balkenende gave political support to the invasion of Iraq that was based completely on lies. Now the Netherlands have troops in Afghanistan, officially to rebuild the country, but in practice to prop up the corrupt regime of Karzai.

The bases on Aruba and Curaçao

In 1999 the Netherlands and the U.S. signed an agreement for the establishment of Forward Operating Locations (FOLs). This meant that the American military could use air force bases on Aruba and Curaçao. While the bases were originally used for operations against drug smuggling and the Colombian guerrilla movement FARC, this changed with the election of George Bush. Venezuela was seen as a threat by then, because it was a beacon of hope for the poor and working people of Latin America. In 2002 there was a CIA-backed coup attempt against the democratically elected Hugo Chávez. Since then there have only been more intrigues against Venezuela.

In 2006 there was a big military exercise by the U.S., Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain, France and Canada in the Caribbean, named Joint Caribbean Lion 2006. This exercise was clearly a provocation against Venezuela. After criticisms by the Venezuelan government the then-minister of defence Henk Kamp and some right-wing MPs decided to accuse Chávez of “wanting to conquer the Antilles”. This was based on false statements from the Venezuelan opposition, that stated Chávez claimed everything within 200 miles from the Venezuelan coast as Venezuelan territory, while in that speech Chávez clearly said “12”, and not “200” miles.

Now there is a new conflict. This has everything to do with the recent militarization of Colombia and its seven military bases that have been given to American troops. Venezuela is not talking nonsense as the media keep claiming. Colombia’s military spending now is 5% of its Gross Domestic Product. At the peak of her struggle against the FARC this was 2.5%.

Also the American Fourth Fleet has been stationed back in the Caribbean since 2008. This fleet was disbanded in 1950 after the end of WWII, but now it is back and close to the Venezuelan coast.

The Netherlands are now playing the role of junior partner of the U.S. in the Caribbean. Different spy planes have been detected above Venezuela. An American Boeing RC-135 has taken off at different times from Curaçao and has been detected over Venezuelan air space.

Hugo Chavez orders military to shoot at US aircraft

 



Obama Will Occupy Afghanistan Beyond 2011 Deadline

White House: We Will Occupy South Asia “For a Long Time”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIt7raIZbRY

 

A long, protracted occupation of Afghanistan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UT01jvGShds

 

Robert Fisk: Obama is a disaster for the Middle East

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4ynybVuwXQ

 



War threat between Venezuela and Colombia increases

War threat between Venezuela and Colombia increases

UK Telegraph
November 15, 2009

Tensions between the countries reached a new high after the Colombian military arrested four Venezuelan soldiers, just days after Mr Chavez told his army to “prepare for war” with Colombia.

The Venezuelan ambassador to Bogota, Gustavo Marquez, said that the seriousness of the situation could not be overstated and that “there is a pre-war situation in the entire region”.

Diplomatic relations between the South American neighbours are frozen and on Saturday President Chavez escalated the war of words with President Alvaro Uribe of Colombia by saying there was no chance of dialogue.

“Uribe is not a politician, he comes from the world of paramilitaries, of drug trafficking, of shady business deals, and he is capable of anything,” the Venezuelan leader said.

“He is a very dangerous man as he has no principles or ethics,” Mr Chavez added.

The broadside came after Colombia detained four members of the Venezuelan National Guard in a boat allegedly on Colombian territory in the remote border province of Vichada. Colombia said yesterday that it would deport the men back to Venezuela.

Tensions between Presidents Uribe and Chavez have escalated in recent months as the two leaders have become increasingly suspicious of each other.

Colombia’s Marxist rebels, the Guerrillas of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the smaller National Liberation Army (ELN), are known to have bases within Venezuela from where they plan and launch attacks on Colombia’s US-backed army.

Mr Chavez hotly denies any links with the rebels, even though there have been seizures of Venezuelan arms and munitions in FARC camps.

Venezuela’s president is angry at an agreement signed earlier this month between Bogota and Washington under which Colombia allows the US military to use seven bases across the country, turning the Andean nation into America’s regional military hub.

Mr Chavez, who accused Washington of being behind a 2002 coup attempt, insists that the US is planning to attack Venezuela to secure control of massive oil reserves. The Venezuela leader believes that Colombia will now be the launch pad for any US attack.

President Uribe is trying to diffuse tensions since Mr Chavez began blocking the entry of Colombian goods, something which is costing the fragile economy hundreds of millions of pounds.

He stated that the captured Venezuelan soldiers would be returned as quickly as possible and “carry with them the message that here their affection for our Venezuelan brothers and that this affection is unquenchable”.

Mr Chavez has ordered another 15,000 soldiers to take up positions along the 1300-mile frontier, while Colombia has created a new division of its army to guard a strategic stretch of the border.

Analysts worry that Marxist rebel groups could manipulate the troop build-up by starting a firefight, sparking a war between the two countries.

 

Chávez tells Venezuela to get ready for war with Colombia


Colombian president Uribe meets with U.S. president Obama

Irish Times
November 10, 2009

VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT Hugo Chávez has told his country to prepare for a possible war with Colombia, as diplomatic and border tensions between the ideologically opposed Andean nations deteriorate to their lowest level in more than a year.

Mr Chávez used his weekly television show, Aló Presidente , to denounce an agreement between Colombia and the US that allows the US military to use seven bases in Colombia. Mr Chávez warned these could be used for an attack on Venezuela.

Ordering troops to the frontier, he said the army could not afford to waste a day and that “we must prepare ourselves for war and help the people prepare for war, because this is the responsibility of all”.

The Colombian and US governments insist the bases are only for use against drug traffickers within Colombia. But Mr Chávez has denounced the pact as part of a US plan to try to dominate a region that in recent years has moved out of its traditional Washington orbit under a new generation of left-wing leaders, of whom Mr Chávez is the most radical.

Supporting their claims about the bases agreement, the Venezuelans have cited a US air force document presented to the US Congress in May. It says one of the bases provides a “unique opportunity” for “conducting full-spectrum operations throughout South America”, which it describes as a “critical region” under constant threat from “anti-US governments”.

On his television programme, Mr Chávez said that “the government of Colombia is not in Bogotá, now it is in Washington”, and warned US president Barack Obama that any US intervention launched from Colombia would spark a “100 years’ war”.

Colombia said it would raise Mr Chávez’s comments with the UN Security Council and the Organisation of American States.

Last year Mr Chávez ordered troops to the frontier live on Aló Presidente following Colombia’s bombing of a rebel guerrilla base hidden on the Ecuador side of the two countries’ border.

This latest round of tensions started with the signing of the bases agreement at the end of last month, and deteriorated last week when Venezuela said Colombian right-wing paramilitaries were responsible for killing two Venezuelan soldiers on its territory.

Colombian rebels and paramilitaries operate right along the border with Venezuela. Leading political allies of Colombian president Álvaro Uribe face investigations into their alleged links with the country’s paramilitaries.

Colombia, meanwhile, accuses Mr Chávez of providing covert support to the Farc guerrilla group.

In recent years Venezuela has embarked on an arms buying spree which it says is necessary to offset strategically the US-bankrolled military in Colombia.

Colombia is the fifth-biggest recipient of US military aid after Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt.

Colombia’s army is double the size of Venezuela’s and battle-hardened after decades fighting left-wing guerrillas in the continent’s most protracted insurgency.

Economic mismanagement means that Venezuela is heavily dependent on Colombian food imports despite its own vast tracts of rich tropical farmland.

Despite a decade of increasingly hostile relations, Venezuelan imports of Colombian foodstuffs have ballooned, accounting for most of the $7.2 billion (€4.8 billion) in bilateral trade between the two countries last year.

Castro:The Latin American Peoples Will Resist The Empire

Morales: U.S. Planning Coups in Latin America

Honduran President Victim of U.S. Coup: I’ve Been Gassed

 



U.S. Navy Kidnapped Islanders and Gassed Their Dogs

U.S. Navy Kidnapped Islanders and Gassed Their Dogs

National Expositor
October 26, 2009

In order to convert the sleepy, Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia into a dominating military base, the U.S. forcibly transported its 2,000 Chagossian inhabitants into exile and gassed their dogs.

By banning journalists from the area, the U.S. Navy was able to perpetrate this with virtually no press coverage, says David Vine, an assistant professor of anthropology at American University and author of “Island of Shame: the Secret History of the U.S. Military on Diego Garcia(Princeton University Press).”

“The Chagossians were put on a boat and taken to Mauritius and the Seychelles, 1,200 miles away, where they were left on the docks, with no money and no housing, to fend for themselves,” Vine said on the interview show “Books Of Our Time,” sponsored by the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover.

“They were promised jobs that never materialized. They had been living on an island with schools, hospitals, and full employment, sort of like a French coastal village, and they were consigned to a life of abject poverty in exile, unemployment, health problems, and were the poorest of the poor,” Vine told interview host Lawrence Velvel, dean of the law school.

Their pet dogs were rounded up and gassed, and their bodies burned, before the very eyes of their traumatized owners, Vine said.

“They were moved because they were few in number and not white,” Vine added. The U.S. government circulated the fiction the Chagossians were transient contract workers that had taken up residence only recently but, in fact, they had been living on Diego Garcia since about the time of the American Revolution. Merchants had imported them to work on the coconut and copra plantations. Vine said the U.S. government induced The Washington Post not to break a story spelling out events on the island.

“Through Diego Garcia,” Vine pointed out, “the U.S. can project its power throughout the Middle East, and from East Africa to India, Australia and Indonesia. With Guam, the island is the most important American base outside the U.S.” He said U.S. bases now number around 1,000, including 287 in Germany, 130 in Japan and Okinawa, and 57 in Italy.

“Bases have been essential tools of U.S. military and economic power since not long after independence,” Vine pointed out. “We had bases all the way to the Pacific. After the Civil War, the U.S. began to acquire coaling bases in the Pacific.”

Although the Chagossians were forcibly removed in 1971, they still hope to return, Vine says, and refer to their period of exile as one of “profound sorrow.” Vine says they would be happy to live on the unused eastern portion of the island and work at the base but the U.S. instead “imports contract labor from other areas so they can send them home when the job is done.” The island’s exiled survivors and their descendants today number about 5,000.

Long off limits to reporters, the Red Cross, and all other international observers and far more secretive than Guantánamo Bay, many long suspected the island was a clandestine CIA “black site” for high-profile detainees, Vine wrote in a related article. Journalist Stephen Grey’s 2006 book “Ghost Plane” documented the presence on the island of a CIA-chartered plane used for rendition flights. On two occasions former U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey publicly named Diego Garcia as a detention facility. And a Council of Europe report named the atoll, along with those in Poland and Romania, as a secret prison.

The island became “a major launch pad” for the U.S. attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, Vine said. In addition to its capacious harbor, the island readily supports some of the largest U.S. warplanes, including Air Force B-52s, B-1Bs and B-2s. Two years ago, the Pentagon awarded a $32 million contract to add a submarine base to the island’s arsenal.

Diego Garcia had been a British possession until 1966, when London allowed the U.S. to use it as a military base in exchange for cancelling a $14-million British debt for a military hardware purchase. Some idea of the size of the base may be conveyed by the fact it is said by the Pentagon to contain 654 buildings.

In a related article about Diego Garcia, Vine has written: “With support for the Chagossians’ struggle growing in both the United States and Britain at the same time that revelations about a secret CIA prison are spreading, the United States must finally act to remedy the damage done by another Guantánamo damaging too many lives and undermining its international legitimacy. The United States must allow the Chagossians to return and assist Britain in paying them proper compensation; the United States must close the detention facilities and open Diego Garcia to international investigators; the United States must end the painful irony that is a base the military calls the ‘Footprint of Freedom.’”

 



Honduran President Victim of U.S. Coup: I’ve Been Gassed

Note: Is there a possibility that military weapons such as the A.D.S. radiation device and L.R.A.D. sound cannon were used on the Honduran president at the Brazilian embassy?

Honduran President Victim of U.S. Coup: I’ve Been Gassed And They’re Torturing Me

Miami Herald
September 24, 2009

It’s been 89 days since Manuel Zelaya was booted from power. He’s sleeping on chairs, and he claims his throat is sore from toxic gases and “Israeli mercenaries” are torturing him with high-frequency radiation.

“We are being threatened with death,” he said in an interview with The Miami Herald, adding that mercenaries were likely to storm the embassy where he has been holed up since Monday and assassinate him.

“I prefer to march on my feet than to live on my knees before a military dictatorship,” Zelaya said in a series of back-to-back interviews.

Zelaya was overthrown by the U.S. military at gunpoint on June 28 and slipped back into his country on Monday, just two days before he was scheduled to speak before the United Nations. He sought refuge at the Brazilian Embassy, where Zelaya said he is being subjected to toxic gases and radiation that alter his physical and mental state.

Witnesses said that for a short time Tuesday morning, soldiers used a device that looked like a large satellite dish to emit a loud shrill noise.

Honduran police spokesman Orlin Cerrato said he knew nothing of any radiation devices being used against the former president.

“He says there are mercenaries against him? Using some kind of apparatus?” Cerrato said. “No, no, no, no. Sincerely: no. The only elements surrounding that embassy are police and military, and they have no such apparatus.”

Police responded to reports of looting throughout the city Tuesday night. Civil disturbances subsided Wednesday afternoon, when a crush of people rushed grocery stores and gas stations in the capital.

Israeli government sources in Miami said they could not confirm the presence of any “Israelis mercenaries” in Honduras.

Zelaya, 56, is at the embassy with his family and other supporters, without a change of clothes or toothpaste. The power and water were turned back on, and the U.N. brought in some food. Photos showed Zelaya, his trademark cowboy hat across his face, napping on a few chairs he had pushed together.

“Look at the shape he’s in — sleeping on chairs,” de facto President Roberto Micheletti told a local TV news station.

Micheletti took Zelaya’s place after the military, executing a Supreme Court arrest warrant, burst into Zelaya’s house and forced him into exile. The country’s military, congress, Supreme Court and economic leaders have backed the ouster, arguing that Zelaya was bent on conducting an illegal plebiscite that they feared would ultimately lead to his reelection.

Micheletti said he was prepared to meet with Zelaya and a delegation from the Organization of American States, but only to discuss one topic: November elections.

On Wednesday, the U.N. cut off all technical aid that would have supported and given credibility to that presidential race. Conditions do not exist for credible elections, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said.

“I proposed dialogue, and they answered with bullets, bombs, a state of siege and by closing the airport,” Zelaya said.

Zelaya told The Herald that Washington should be taking a stronger stance against the elite economic interests that “financed and benefited” from the coup that ousted him three months ago.

If President Barack Obama hit Honduras with commercial sanctions or suspended free-trade agreements, the coup “would last just five minutes.”

The Obama administration suspended economic aid to Honduras and withdrew the visas of members of the current administration.

About 75 percent of Honduras’ commerce depends on the United States, Zelaya said. And because powerful economic forces were behind Zelaya’s ouster, Obama should hit those forces where it hurts most, Zelaya said.

“I have told this to Obama, to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to the U.S. Embassy here and anyone else who will listen,” Zelaya said. “They know how to act. Until now, they have been very prudent.”

With Micheletti showing a new willingness to talk with the OAS, and the U.N. Security Council set to meet to discuss the embassy situation soon, it isn’t the moment for more penalties, the U.S. State Department said.

“Right now, when there are openings for dialogue, is not the time to announce new sanctions,” a State Department official said.

Dates for the OAS visit, which could include emissaries from 10 countries, are being worked out, the official said.

Spokesman Ian Kelly said the U.N. Security Council meeting came at the request of the Brazilian government. No date has been set for the meeting.

“In general, we continue to work with our partners in the U.N. and the OAS to come up with means to promote a dialogue and defuse the tensions, of course with the ultimate goal of resolving the crisis,” State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said at a media briefing in Washington. “And we’re continuing our consultations with our partners in the region, and enlisting wherever we can their assistance in this process.”

The U.S. Embassy here spent the day denying rumors that Zelaya planned to move to American grounds. The rumor may have started because U.S. Embassy vehicles were used to evacuate Zelaya supporters who left the Brazilian Embassy willingly Tuesday.

“The embassy has been turned into a bunker for Zelaya,” Assistant Foreign Minister Martha Lorena Alvarado de Casco told The Herald. “He’s turned it into his headquarters, and he is using it to call for insurrection.”

Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim told CNN en Español that his government asked Zelaya to tone down his rhetoric while he remains an embassy guest.

“The word `death’ should not even be mentioned,” he said.

Rioting broke out in various parts of the capital Tuesday night, and lines hundreds deep formed at supermarkets when desperate shoppers scrambled to buy food after a round-the-clock curfew was briefly lifted.

“I have no food in my house,” said Patti Vásquez, a housewife who, after two hours, still had not reached the front doors of a supermarket in an upscale shopping mall. “I need to get milk and juice and eggs.”

Zelaya says he has no plans to leave the embassy anytime soon.

. “I am the president the people of Honduras chose,” Zelaya said. “A country can’t have two presidents — just one.”

U.S. Military Kidnaps Honduran President

 



U.S. Seeks Occupation of Pakistan

Ex-Intel officer: U.S. Seeks Occupation of Pakistan

Press TV
Seppember 14, 2009

The US seeks to establish new military bases in Pakistan to keep the country destabilized and control its nuclear weapons, says a former head of Pakistan’s intelligence service.

In an exclusive interview with Press TV on Sunday, Hamid Gul said that Washington planned to expand its embassy and increase its security guards in Pakistan.

“There are already three thousand five hundred of them [US security guards] and one thousand more are coming,” Gul said.

He also noted that Americans seek to set up a large intelligence network inside Pakistan under the pretext of giving financial aid to the country.

“They [Americans] are going to set up a large intelligence network inside Pakistan. They say because we are spending money directly on projects, therefore we need the security guards and we are bringing in the contractors,” said Gul.

US officials “want to go for Pakistan’s nuclear assets. They are inching close to those nuclear assets day by day,” he added.

When asked about Washington’s long-term goal in Pakistan, the former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) said that the United States wants to keep the country destabilized.

Washington’s decision to expand its embassy in Pakistan has also rung alarm bells in China with Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan, Luo Zhaohui, expressing concern over the planned measure.

“China has concerns over the expansion of the US Embassy in Islamabad and the United States should expand its Embassy by materializing rules and regulations of Pakistan,” Zhaohui said at a news conference.

 

Washington’s “good war”
Death squads, disappearances and torture in Pakistan

WSWS
September 16, 2009

As the Obama administration prepares a major escalation of the so-called AfPak war, reports from Pakistan’s Swat Valley, near Afghanistan’s eastern border, provide a gruesome indication of the kind of war that the Pentagon and its local allies are waging.

While touted by Obama and his supporters as the “good war,” there is mounting evidence that the Pentagon and the CIA are engaged in a war against the population of the region involving death squads, disappearances and torture.

The Pakistani army sent 20,000 troops into Swat, part of the country’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP), last April to wage war against ethnic Pashtun Islamist movements (routinely described as the Pakistani Taliban) that have supported fellow Pashtuns across the border who are resisting the US-NATO occupation of Afghanistan.

This offensive, which was carried out on the direct and highly public insistence of US envoy Richard Holbrooke and senior American military officers during repeated trips to Islamabad, unleashed a humanitarian catastrophe. In what amounted to a massive exercise in collective punishment, many civilians were killed or wounded and some 2.5 million people were driven from their homes.

Now, the Pakistani military continues to occupy the area, carrying out a reign of terror in which individuals identified as opponents of the government and the US occupation across the border are being picked up and tortured to death.

According to a report published September 15 in the New York Times, with the military occupation of the Swat Valley “a new campaign of fear has taken hold, with scores, perhaps hundreds, of bodies dumped on the streets in what human rights advocates and local residents say is the work of the military.”

While the Pakistani military has denied responsibility for this wave of killings—blaming them on civilians seeking revenge against the Islamists—the Times quotes local residents, politicians and human rights workers as blaming the army. They point, the article states, to “the scale of the retaliation, the similarities in the way that many of the victims have been tortured and the systematic nature of the deaths and disappearances in areas that the military firmly controls.”

In addition to bearing marks of brutal torture, many of the bodies are discovered with their hands tied behind their backs and with a bullet in the back of the neck. In some cases corpses have been beheaded.

On September 1, the Pakistani newspaper Dawn quoted government officials as saying that 251 bodies had been found dumped along the roadside in the Swat Valley since July. On August 27, the newspaper reported that 51 bodies had been found in the area in the space of just 24 hours.

Dawn has also reported the discovery of a number of mass graves containing victims of the military and referred to local residents who had “witnessed the crude and inhuman lumping together of the living and the dead.”

The Times cites the case of Akhtar Ali, 28, arrested by the military at his electrical repair shop on September 1. While military officials repeatedly told his family that he would be released, four days later his corpse was dumped on their doorstep, bearing cigarette burns and with nails hammered into his flesh. “There was no place on his body not tortured,” his family said in a petition seeking justice.

American officials have praised the Pakistani military for its campaign in the Swat Valley, with US Ambassador Anne Patterson visiting Mingora, Swat’s largest town, last week to congratulate the army.

Now US officials are pressing the Pakistani government to replicate this bloody campaign in South Waziristan. A similar offensive is already underway in the Khyber Agency, site of the Khyber Pass, a key route for supplies to the US occupation force in Afghanistan. UN officials report that 100,000 people have been displaced by the attack.

Washington stands behind the atrocities being carried out against the Pakistani people. It is funding the Pakistani military operations, with some $2.5 billion in overt military aid this fiscal year. Meanwhile, CIA drone attacks continue, having claimed nearly 600 Pakistani victims over the past year, the majority of them civilians.

There is every reason to suspect that the wave of disappearances, torture and death squad assassinations in Pakistan is also “made in the USA.”

Before becoming the US commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal headed the military’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the secret special operations unit that investigative journalist Seymour Hersh described as an “executive assassination wing.”

US special forces “trainers” are operating on Pakistani soil, instructing Pakistani forces in the kind of tactics favored by JSOC—tactics that yield the bound and battered bodies dumped in the streets of Swat.

These tactics fit a long pattern of US counterinsurgency warfare, from Operation Phoenix in Vietnam to the US-backed death squads that terrorized the population of El Salvador in the 1980s.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen warned again Tuesday in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee that the military will almost certainly seek an increase in troop levels over the 70,000 American soldiers and Marines that are to be deployed in Afghanistan by the end of this year.

Citing diplomatic sources, Dawn reported that Gen. McChrystal is calling for a shift in the war’s focus to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area.

Having lost control of most of Afghanistan after nearly eight years of US occupation, the Pentagon is preparing to launch a new wave of bloodletting and terror against the population on both sides of the border in the hope of breaking popular resistance.

The administration of Barack Obama, elected on a wave of antiwar sentiment, is already implicated in war crimes that rival those carried out by his predecessor. Support for the war within the US has declined to levels approaching those reached over Iraq, with the latest CNN poll showing 58 percent of Americans opposing the US occupation of Afghanistan and only 39 percent supporting it.

Driven by the interests of the US ruling elite, the escalation of this dirty war, together with the escalating assault on jobs and living standards at home, is creating the conditions for the emergence of a mass political movement of working people against the Obama administration and the profit system which is the driving force of imperialist war.

 



U.S. Planning Coups in Latin America

Morales: U.S. Planning Coups in Latin America

Press TV
September 14, 2009

The Bolivian president has accused the United States of planning coups in Latin America after Washington reached an agreement with Colombia over military bases.

“In Latin America, where there is a US military base there are military coups,” Evo Morales told Bolivian immigrants living in Spain on Sunday.

Morales along with his allies in South America have repeatedly criticized the deal between Colombia and the US that would give the US military access to seven Colombian bases for a 10 year period.

“To the social movements of Europe and the world: Help us put an end to military bases in Latin American,” he said, citing the Bolivian constitution that bans foreign bases on its soil.

According to US officials, American troops will continue to be involved in helping Colombia in counter-drug operations and in supporting its fight against leftist rebels.

However, Latin American governments believe that the US uses the regional war on drugs as a pretext to boost its regional military presence.

Meanwhile, Morales claimed earlier that the United States was involved in a military coup in Honduras that ousted President Manuel Zelaya in June.

Later, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez presented a document from the US Air Mobility Command which according to him showed Washington’s future plans for the region.

The Venezuelan leftist leader claimed that the US wants to use Colombia as a power base, from which to dominate South America.

 



U.S. Military Kidnaps Honduran President

Chavez Says The U.S. Toppled The Honduran President, Taking Him To A U.S. Air Base


Hugo Chavez

aangrifan
August 20, 2009

It looks like it was the CIA that toppled Manuel Zelaya, the president of Honduras, on 28 June 2009.

Diana Barahona, at Global Research, 18 August 2009, tells us that Zelaya was taken to a U.S. air base during the kidnapping.

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez has revealed that Honduran President Manuel Zelaya told him that the military who kidnapped him transferred him by plane to a U.S. military base, in Honduran territory.

According to Chavez: “They put Zelaya in the plane and landed at Palmerola with the president a prisoner and the Yankee officials appeared and knew that the president was there, they had a discussion with the Honduran officials.

“Then the Yankee military took the decision there to send him to Costa Rica.

“That is a very serious matter, the the president of Honduras was in a Yankee military base…

“The Yankees overthrew Zelaya…

“From the Yankee base, which is at a place called Palmerola, they carried out all of the operations and the dirty war and the terrorism against Sandinista Nicaragua, against El Salvador.

“It wasn’t long ago that the Yankees turned Honduras into a platform to attack its neighbors.”

“What we are asking is that he (Obama) withdraw the Palmerola base, that he withdraw the Guantanamo base where they torture…”

Chavez also said that Venezuela rejects Obama’s policy of setting up U.S. military bases in Colombia.

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

 

Honduras: Military Coup Engineered By Two US Companies?

John Perkins
Information Clearing House

I recently visited Central America. Everyone I talked with there was convinced that the military coup that had overthrown the democratically-elected president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, had been engineered by two US companies, with CIA support. And that the US and its new president were not standing up for democracy.

Earlier in the year Chiquita Brands International Inc. (formerly United Fruit) and Dole Food Co had severely criticized Zelaya for advocating an increase of 60% in Honduras’s minimum wage, claiming that the policy would cut into corporate profits. They were joined by a coalition of textile manufacturers and exporters, companies that rely on cheap labor to work in their sweatshops.

Democracy Now! covers the Honduran coup.

Memories are short in the US, but not in Central America. I kept hearing people who claimed that it was a matter of record that Chiquita (United Fruit) and the CIA had toppled Guatemala’s democratically-elected president Jacobo Arbenz in 1954 and that International Telephone & Telegraph (ITT), Henry Kissinger, and the CIA had brought down Chile’s Salvador Allende in 1973. These people were certain that Haiti’s president Jean-Bertrand Aristide had been ousted by the CIA in 2004 because he proposed a minimum wage increase, like Zelaya’s.

I was told by a Panamanian bank vice president, “Every multinational knows that if Honduras raises its hourly rate, the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean will have to follow. Haiti and Honduras have always set the bottom line for minimum wages. The big companies are determined to stop what they call a ‘leftist revolt’ in this hemisphere. In throwing out Zelaya they are sending frightening messages to all the other presidents who are trying to raise the living standards of their people.”

It did not take much imagination to envision the turmoil sweeping through every Latin American capital. There had been a collective sign of relief at Barack Obama’s election in the U.S., a sense of hope that the empire in the North would finally exhibit compassion toward its southern neighbors, that the unfair trade agreements, privatizations, draconian IMF Structural Adjustment Programs, and threats of military intervention would slow down and perhaps even fade away. Now, that optimism was turning sour.

The cozy relationship between Honduras’s military coup leaders and the corporatocracy were confirmed a couple of days after my arrival in Panama. England’s The Guardian ran an article announcing that “two of the Honduran coup government’s top advisers have close ties to the US secretary of state. One is Lanny Davis, an influential lobbyist who was a personal lawyer for President Bill Clinton and also campaigned for Hillary. . . The other hired gun for the coup government that has deep Clinton ties is (lobbyist) Bennett Ratcliff.” (1)

DemocracyNow! broke the news that Chiquita was represented by a powerful Washington law firm, Covington & Burling LLP, and its consultant, McLarty Associates (2). President Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder had been a Covington partner and a defender of Chiquita when the company was accused of hiring “assassination squads” in Colombia (Chiquita was found guilty, admitting that it had paid organizations listed by the US government as terrorist groups “for protection” and agreeing in 2004 to a $25 million fine). (3) George W. Bush’s UN Ambassador, John Bolton, a former Covington lawyer, had fiercely opposed Latin American leaders who fought for their peoples’ rights to larger shares of the profits derived from their resources; after leaving the government in 2006, Bolton became involved with the Project for the New American Century, the Council for National Policy, and a number of other programs that promote corporate hegemony in Honduras and elsewhere.

McLarty Vice Chairman John Negroponte was U.S. Ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985, former Deputy Secretary of State, Director of National Intelligence, and U.S. Representative to the United Nations; he played a major role in the U.S.-backed Contra’s secret war against Nicaragua’s Sandinista government and has consistently opposed the policies of the democratically-elected pro-reform Latin American presidents. (4) These three men symbolize the insidious power of the corporatocracy, its bipartisan composition, and the fact that the Obama Administration has been sucked in.

The Los Angeles Times went to the heart of this matter when it concluded:

What happened in Honduras is a classic Latin American coup in another sense: Gen. Romeo Vasquez, who led it, is an alumnus of the United States’ School of the Americas (renamed the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation). The school is best known for producing Latin American officers who have committed major human rights abuses, including military coups. (5)

All of this leads us once again to the inevitable conclusion: you and I must change the system. The president – whether Democrat or Republican – needs us to speak out.

Chiquita, Dole and all your representatives need to hear from you. Zelaya must be reinstated.

 



761 U.S. Military Bases Across the Planet

761 U.S. Military Bases Across the Planet

Alternet
September 8, 2008

Here it is, as simply as I can put it: In the course of any year, there must be relatively few countries on this planet on which U.S. soldiers do not set foot, whether with guns blazing, humanitarian aid in hand, or just for a friendly visit. In startling numbers of countries, our soldiers not only arrive, but stay interminably, if not indefinitely. Sometimes they live on military bases built to the tune of billions of dollars that amount to sizeable American towns (with accompanying amenities), sometimes on stripped down forward operating bases that may not even have showers. When those troops don’t stay, often American equipment does — carefully stored for further use at tiny “cooperative security locations,” known informally as “lily pads” (from which U.S. troops, like so many frogs, could assumedly leap quickly into a region in crisis).

At the height of the Roman Empire, the Romans had an estimated 37 major military bases scattered around their dominions. At the height of the British Empire, the British had 36 of them planetwide. Depending on just who you listen to and how you count, we have hundreds of bases. According to Pentagon records, in fact, there are 761 active military “sites” abroad.

The fact is: We garrison the planet north to south, east to west, and even on the seven seas, thanks to our various fleets and our massive aircraft carriers which, with 5,000-6,000 personnel aboard — that is, the population of an American town — are functionally floating bases.

And here’s the other half of that simple truth: We don’t care to know about it. We, the American people, aided and abetted by our politicians, the Pentagon, and the mainstream media, are knee-deep in base denial.

Now, that’s the gist of it. If, like most Americans, that’s more than you care to know, stop here.

Where the Sun Never Sets

Let’s face it, we’re on an imperial bender and it’s been a long, long night. Even now, in the wee hours, the Pentagon continues its massive expansion of recent years; we spend militarily as if there were no tomorrow; we’re still building bases as if the world were our oyster; and we’re still in denial. Someone should phone the imperial equivalent of Alcoholics Anonymous.

But let’s start in a sunnier time, less than two decades ago, when it seemed that there would be many tomorrows, all painted red, white, and blue. Remember the 1990s when the U.S. was hailed — or perhaps more accurately, Washington hailed itself — not just as the planet’s “sole superpower” or even its unique “hyperpower,” but as its “global policeman,” the only cop on the block? As it happened, our leaders took that label seriously and our central police headquarters, that famed five-sided building in Washington D.C, promptly began dropping police stations — aka military bases — in or near the oil heartlands of the planet (Kosovo, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait) after successful wars in the former Yugoslavia and the Persian Gulf.

As those bases multiplied, it seemed that we were embarking on a new, post-Soviet version of “containment.” With the USSR gone, however, what we were containing grew a lot vaguer and, before 9/11, no one spoke its name. Nonetheless, it was, in essence, Muslims who happened to live on so many of the key oil lands of the planet.

Yes, for a while we also kept intact our old bases from our triumphant mega-war against Japan and Germany, and then the stalemated “police action” in South Korea (1950-1953) — vast structures which added up to something like an all-military American version of the old British Raj. According to the Pentagon, we still have a total of 124 bases in Japan, up to 38 on the small island of Okinawa, and 87 in South Korea. (Of course, there were setbacks. The giant bases we built in South Vietnam were lost in 1975, and we were peaceably ejected from our major bases in the Philippines in 1992.)

Read Full Article Here

 



Ron Paul: There’s no difference between McCain and Obama

Ron Paul: There’s no difference between McCain and Obama

Raw Story
August 29, 2008

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

Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has declined to endorse either John McCain or Barack Obama, and he told CNN’s Kiran Chetry on Thursday that he sees “no difference” between them because both espouse foreign policies that only create more threats to our national interests.

Chetry asked Paul, “Do you think it’s a valid argument … that a John McCain administration would be a four-year extension of the Bush administration?”

“Sure, but I think that’s what’s going to happen with Obama, too,” Paul replied. “There’s no difference.”

“Their foreign policies are identical,” Paul explained. “They want more troops in Afghanistan. They want to send more support to Georgia to protect the oil line there. Neither one says bring home the troops from Iraq from the bases — you know the bases are going to stay there, the embassy as big as the Vatican, that’s going to remain. So their foreign policies are exactly the same. They’re both very, very aggressive with Iran. So I would say there’s no difference.”

“How would you handle these global threats, then, if it’s not to send our troops there and make sure that we’re protected?” Chetry asked.

“We create the threats!” Paul replied emphatically. “Why are we on the borders of Russia provoking the Russians? I mean, the Georgians initiated the military attack against these enclaves where there were mostly Russians. … It’s the fact that we’re over there that we create these crises.”

“Isn’t it part of our duty, though, to support these fledgling democracies that ask for our help?” asked Chetry.

“No, it’s not our responsibility to do that,” Paul said firmly. “We should endorse the principle but not send troops and money. … Once we get over there, we just aggravate the situation.”

“We bombed Serbia in order for Kosovo to become independent,” Paul concluded. “Now the Russians are doing the same thing. … It’s this total inconsistency.”

 

Ron Paul’s rally: The other political convention in town

Beth Hawkins
Minnesota Post
September 1, 2008

When followers of erstwhile presidential candidate Ron Paul said they were going to stage an alternate convention, they meant it. Pretty much everything about Paul’s grassroots Rally for the Republic stands in stark contrast to the Republican national convention getting underway in St. Paul.

Its delegates are on their way via “Ronvoy,” a caravan of minivans and charter buses organized on the Internet. Many are eschewing hotels in favor of campgrounds and RV parks in Twin Cities exurbs, according to organizers. Still others will arrive just in time for the rally, a 12-hour marathon of speakers and entertainers taking place Tuesday at the Target Center in downtown Minneapolis.

“Most of our people are not wealthy,” said Drew Ivers, a longtime GOP activist who is Paul’s delegate coordinator. “They’re working people feeling the pinch. They’re not country-club elitists. With the price of gas, they’re caravanning in in minivans and the like.

“These people are sacrificing to make this happen,” Ivers added. “I think it’s commendable.”

Speakers expected at the rally include former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura, MSNBC correspondent Tucker Carlson, anti-tax lobbyist Grover Norquist, Barry Goldwater Jr., son of the late presidential candidate, and Barb White, a candidate in Minnesota’s fifth congressional district.

On hand to entertain the 10,000 supporters organizers say they expect will be musicians Marc Scibilia, Rockie Lynne, Sara Evans and Aimee Allen, the voice behind “The Ron Paul Revolution Theme Song.” Tickets, still available at Ticketmaster at press time, are priced at a cheeky $17.76.

$4.7 million in campaign coffers
A physician and 10-term congressman from the greater Houston area, Paul officially suspended his campaign for the GOP presidential nomination in June. Instead, he announced, he would use the $4.7 million remaining in his campaign coffers to underwrite the Campaign for Liberty, a grassroots effort to push libertarian-minded candidates for local offices across the country.

Ron Paul’s Rally for the Republic Sold Out
http://www.marketwatch.com/n…-49FAF8D09D25%7D&dist=hppr

C-SPAN 2 to cover the entire Rally for the Republic
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=428

Ron Paul’s Supporters in Nevada Could Cause McCain Trouble
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB121944799376665201.html

Ron Paul on FOX News 8/31/08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c2_tp1RR7c

Ron Paul’s welcome to Minneapolis RNC
http://mparent7777-1.livejournal.com/1472546.html

Pat Buchanan at DNC: ’Come to Ron Paul’s Convention!’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bld1tgarMAs

 



Fighting Continues After Georgia-Russia Peacetalks


both sides ignore peacetalks… this is going to be a long week…
Russia Announces War Halt; Fighting Continues

Wired
August 12, 2008

Russian President Medvedev announced a halt to his country’s military operation in Georgia. But there are reports of continued bombings. And he said that Russian troops are still cleared to “eliminate” any enemy remaining in the contested region of South Ossetia.

The AP reports that “hours before the Russian announcement, Russian forces bombed the crossroads city of Gori and launched an offensive in the part of separatist Abkhazia still under Georgian control, sending in 135 military vehicles – including tanks – and tightening the assault on the beleaguered nation.” In Poti, a port city in western Georgia, a New York Times correspondent heard bombs falling around an hour after Mr. Medvedev’s statement.

Russian defense official Anatoly Nogovitsyn tells the Times that Russian military actions could continue. “If you receive the order to cease fire, this would not mean that we would stop all operations, including reconnaissance operations,” he said.

 

Russia Prepares for Naval Blockade of Georgia, Bombs Major Oil Supplier to the West

Kommersant
August 12, 2008

Ships are grouping in the Black Sea near the Georgian aquatic border. A unnamed naval source has said that the move is necessary to prevent arms deliveries to Georgia by sea. He added that the naval blockade of Georgia will help avoid escalation of military actions in Abkhazia. Radio station Echo of Moscow reports that several Georgian Internet publications have confirmed that the Russian Black Sea fleet is regrouping.
Witnesses say that several Georgian military vessels attempted to approach the coast of Abkhazia. The Interfax correspondent in Sukhumi reports that the Georgian attempt was countered by the Russian Black Sea Fleet, which opened preventative fire. The Interfax information was confirmed by enforcement bodies in Abkhazia.

Apparently, after Georgian forces were repulsed from Tskhinvali, air connections with Georgian were broken and Georgian military activity was suppressed and Russia began economic suppression.

Georgia in the meantime is accusing Russia of attempting to blow up the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. Georgian Minister of Economic Development Ekaterina Sharashidze stated that Russian Air Force planes attacked the pipeline, but missed their target. “That makes it clear that the targets of the Russian military were not only Georgian economic objects, but international objects on Georgian territory,” she said. Reports were received throughout the day that Russian military planes struck targets in Georgia, however, they were military, not economic.

The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline runs a total of 1768 km., of which 443 km. stretches through Azerbaijan, 249 km. through Georgia and 1076 km. through Turkey. Construction of the pipeline began in 2003 and it began to pump oil on May 18, 2005. About 1 million barrels of oil per year are pumped through the pipeline. Construction of the pipeline cost $4 billion, not counting the filling of the pipeline, financial servicing or interest costs. The shareholders in the pipeline are BP (30,1%), AzBTC (25%), Chevron (8,9%), StatoilHydro (8,71%), ТРАО (6,53%), ENI (5%), Total (5%), Itochu (3,4%), Inpex (2,5%), ConocoPhillips (2,5%) and Hess (2,36%).

 

Georgia resumes shelling of S. Ossetia, troops shooting refugees after call for peacetalks

Russia Today
August 11, 2008

Authorities in South Ossetia say Georgian troops have shelled the road being used for evacuating people from the conflict zone, according to Russian Interfax news agency. Attacks are continuing in the South Ossetian region, despite claims from Georgia that it was imposing a ceasefire.

There have been several explosions in the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, after it came under a renewed shelling attack. Several Russian troops have been wounded.

It said that Russian forces have shot down a Georgian military plane in South Ossetia in the area around Eredvi.

Russian humanitarian aid has begun to arrive in the breakaway region’s capital.

Tskhinvali is back under peacekeepers’ control, as Russian troops disarm Georgians, who still remain in the city.

Moscow is sending more troops to South Ossetia. And military investigators have already started working in Tskhinvali to collect evidence of war crimes.

1600 civilians are thought to have died in South Ossetia. 15 Russian peacekeepers were killed with 70 others were wounded. Georgia claims 50 of its troops have been killed, and around 300 wounded.

 

Russian news agencies report sunken Georgian ship

Washington Times
August 10, 2008

Russian news agencies say the Defense Ministry is claiming to have sunk a Georgian missile boat that was trying to attack Russian navy ships in the Black Sea.

Russia’s Defense Ministry refused to comment on the Sunday reports to The Associated Press and Georgian officials could not immediately be reached.

If confirmed, the incident could mark a serious escalation of the fighting between Russia and Georgia over the separatist Georgian province of South Ossetia.

“Georgian missile patrol boats today made two attempts to attack Russian military ships. The Russian ships opened fire in response and as a result, one of the Georgian ships carrying out the attack was sunk,” the ITAR-Tass news agency quoted a ministry spokesman as saying.

Read Full Article Here

Russian Forces Capture Military Base in Georgia
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/w..=world&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Live webcam from Tbilisi
http://tvali.ge/index.php?action=cameras

Neocons Call For U.S. To Launch War Against Russia
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/11/neocon-russia-war/

Georgia: America admits it has few options for dealing with Russia-Georgia war
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new..ns-for-dealing-with-Russia-Georgia-war.html

Georgian minister: We won’t cede to Russians
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/C..tPreview/1,2506,L-3580432,00.html

Swarms of Russian jets bomb Georgian targets
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92G35OO0&show_article=1

Bush Warns Russia To Pull Back
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92GC5G80&show_article=1

Cheney: Russian Offensive Will Not Go Unanswered
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92GC5G80&show_article=1

Ukraine threatens to bar Russian warships
http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSLA480092

Georgia Overrun By Russian Troops
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news..ssian-troops-scale-ground-invasion-begins.html

Tbilisi civilian airport hit in Russian air strike
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/2008081..etia-runway-bd5ae06.html

McCain warns Russians of “severe, long-term negative consequences”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080811/pl_politico/19061_1

US military surprised by speed, timing of Russia military action
Israelis in Georgia warn of impending disaster
Operation Dagestan
Zbig: Russian Invasion Like Stalin’s Invasion Of Finland

 



Georgia Started War by Shelling South Ossetian Capital

Georgia Started War by Shelling South Ossetian Capital

Press TV
August 10, 2008

Tensions between the former Soviet republic of Georgia and Russia erupted into full-scale war on 7 August, leaving thousands of civilians dead and turning dozens of thousands more into refugees.

The conflict in South Ossetia has great strategic importance because it involves one of the United States’ staunch allies and Russia, a re-emerging superpower with vast energy reserves that is showing growing eagerness to defend its interests on the international stage.

President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia said that his country was acting to restore peace in the Caucasus and protect its citizens and peacekeepers who had come under Georgian attack in South Ossetia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Georgia of utilizing massive violence with the aim of making the Ossetian population flee.

“We are receiving reports that a policy of ethnic cleansing was being conducted in villages in South Ossetia, the number of refugees is climbing, the panic is growing, people are trying to save their lives,” said Lavrov.

Russian counteroffensive expelled Georgian forces from the capital of South Ossetia, Tskhinvali, after four days of heavy fighting. Georgia’s military defeat was already clear and sure at that time.

Read Full Article Here

 

American in Java, South Ossetia confirms first-strike was from Georgia

 

Putin accuses Georgia of genocide

Press TV
August 10, 2008

Russian Premier Vladimir Putin arrived in the capital of North Ossetia, and called Georgia’s acts in South Ossetia a species of “genocide”.

While in Vladikavkaz, the capital of North Ossetia, Putin said, “The actions of the Georgian leadership in South Ossetia are a crime and foremost they are a crime against their own people because a deadly blow has been delivered to the territorial integrity of Georgia, which brings massive damage to its national identity.”

Putin continued, “It’s hard to imagine after all that had happened and after all that is still happening they’ll be able to convince South Ossetia to be part of Georgia.”

The impact of what he saw led him to call for an investigation into alleged acts of genocide by Georgian forces during their offensive against South Ossetia, AFP reported.

Putin told President Dmitry Medvedev in comments that were broadcast on Sunday on Russian television that the incidents that were described by the refugees, “lie beyond the framework of understanding of military actions.”

He continued by saying, “In my opinion they are already elements of some kind of genocide of the Ossetian people. I think it would be correct if you instruct the military prosecutor to document all such incidents.”

In response to Putin’s statement, Medvedev said that he would issue the order and vowed to bring criminal charges against those who were responsible.

He had originally arrived in Vladikavkaz to hold talks with evacuees and officials and had changed his travel plans in order to see at first hand what was being done to assist the war refugees from South Ossetia, Russia Today reported.

Putin also discussed an aid package to help North Ossetia cope with the influx of refugees by announcing that the Russian government was planning to assign about USD 400m for the reconstruction of South Ossetia.

 

Georgia’s Betrayal and Censorship of it’s Citizens

 

After Georgia pulled-out of South Ossetia, Russian planes continued bombing raids

 

Conflict Between Russia and the US in the Caucasus

Strategic Culture Foundation
August 10, 2008

Upon his arrival to Vladikavkaz from Beijing on August 9, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said that Georgia had committed a crime against its own people, dealt a blow to its own territorial integrity, and caused a tremendous damage to its statehood. He also said that under the circumstances it was hard to imagine how South Ossetia would now be convinced to become a part of Georgia as the Georgian aggression, which was a crime against the Ossetian people, had led to numerous fatalities among the civilian population and to a humanitarian catastrophe. Subsequently V. Putin described the drama in South Ossetia as genocide while visiting a refugee camp in the Alagir district.

Thus, V. Putin has thoroughly assessed the recent developments from the political and legal standpoints. Russia will provide the entire necessary assistance to South Ossetia at the initial phase of the crisis relief. V. Putin pledged that the refugees would be able to return to their homeland and declared that Russia would contribute 10 bn rubles to rebuild Tskhinvali as the first step.

Russian President D. Medvedev said he would instruct the military prosecutor to document the crimes against civilians in South Ossetia.

The clear and definite statements made by the two Russian leaders contrast sharply with those of the Georgian leader who obviously expected the situation to evolve not the way it actually did. Overwhelmed by fury, he keeps ordering new devastating attacks on Tskhinvali and South Ossetia’s villages and begs his Western patrons for help. Georgian Minister for Reintegration Temur Yakobashvili indicated that the West would surely exert pressure on Moscow and then Georgia would emerge from the conflict as the winner. For some unknown reason, Mr. Saakashvili and his team concluded that the aggression and genocide for which they are responsible would remain unpunished.

Russia’s reaction to the tragedy in South Ossetia has shown that the Medvedev-Putin tandem functions with high efficiency and synchronism. Clearly, the attempts of external forces to destabilize the domestic political situation in Russia by instilling divisions in its leadership have failed.

Western media said that the Georgian President (already called a war criminal by a number of politicians) had offered a ceasefire directly to Russian President D. Medvedev. The reports were refuted and branded disinformation by the Kremlin. No doubt, there can be no truce with Mr. Saakashvili until all the Georgian guerillas are expelled from South Ossetia and the infrastructure of the Georgian state terrorism including army bases, military installations, air force bases, and the networks of their economic support are maximally destroyed.

It transpired that the news about the withdrawal of the Georgian army from South Ossetia had been another lie. In all likelihood, the disinformation is spread by the representatives of Georgia in order to win time to regroup its forces. They must be routed completely in order to ensure peace and stability for the Caucasus. Russian Prime Minister V. Putin said: “For centuries Russia has played a highly positive stabilizing role in the region, being a guarantor of cooperation and progress. Things have always been and are going to remain that way – nobody should have any doubts about this.”

V. Putin was absolutely right when he said that Russians will continue to regard the Georgian people as friends. The severity of the fighting in which the Russian army, peacekeepers, and the Ossetian self-defense forces are currently engaged shows that Russia is facing a serious and ferocious enemy who recognizes no moral limitations on the way to its criminal objectives. Certainly, this does not apply to the Georgian nation – dragged into bloody adventures for which it will certainly have to pay, it is yet to draw conclusions from the experience. One item from the timeline preceding the aggression deserves particular attention – the Georgian-US Immediate Response 2008 military exercise, during which the US instructors trained the Georgian forces to carry out “anti-terrorist cleansings” in residential areas was completed on July 31. The exercise included such activities as cleansing terrorists from villages (allegedly in the framework of the preparation of the Georgian military for the operations in Iraq) and ensuring the security of the civilian population. The atrocities perpetrated by the Georgian guerillas in Tskhinvali had been taught by the Western instructors under the cynical disguise of “the struggle against terrorism”. The actual objectives are of course completely different. Former Georgian Foreign Minister Salomé Zourabichvili, who is certainly a very well-informed person, said the US presence in Georgia comprises a broad range of activities including the training of the Georgian armed forces and the monitoring of the strategically important corridor passing across the Caucasus. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline is a part of the latter. Zourabichvili opineds that the main purpose of the current conflict with Russia is to strengthen the loyalty of Georgia to the US and Great Britain and to guarantee that they will have control over the country and, consequently, over the South Caucasus.

It should be noted that the escalation at Russia’s border coincided in time with tensions in China’s Xinjiang autonomous region, where a terrorist act has taken place during the Olympics. A few days earlier, an arms depot was found in Bishkek, the capital of Kirghizstan, attended by 10 US military servicemen and several diplomats from the US Ambassy in the country. Georgia’s aggression against South Ossetia is a war in the interests of other players, a war in which Georgians are to play the role of cannon fodder. Unless the aggression is suppressed immediately in the tiny region of the Caucasus, new and much more extensive regional conflicts will be imminent.

Now, as during WWII, the Russian army is fighting heroically to protect not only the Caucasus but the entire post-Soviet space from the fascist plague.

Recent News:

Georgia-South Ossetia: Conflict between ’Moscow and the entire West’
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/south-ossetia.htm

US condemns ’dangerous’ Russian response in South Ossetia
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/10/georgia.russia2

Fox News Host Refuses To Talk About Russia-Georgia War, Insists On Covering Edwards’
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/09/fox-news-edwards/

Two Journalists Killed in S.Ossetia
http://67.222.4.42/eng/article.php?id=19035

U.S. Begins Flying Georgian Troops Home
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/2008081..AlHwLtln5qYxKIwhC9qxilwUewgF

NATO envoy: Russia is not at war, rejects cease-fire
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellit..48355&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

Iran Calls For Ceasefire In Georgia
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/10/content_9112445.htm

Russian Troops Control South Ossetian Capital
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/10/content_9112445.htm

Russia Disputes Claim Of Georgian Pullout
http://news.yahoo.com/s/a..lt=AlHwLtln5qYxKIwhC9qxilwUewgF

Russian media, “Turkey supports Georgia”
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/home/9626649.asp?gid=244&sz=3441

Georgia’s Parliament Approves State Of War
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/09/georgia.ossetia/index.html

Russia strikes a blow at its fears of Nato encirclement
Russia Expands Bombing Blitz Against Georgia
NATO encouraged Georgia – Russian envoy

 



1,500 Reported Killed in Georgia-Russia Battle


1,500 Reported Killed in Georgia-Russia Battle

NY Times
8/8/8

Russian air attacks over northern Georgia intensified on Saturday morning, striking two apartment buildings in the city of Gori and clogging roads out of the area with fleeing refugees.

Russian authorities said their forces had retaken the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, from Georgian control during the morning hours. They reported that 15 Russian peacekeepers and 1,500 civilians have been killed in the conflict.

Georgian forces shot down 10 Russian combat planes over the last two days, according to Alexander Lomaya, secretary of the Georgian National Security Council.

Twelve Russian troops were killed, according to Anatoly Nogovitsyn, a general colonel in the Ministry of Defense. Mr. Nogovitsyn was asked if it is a state of war, but he denied that. He said Russian forces are in Tskhinvali to help peacekeepers who were already there.

Shota Utiashvili, an official at the Georgian Interior Ministry, called the attack on Gori a “major escalation,” and said he expected attacks to increase over the course of Saturday. He said some 16 Russian planes were in the air over Georgian territory at any given time on Saturday, four times the number of sorties seen Friday.

In the Georgian capital of Tbilisi, wounded fighters and civilians began to arrive in hospitals, most with shrapnel or mortar wounds. Several dozen names had been posted outside the hospital.

In a news conference, the Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said Georgian attacks on Russian citizens “amounted to ethnic cleansing.”

Mr. Lavrov said Russian airstrikes targeted military staging grounds. Asked whether Russia is prepared to fight “all-out war” in Georgia, he said: “No. Georgia, I believe, started a war in Southern Ossetia, and we are responsible to keep the peace.”

He said Moscow has been working intensely with foreign leaders, in particular the United states. “We have been appreciative of the American efforts to pacify the hawks in Tbilisi. Apparently these efforts have not succeeded. Quite a number of officials in Washignton were really shocked when all this happened.”

The United States and other Western nations, joined by NATO, condemned the violence and demanded a cease-fire. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice went a step further, calling on Russia to withdraw its forces, and

President George W. Bush, who is at the Olympics in Beijing, was expected to make a statement at about 7 a.m. Eastern.

Russian military units — including tank, artillery and reconnaissance — arrived in Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia, on Saturday to help Russian peacekeepers there, in response to overnight shelling by Georgian forces, state television in Russia reported, citing the Ministry of Defense. Ground assault aircraft were also mobilized, the Ministry said.

Also on Saturday a senior Georgian official said by telephone that Russian bombers were flying over Georgia and that the presidential offices and residence in Tbilisi had been evacuated. The official added that Georgian forces still had control of Tskhinvali.

Neither side showed any indication of backing down. Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin of Russia declared that “war has started,” and President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia accused Russia of a “well-planned invasion” and mobilized Georgia’s military reserves. There were signs as well of a cyberwarfare campaign, as Georgian government Web sites were crashing intermittently during the day.

The escalation risked igniting a renewed and sustained conflict in the Caucasus region, an important conduit for the flow of oil from the Caspian Sea to world markets and an area where conflict has flared for years along Russia’s borders, most recently in Chechnya.

The military incursion into Georgia marked a fresh sign of Kremlin confidence and resolve, and also provided a test of the capacities of the Russian military, which Mr. Putin had tried to modernize and re-equip during his two presidential terms.

Frictions between Georgia and South Ossetia, which has declared de facto independence, have simmered for years, but intensified when Mr. Saakashvili came to power in Georgia and made national unification a centerpiece of his agenda. Mr. Saakashvili, a close American ally who has sought NATO membership for Georgia, is loathed at the Kremlin in part because he had positioned himself as a spokesman for democracy movements and alignment with the West.

Earlier this year Russia announced that it was expanding support for the separatist regions. Georgia labeled the new support an act of annexation.

The conflict in Georgia also appeared to suggest the limits of the power of President Dmitri A. Medvedev, Mr. Putin’s hand-picked successor. During the day, it was Mr. Putin’s stern statements from China, where he was visiting the opening of the Olympic Games, that appeared to define Russia’s position.

But Mr. Medvedev made a public statement as well, making it unclear who was directing Russia’s military operations. Officially, that authority rests with Mr. Medvedev, and foreign policy is outside Mr. Putin’s portfolio.

“The war in Ossetia instantly showed the idiocy of our state management,” said a commentator on the liberal radio station, Ekho Moskvy. “Who is in charge — Putin or Medvedev?”

The war between Georgia and South Ossetia, until recently labeled a “frozen conflict,” stretches back to the early 1990s, when South Ossetia and another separatist region, Abkhazia, gained de facto independence from Georgia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The region settled into a tenuous peace monitored by Russian peacekeepers, but frictions with Georgia increased sharply in 2004, when Mr. Saakashvili was elected.

Reports conflicted throughout Friday about whether Georgian or Russian forces had won control of Tskhinvali, the capital of the mountainous rebel province. It was unclear late on Friday whether ground combat had taken place between Russian and Georgian soldiers, or had been limited to fighting between separatists and Georgian forces.

Marat Kulakhmetov, commander of Russian peacekeeping forces in Tskhinvali, said early on Saturday that South Ossetian separatists still held most of the city and that Georgian forces were only present on its southern edge.

That report aligned with a statement by Georgia’s ambassador to the United Nations, Irakli Alasania, who said that Georgian military units held eight villages at the capital’s edge. Georgian officials asserted that Russian warplanes had attacked Georgian forces and civilians in Tskhinvali, and that airports in four Georgian cities had been hit.

Shota Utiashvili, an official at the Georgian Interior Ministry, said they included the Vaziany military base outside of Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, a military base in Marneuli, and airports in the cities of Delisi and Kutaisi.

“We are under massive attack,” he said.

Late in the night, George Arveladze, an adviser to Mr. Saakashvili, said that Russian planes had bombed the commercial seaport of Poti, where one worker was missing and several others were wounded. Poti is an export point for oil from the Caspian Sea; Mr. Arveladze said the initial reports indicated that the oil terminal had not been struck.

Eduard Kokoity, the president of South Ossetia, said in a statement on a government Web site that hundreds of civilians had been killed in fighting in the capital. Russian peacekeepers stationed in South Ossetia said that 12 peacekeeping soldiers were killed Friday and that 50 were wounded. The claims of casualties by all sides could not be independently verified.

Analysts said that either Georgia or Russia could be trying to seize an opportune moment — with world leaders focused on the start of the 2008 Olympics this week — to reclaim the territory, and to settle the dispute before a new American presidential administration comes to office.

Richard C. Holbrooke, the former American ambassador to the United Nations, said that Russia’s aims were clear. “They have two goals,” he said. “To do a creeping annexation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and, secondly, to overthrow Saakashvili, who is a tremendous thorn in their side.”

A spokesman for Mr. Medvedev declined to comment.

The United States State Department issued a press release late Friday saying that John D. Negroponte, the deputy secretary of state, had summoned the Russian chargé d’affairs to press for a de-escalation of force. “We deplore today’s Russian attacks by strategic bombers and missiles, which are threatening civilian lives,” the statement said.

The United States also said Friday that it would send an envoy to the region to try to broker an end to the fighting.

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany issued a statement calling on both sides “to halt the use of force immediately.” Germany has taken a leading role in trying to ease the tensions over Abkhazia.

The trigger for the fresh escalation began last weekend, when South Ossetia accused Georgia of firing mortars into the enclave after six Georgian policemen were killed in the border area by a roadside bomb. As tensions grew, South Ossetia began sending women and children out of the enclave. The refugee crisis intensified Friday as relief groups said thousands of refugees, mostly women and children, were streaming across the border into the North Caucasus city of Vladikavkaz in Russia.

Early on Friday, Russia’s Channel One television showed Russian tanks entering South Ossetia and reported that two battalions reinforced by tanks and armored personnel carriers were approaching its capital.

There were unconfirmed reports that Georgian forces had shot down two Russian planes and that its aircraft had bombed a convoy of Russian tanks. Russian state television showed what it said was a destroyed Georgian tank in Tskhinvali, its turret smoldering.

Women and children in Tskhinvali were hiding in basements while men had fled to the woods, said a woman reached by telephone in the neighboring Russian region of North Ossetia, who said she had been in phone contact with relatives there. She declined to give her name.

In Gori, a city outside South Ossetia and about 12 miles from Tskhinvali, residents said there had been sporadic bombing all day. The city was shaken by numerous vibrations from the impact of bombs on Friday evening. One Russian bomb exploded in Gori near a textile factory and a cellphone tower, leaving a crater.

At the United Nations on Friday, diplomats continued to wrangle over the text of a statement after attempts to agree to compromise language collapsed Friday afternoon, after nearly three hours of consultations.

The Russians, who had called the emergency session, proposed a short, three-paragraph statement that expressed concern about the escalating violence, and singled out Georgia and South Ossetia as needing to cease hostilities and return to the negotiating table.

But one phrase calling on all parties to “renounce the use of force” met with opposition, particularly from the United States, France and Britain. The three countries argued that the statement was unbalanced, one European diplomat said, because that language would have undermined Georgia’s ability to defend itself. Belgium, which holds the rotating presidency of the Security Council this month, circulated a revised draft calling for an immediate cessation of hostility and for “all parties” to return to the negotiating table. By dropping the specific reference to Georgia and South Ossetia, the compromise statement would also encompass Russia.

The Security Council was scheduled to meet Saturday to resume deliberations. China, in its statement during the early morning debate, had asked for a traditional cease-fire out of respect for the opening of the Olympics.

There are over 2,000 American citizens in Georgia, Pentagon officials said. Among them are about 130 trainers — mostly American military personnel but with about 30 Defense Department civilians —assisting the Georgian military with preparations for deployments to Iraq.

The American military was taking no actions regarding the outbreak of violence, according to Pentagon and military officials. While there has been some contact with the Georgian authorities, the Defense Department had received no requests for assistance, the officials said.

 

U.S. Through Georgia Starts War With Russia

Lee Rogers
Rogue Government
8/8/8

The military conflict between Russian and Georgian forces is undoubtedly a curtain raiser that could potentially escalate into a much larger conflict. Although this is an extremely serious situation, the U.S. press has downplayed its significance choosing not to make this the top story of the day. This is despite the fact that the U.S. has had an active military presence in Georgia for several years and had been recently conducting joint drills with the Georgian military only weeks ago. Not only that, but the Debka File is reporting that the Israelis have also been providing military support to Georgia. With that said, there is little doubt that U.S. forces are actively engaged in battle with the Georgian military fighting the Russians. An even more ominous fact is that the Georgian military started this conflict by invading the province of South Ossetia a territory that is around 90% Russian. The Georgian military forces started this by entering South Ossetia, killing Russian peace keepers which results in the Russian response. This fact has been confirmed by the London Guardian, Reuters and other media outlets, meaning that the Georgian puppet government backed by the U.S. and Israel has launched an attack against Russia. This is an extremely serious situation and the U.S. corporate controlled press is acting like the Russians were the one’s that started this whole thing when that is a total distortion of everything that the foreign press has been saying. This is outrageous considering the U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. It should also come as no surprise that something like this has happened on August 8th, 2008 or 8/8/08 due to the numerological significance of the date to the elite who follow the occult and the added distraction of the Olympics. There is little doubt that this event has been engineered by powerful people in the Anglo-American establishment.

Read Full Article Here

 

Evidence of U.S. Military Presence in Georgia

Prison Planet
8/8/8

Georgia, US start military exercises despite tensions with Russia

CNews
July 15, 2008

TBILISI, Georgia (AP) — Georgian and U.S. troops started a joint military exercise Tuesday amid growing tensions between the ex-Soviet republic and Russia, a Georgian defense ministry official said.

Read article

Russian military gangs ready to invade Georgia. U.S. sends thousand marines in response

Kavkaz-Center
July 10, 2008

Gangs of the Russian invaders from the so-called North Caucasus Military District are ready “to provide assistance to the Russian troops in case the situation gets more aggravated in the conflict zones in Abkhazia and South Ossetia”, as gang leader of Russian North Caucasus Military District, Sergei Makarov, said.

Read article

US army exercises begin in Georgia

Aljazeerea
July 15, 2008

The United States and Russia are holding military exercises on either side of the Caucasus mountains amid increasing tensions over the fate of two separatist regions in ex-Soviet Georgia.

Read article

US runs military exercise around Georgia conflict

Now Public
July 17, 2008

The conflict in the Caucasus country of Georgia is growing to alarming levels. The country is fighting with a break-away region in teh North called Abkhazia, where an ethnic minority lives. The area is currently de-facto independent, and Russia is backing the area’s claims to independence, although it’s not really clear why. The US secretary of state Condoleeza Rice visited the country earlier this month, and now the US military is running exercises around the conflict. Could the US military be planning to get involved in this Caucasus conflict? The US would be supporting its pro-West ally Georgia, while Russia would be supporting the rebels. Not exactly a good idea geopolitically!

Read article

Read Full Article Here

90% of South Ossetia’s non-Georgian people have Russian passports
http://www.associatedconten..oking_for_a_fight_with_georgia.html?cat=9

Georgian President requests U.S. support in war with Russia
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=26849

U.S. Attacks Russia Through Client State Georgia
http://www.prisonplanet.com/us-attacks-russia-through-client-state-georgia.html

More Video Reports On Georgia/Russia Conflict
http://www.infowars.com/?p=3838

Russian jets bomb airbase outside Georgian capital
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/0808..nal_georgia_ossetia_dc

Bush Reiterates Support For Georgia’s Terrirotial Integration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFSMAreeH4U

Russian peacekeepers confirmed 15 killed in Georgia
http://www.russiatoday.ru/news/news/28656

Pentagon closely monitoring Georgia situation
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/08/military_georgia_080808w/

 



Domestic Military Operations in Southern California

Domestic Military Operations in Southern California

 



The Lesson from Obama’s Cowardly Flip-Flop

The Lesson from Obama’s Cowardly Flip-Flop

Jacob G. Hornberger
FFF
July 10, 2008

Those who think that the election of Barack Obama will save the nation from its many foreign-policy/civil-liberties woes got smashed and dashed with a cold dose of reality. Flip-flopping in the finest political tradition, Obama voted in favor of President Bush’s wiretap/immunity bill, after promising to filibuster it before he secured the Democratic Party nomination.

Presumably, Obama’s thinking goes like this: “Now that I’ve secured the nomination of my party, liberals will vote for me regardless because they won’t want John McCain in power. So, I can now flip flop and taken different positions on foreign policy and civil liberties so that John McCain won’t be able to tell people that I’m soft on terrorism.”

Reminding people of what happened in 2002, when the Democrats unconstitutionally and cowardly delegated the power to declare war on Iraq to President Bush because of fear that the president would accuse them of being soft on Saddam Hussein, congressional Democrats voted to give Bush everything he wanted plus more in the wiretap/immunity bill, including civil immunity to private telecom companies for apparent felony offenses committed against their customers.

For an excellent analysis of the cowardly and craven cave-in by Obama and his fellow Democrats, see Glenn Greenwald’s blog and Jonathan Turley’s television interview, which is included in Greenwald’s June 9 blog. (Both Greenwald and Turley delivered terrific speeches at our recent conference “Restoring the Republic 2008: Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties.”)

Meanwhile, the president and his associates continue to threaten Iran with a military attack without even pretending that they’re going to first ask for a declaration of war from Congress, which the Constitution requires. Keep in mind that the Constitution is the law that we the people impose on the president and the Congress. That’s the law that the president feels that he can violate with impunity.

The fact is that Americans are living under a lawless regime, one in which the president feels that constitutional constraints are illegitimate during his “war on terrorism,” which he says will last indefinitely given that there are still so many terrorists and potential terrorists in the world. Never mind that the U.S. government’s own policies generate the terrorist threat against the United States, which is then used as the excuse for the president to operate in an omnipotent and extra-constitutional manner.

That’s what his signing statements, illegal wiretaps and other searches, enemy-combatant designations, torture and sex abuse camps, cancelation of habeas corpus, wars of aggression, indefinite detentions, and kangaroo military tribunals are all about — the power to ignore constitutional restraints — omnipotent power.

The battle over the wiretap/immunity bill demonstrates a critically important point, one that every lover of liberty must ultimately confront: It is not sufficient to fight every assault on civil liberties that comes down the pike. The infringements are endless. Even if one civil-liberties battle is won, there are always three more battles to wage.

Suppose, for example, that civil libertarians succeed in getting the Pentagon’s torture and sex abuse camp at Guantanamo Bay closed down. Would that end the torture and sex abuse? Of course not. They’ll simply start sending detainees to torture and sex abuse camps in Afghanistan or to friendly terrorist regimes, such as Syria (which they still claim they don’t talk to despite the fact that the CIA somehow or another made the arrangements with Syrian torturers to torture an innocent man on its behalf).

Thus, what every American who thirsts for the restoration of a normal, free society must recognize is that there is one — and only one — solution: the dismantling of America’s standing army, especially the military-industrial complex and the CIA, which are the center of the rot of the U.S. Empire. This is what should have been done when the Berlin Wall fell and it’s what should be done today.

That’s the root of the weed. That’s what needs to be pulled out of the ground. It’s not sufficient to simply continue trimming its branches.

That would mean the closing of every U.S. military base around the world — Europe, Asia, South America, and everywhere else. It would entail bringing all those troops home and discharging them into the private sector. It would entail closing the multitude of military bases all across the United States. It would entail the abolition of the CIA. It would include the repeal of the deadly and destructive war on drugs. It would entail the end of all foreign aid. It would mean the end of the U.S. government’s meddling in the affairs of other nations. It would entail the repeal of all the taxes that fund these people and their deadly, destructive, and nefarious operations.

Barack Obama’s cowardly flip flop should remind every American that the key to our future lies not in electing different people to public office. Instead, the key to our future lies in a shift in paradigms — from one of big government in foreign (and domestic) affairs to one of limited government in foreign (and domestic) affairs.

The time has come for the American people to do what Americans in 1787 were doing: reflecting upon the principles of liberty and limited government on which this nation should be based. The time has come to end the U.S. government’s role as the world’s policeman, intervener, interloper, aggressor, welfare provider, and sole remaining empire. The time has come for the American people to restore the principles of liberty and limited government that our ancestors bequeathed to us.

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

 

Obama’s poll numbers plummet: Apparently betraying Americans does not pay

Newsweek
July 11, 2008

A month after emerging victorious from the bruising Democratic nominating contest, some of Barack Obama’s glow may be fading. In the latest NEWSWEEK Poll, the Illinois senator leads Republican nominee John McCain by just 3 percentage points, 44 percent to 41 percent. The statistical dead heat is a marked change from last month’s NEWSWEEK Poll, where Obama led McCain by 15 points, 51 percent to 36 percent.

Obama’s rapid drop comes at a strategically challenging moment for the Democratic candidate. Having vanquished Hillary Clinton in early June, Obama quickly went about repositioning himself for a general-election audience–an unpleasant task for any nominee emerging from the pander-heavy primary contests and particularly for a candidate who’d slogged through a vigorous primary challenge in most every contest from January until June. Obama’s reversal on FISA legislation, his support of faith-based initiatives and his decision to opt out of the campaign public-financing system left him open to charges he was a flip-flopper. In the new poll, 53 percent of voters (and 50 percent of former Hillary Clinton supporters) believe that Obama has changed his position on key issues in order to gain political advantage.

More seriously, some Obama supporters worry that the spectacle of their candidate eagerly embracing his old rival, Hillary Clinton, and traveling the country courting big donors at lavish fund-raisers, may have done lasting damage to his image as an arbiter of a new kind of politics. This is a major concern since Obama’s outsider credentials, have, in the past, played a large part in his appeal to moderate, swing voters. In the new poll, McCain leads Obama among independents 41 percent to 34 percent, with 25 percent favoring neither candidate. In June’s NEWSWEEK Poll, Obama bested McCain among independent voters, 48 percent to 36 percent.

Read Full Article Here

Obama’s campaign manager begs for money
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/14/thi..ager-begs-for-money/

Obama sees three straight months of declining donations
http://www.washingtonpost.com/../2008/07/10/AR2008071002813_pf.html

 



Israeli jets practice bombing Iran over Iraqi airspace

Israeli jets practice bombing Iran over Iraqi airspace

Sources in Iraq’s Defense Ministry say for past month Israel using American bases to conduct overflights as part of rehearsal for possible bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities; IDF: Reports are unfounded

Roee Nahmias
Israeli News
July 11, 2008

The IDF dismissed Friday evening earlier reports claiming that Air Force jets have been training in Iraq ahead of a possible strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The IDF Spokesperson’s Office said the Iraqi reports were “unfounded.”

According to the reports, sources in the Iraqi Defense Ministry told a local news network Friday that Israeli fighter jets have been flying over Iraqi territory for over a month in preparation for potential strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, adding that the aircraft have been landing in American bases following the overflights.

An Iraqi website has claimed that Israeli warplanes have been using Iraqi airspace to practice for possible bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities.

Nahrainnet.com, quoting unnamed sources in the Iraqi defence ministry, said that for the past month Israel has been using US bases in Iraq to conduct overflights.

Defence Ministry spokesman Major General Mohammed al-Askari dismissed the report on Friday.

“We have no information about Israeli jets using Iraqi airspace for rehearsals,” he told AFP.

In Jerusalem, meanwhile, an Israeli military spokesman told AFP he was aware of the report and said, “I have no information on this.”

The US military did not comment on the report.

Word of Israel’s alleged Air Force maneuvers in Iraq has reached Iran. The sources said the US has boosted security in and around the bases used by Israel during the exercises.

According to the Defense Ministry officials, retired Iraqi army officers in the Al Anbar district reported that fighter jets have been regularly entering Iraqi airspace from Jordan and landing at the airport near Haditha. The sources estimated that should the Israeli jets take off from the American bases it would take them no more than five minutes to reach Iran’s nuclear reactor in Bushehr.

The sources estimated that should the Israeli jets take off from the American bases it would take them no more than five minutes to reach Iran’s nuclear reactor in Bushehr.

American officials said recently that more than 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters took part in maneuvers over the eastern Mediterranean and Greece in the first week of June, apparently a rehearsal for a potential bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

 

Barak In Washington To Lobby For Iran Attack

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
July 11, 2008


Israeli war minister Ehud Barak will visit Washington next week to meet with top U.S. government officials and President Bush in what some are suggesting will be the final planning session in anticipation of a military strike on Iran.

Barak will hold talks for three days with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon – as well as U.S. President George Bush.

Barak’s visit will also precede a tour by Israeli military chief of staff Lieutenant-General Gabi Ashkenazi, who is set to meet with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen.

The trip follows Mossad chief Meir Dagan’s visit to Washington during which he met top intelligence officials.

“The visits of the Israeli officials came as an intense debate continued to rage inside the US administration between those who favored military action, led by Cheney, and those opposed, led by Gates,” according to a Jerusalem Post report.

Read Full Article Here

 

President George W Bush backs Israeli plan for strike on Iran

The Sunday Times
July 13, 2008

President George W Bush has told the Israeli government that he may be prepared to approve a future military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if negotiations with Tehran break down, according to a senior Pentagon official.

Despite the opposition of his own generals and widespread scepticism that America is ready to risk the military, political and economic consequences of an airborne strike on Iran, the president has given an “amber light” to an Israeli plan to attack Iran’s main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties, the official told The Sunday Times.

“Amber means get on with your preparations, stand by for immediate attack and tell us when you’re ready,” the official said. But the Israelis have also been told that they can expect no help from American forces and will not be able to use US military bases in Iraq for logistical support.

Nor is it certain that Bush’s amber light would ever turn to green without irrefutable evidence of lethal Iranian hostility. Tehran’s test launches of medium-range ballistic missiles last week were seen in Washington as provocative and poorly judged, but both the Pentagon and the CIA concluded that they did not represent an immediate threat of attack against Israeli or US targets.

“It’s really all down to the Israelis,” the Pentagon official added. “This administration will not attack Iran. This has already been decided. But the president is really preoccupied with the nuclear threat against Israel and I know he doesn’t believe that anything but force will deter Iran.”

The official added that Israel had not so far presented Bush with a convincing military proposal. “If there is no solid plan, the amber will never turn to green,” he said.

There was also resistance inside the Pentagon from officers concerned about Iranian retaliation. “The uniform people are opposed to the attack plans, mainly because they think it will endanger our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the source said.

Read Full Article Here

Israeli jets use Iraqi airspace to practice Iran strike: website
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080711153839.uk37f5gh.html

Fmr Cheney adviser: Odds of Israel attacking Iran ’slightly, slightly above 50-50’
http://www.motherjones.com/w../07/iran-bomb-us-israel-war-threat.html

Iran Missile Test Bluff: Old Rockets, Bogus Video
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashim.htm

Iran’s Photoshopped Missiles Are “Glorified Scuds”
http://www.infowars.net/articles/july2008/110708Scuds.htm

Retired Military Leaders Oppose Provocative House Resolution on Iran
http://www.clw.org/media/releases/press_release_hconres362/

Iran says talk of US attack ‘craziness’
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080712083343.wsceub4q.html

Iran’s missiles are just for show
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JG11Ak01.html

Iran missile tests prove US missile plan ‘not needed’: Russia
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080711085515.a2i29ovk.html

Coup on Iran & False Flag News Archive

 



Afghanistan Blames Deadly Bombing on Pakistan

Afghanistan Accuses “Foreign Intelligence Agency” Of Deadly Embassy Bombing

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
July 7, 2008

Afghanistan’s interior ministry has accused a “foreign intelligence agency” of being behind today’s deadly suicide bombing that ripped apart the country’s Indian embassy in Kabul, killing 41 people. Could the event represent another “false flag” run by American intelligence as a means of maintaining a military presence in Afghanistan and control of the country’s lucrative opium trade?

A further 141 were injured when the bomber rammed a car packed with explosives into two diplomatic vehicles entering the embassy and the blast also devastated nearby shops and buildings.

“The interior ministry believes this attack was carried out in coordination and consultation with an active intelligence service in the region,” the ministry said in a statement.

“Afghanistan has previously accused Pakistani agents of being behind a number of attacks on its soil,” according to a London Guardian report, referring to the notorious Pakistani ISI intelligence agency.

As Jane’s Information Group notes, “The CIA has well-established links with the ISI, having trained it in the 1980s to ‘run’ Afghan mujahideen (holy Muslim warriors), Islamic fundamentalists from Pakistan as well as Arab volunteers by providing them with arms and logistic support to evict the Soviet occupation of Kabul.”

“Opium cultivation and heroin production in Pakistan’s northern tribal belt and neighbouring Afghanistan was also a vital offshoot of the ISI-CIA co-operation. It succeeded not only in turning Soviet troops into addicts, but also in boosting heroin sales in Europe and the US through an elaborate web of well-documented deceptions, transport networks, couriers and payoffs. This, in turn, offset the cost of the decade-long anti-Soviet ‘unholy war’ in Afghanistan.”

Could the Kabul bombing be a joint ISI-CIA false flag for the purposes of creating a pretext for the continued presence of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, control of the booming opium drugs trade and the construction of permanent military bases?

As we reported last month, Middle East sources indicated that U.S. forces gave the green light for the Taliban to attack a government prison in Kandahar on June 13th, and stood idly by while Taliban fighters violently freed more than 1000 inmates.

According to some observers, the recent apparent resurgence of the Taliban has been encouraged by NATO and the U.S. as a bulwark against political pressure and calls for troops to leave the country.

Without an enemy to fight, there would be no justification for a continued U.S. and NATO presence in Afghanistan. There would be no more weapons sales contracts and no more rebuilding contracts for Halliburton. Opium cultivation would fall back into the hands of warlords and the Taliban, who banned production before the U.S. invasion in 2001, after which heroin flooded the streets of the U.S. and UK in record numbers as cultivation soared 50 per cent year on year. Afghanistan now exports upwards of 92 per cent of the world’s supply of opium, which is used to make heroin.

As Professor Michel Chossudovsky writes, “U.S. military presence has served to restore rather than eradicate the drug trade.”

“Implemented in 2000-2001, the Taliban’s drug eradication program led to a 94 percent decline in opium cultivation. In 2001, according to UN figures, opium production had fallen to 185 tons. Immediately following the October 2001 US led invasion, production increased dramatically, regaining its historical levels.”

“Based on wholesale and retail prices in Western markets, the earnings generated by the Afghan drug trade are colossal. In July 2006, street prices in Britain for heroin were of the order of Pound Sterling 54, or $102 a gram,” Chossudovsky notes.

The necessity for continued violence in Afghanistan exists just like it does in Iraq, for the pretext of justifying an endless military occupation and the opportunity to build military bases that will be used as launch pads for future wars, as is now being discussed for Iraq.

As we have highlighted in the past, links between Taliban leadership and the U.S. military-industrial complex are documented.

As Seymour Hersh reported in January 2002, at the height of the war in Afghanistan, hundreds of Taliban fighters “accidentally” ended up on U.S. organized special safety corridor airlifts right before the fall of Kunduz.

The Taliban itself was a creation of the CIA having been set up and bankrolled by the U.S. in tandem with Pakistan’s ISI.

“In the 1980s, the CIA provided some $5 billion in military aid for Islamic fundamentalist rebels fighting the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan, but scaled down operations after Moscow pulled out in 1989. However, Selig Harrison of the DC-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars recently told a conference in London that the CIA created the Taliban “monster” by providing some $3 billion for the ultra-fundamentalist militia in their 1994-6 drive to power,” reported the Times of India.

Afghans implicate Pakistan in embassy bombing
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/08/afghanistan.pakistan

40 dead in suicide attack on India’s Afghanistan embassy
http://uk.news.yahoo.com..attacks-india-3cebad0.html

Kabul car bombing marks deadliest attack since fall of Taliban
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080707/ap_on_re_as/afghan_explosion

 



’US builds 4 bases on Iraq-Iran border’

’US builds 4 bases on Iraq-Iran border’

Press TV
June 26, 2008

The US military has constructed four advanced bases 20 miles from Iraq’s border with Iran, a senior Iraqi police officer has announced.

The bases, equipped with missile launch pads, have been set up over the past four months on the Iraq-Iran border; Iraqi al-Noor newspaper quoted the official as saying.

He added that one of the bases has been located 30 km (20 miles) from the first border town with Iran and houses remote-controlled launching pads as well as radar systems similar to ones used in Kuwait during the first Persian Gulf war.

“The bases do not serve military intentions and its staff would not be military personnel.”

According to the official, the bases are only precautionary measures in case of a military strike against Israel by Iran.

Read Full Article Here

 

Israel Prodding U.S. To Attack Iran

CBS News
June 24, 2008

Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen leaves Tuesday night on an overseas trip that will take him to Israel, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin. The trip has been scheduled for some time but U.S. officials say it comes just as the Israelis are mounting a full court press to get the Bush administration to strike Iran’s nuclear complex.

CBS consultant Michael Oren says Israel doesn’t want to wait for a new administration.

“The Israelis have been assured by the Bush administration that the Bush administration will not allow Iran to nuclearize,” Oren said. “Israelis are uncertain about what would be the policies of the next administration vis-à-vis Iran.”

Israel’s message is simple: If you don’t, we will. Israel held a dress rehearsal for a strike earlier this month, but military analysts say Israel can not do it alone.

“Keep in mind that Israel does not have strategic bombers,” Oren said. “The Israeli Air Force is not the American Air Force. Israel can not eliminate Iran’s nuclear program.”

The U.S. with its stealth bombers and cruise missiles has a much greater capability. Vice President Cheney is said to favor a strike, but both Mullen and Defense Secretary Gates are opposed to an attack which could touch off a third war in the region.

 

IRAN: American public won’t allow another war, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman says

LA Times
June 27, 2008

Despite constant talk of war, U.S. officials have tried to reach out to the Iranian people in an attempt to get past the animosity between Washington and Tehran.

But Iranian officials have also been on a diplomatic offensive, reaching out to ordinary people in the Middle East as well as, more modestly, to Americans.

Known for his good looks, polite manners and kindly attitude toward the media, Iran’s silver-haired foreign ministry spokesman, Mohammed Ali Hosseini has emerged as a frequent public face on his government’s policies.

In a lengthy interview in his office Wednesday, he described Americans as a peace-loving people who “hate violence” and are suffering because of the mistakes of their leaders. He said he believed economic pressures, the military entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan, and American public opinion would prevent war from breaking out between Iran and the United States. “The U.S. and the Zionist regime, thanks to the increasing economic, political, security and military crises in which they are stuck, are not logically in a position to tolerate the expenses of another massive and far-reaching crisis,” Hosseini said.

He continued:

Public opinion in the world will not permit [President] Bush to exacerbate the pains and tragedies already inflicted on the nations of the region and the American people. Nowadays, the polling surveys carried out among U.S. elites, thinkers and, by and large, the American people, show they hate violence, further battles and anarchy. The surveys indicate that the Americans are seeking genuine peace, stability and security.

But he warned:

If there is a war against the Islamic Republic of Iran, it will be out of control and with unpredictable consequences. Thus, anyone with minimum rationality and political logic does not dare to step on this path.

Hosseini, 47, is a physicist by training and a career diplomat. A native of Tehran, he studied in India before joining Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs 20 years ago. He’s a family man, with a wife and three children. He sat down for an exclusive and wide-ranging interview with the Los Angeles Times about Iran’s nuclear program, U.S. relations and turmoil in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, which have became contested terrain in the Cold War between Washington and Tehran.

Read Full Article Here

Top US military officer heads to Israel with Iran on the agenda
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM..t6NsANUMU-KNN7S6vw

Greece: We did not prepare for Iran war
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=61624&sectionid=351020104

Are Congressional Democrats Leading Us to War with Iran?
http://www.yesmagazine.org/svgbl..ional-democrats-leading.html

Pentagon making case against Iran
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.as..sectionid=351020101

ONGC discovers new Iranian oilfield
http://in.reuters.com/article/email/idINIndia-34272220080628

Israeli top brass split over plan to hit Iran
http://www.thejc.com/home.asp..d=19&AId=60896&ATypeId=1

Olmert acknowledges secret meeting
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jun/26/ol..dges-meeting/

Iran Revolutionary Guards chief in new warning to Israel: report
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080628075012.z5qpu0qc.html

Israel gives UN watchdog secret briefing on Iran
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/996713.html

Iran Says Gulf Oil Route At Risk if Attacked
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/i..-oil.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Syria planned to supply Iran with nuclear fuel, Israel says
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/25/syria.iran

Coup on Iran & False Flag News Archive

 



Iraq war costs may reach $2.7 trillion

Iraq war costs may reach $2.7 trillion

Press TV
June 13, 2008

The costs on American taxpayers may reach $2.7 trillion by the time the Iraq war ends, according to a Congressional testimony.

In a hearing held by the Joint Economic Committee Thursday, members of the Congress heard testimony about the current costs of the war and the future economic fallout from returning soldiers.

At the beginning of the conflict in 2003, the Bush administration gave Congress a cost estimate of $60 billion to $100 billion for the entirety of the war. However, the battle has been dragging on much longer than most in the government expected.

William Beach, director of the Center for Data Analysis, told the Congress that the Iraq war has already cost taxpayers $646 billion.

That’s only accounting for five years, and with the conflict expected to drag on for another five years, the figure is expected to more than quadruple, Beach added.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the war costs taxpayers about $430 million per day.

“It is long past time for the administration to come clean and account for the real costs of the war in Iraq,” said Schumer. “If they want to disagree with our estimates or with other experts … fine – they should come and explain why.”

The Bush administration, which was invited to give testimony, declined to participate.

The Pentagon has previously said that the war costs approximately $9.5 billion a month, but some economists say the figure is closer to $25 billion a month when long-term health care for veterans and interest are factored in.

 

Iraqi PM suggests US might be asked to leave

Raw Story
June 13, 2008

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki suggested that US forces might be asked to leave if the two countries cannot agree on the new status of forces agreement, McClatchy reported Friday.

Maliki, seen above, made the comment after pressure from Shiite lawmakers who feel that Iraq’s sovereignty is threatened by US forces and after talks over the status of forces agreement “reached an impasse,” according to McClatchy.

“Iraq has another option that it may use,” Maliki said during a visit to Amman, Jordan. “The Iraqi government, if it wants, has the right to demand that the U.N. terminate the presence of international forces on Iraqi sovereign soil.”

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari said that although talks over the security pact are struggling, Baghdad and Maliki are committed to concluding the agreement, Reuters reported Friday.

“I think it’s too early really to judge this agreement that it is dead or there is no way out,” he said after attending a U.N. Security Council meeting on Iraq.

The U.N. mandate for a US presence in Iraq expires at the end of the year, McClatchy reported.

An excerpt from the McClatchy story details the nations’ conflict over the status of forces agreement:

“Maliki acknowledged that talks with the U.S. on a status of forces agreement “reached an impasse” after the American negotiators presented a draft that would have given the U.S. access to 58 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and immunity from prosecution for both U.S. soldiers and private contractors.

The Iraqis rejected those demands, and U.S. diplomats have submitted a second draft, which Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih told McClatchy included several major concessions. Among those would be allowing Iraq to prosecute private contractors for violations of Iraqi law and requiring U.S. forces to turn over to Iraqi authorities Iraqis that the Americans detain.”

Iraq says talks with U.S. on pact reach “dead end”
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSCOL33273620080613

Blackwater’s Private CIA
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/87200/?page=entire

4 Afghan civilians killed in US raid
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=59546&sectionid=351020403

US Napalm Iraqi Children (Warning-Graphic)
http://thingsimportanttoharry.blogspot.c..ldren-warning.html

Doctors To Study Iraq Birth Defects
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1318608,00.html

GAO: Military Fails To Examine Troops Properly
http://www.usatoday.com/ne..-deploy-report_N.htm?csp=1

 



Kucinich Introduces Bush Impeachment Resolution

Kucinich Introduces Bush Impeachment Resolution

Iraqis: U.S. Demanding 58 Military Bases

 



New Agreement Lets US Strike Any Country From Inside Iraq

New Agreement Lets US Strike Any Country From Inside Iraq

Gulf News
June 3, 2008

A proposed Iraqi-American security agreement will include permanent American bases in the country, and the right for the United States to strike, from within Iraqi territory, any country it considers a threat to its national security, Gulf News has learned.

Senior Iraqi military sources have told Gulf News that the long-term controversial agreement is likely to include three major items.

Under the agreement, Iraqi security institutions such as Defence, Interior and National Security ministries, as well as armament contracts, will be under American supervision for ten years.

The agreement is also likely to give American forces permanent military bases in the country, as well as the right to move against any country considered to be a threat against world stability or acting against Iraqi or American interests.

The military source added, “According to this agreement, the American forces will keep permanent military bases on Iraqi territory, and these will include Al Asad Military base in the Baghdadi area close to the Syrian border, Balad military base in northern Baghdad close to Iran, Habbaniyah base close to the town of Fallujah and the Ali Bin Abi Talib military base in the southern province of Nasiriyah close to the Iranian border.”

The sources confirmed that the American army is in the process of completing the building of the military facilities and runways for the permanent bases.

He added that the American air bases in Kirkuk and Mosul will be kept for no longer than three years. However, he said there were efforts by the Americans to include the Kirkuk base in the list of permanent bases.

The sources also said that a British brigade was expected to remain at the international airport in Basra for ten years as long as the American troops stayed in the permanent bases in Iraq.

Iraqi analysts said that the second item of the controversial agreement which permits American forces on Iraqi territories to launch military attacks against any country it considers a threat is addressed primarily to Iran and Syria.

Iran has raised serious concerns in the past few days over the Iraqi-American security agreement and followed it with issuing religious fatwas and called for demonstrations, mainly by the powerful Shiite leader Moqtada Al Sadr movement, who is close to Iran, against the agreement.

 

Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control
Bush wants 50 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors

Randall Mikkelsen
London Independent
June 5, 2008

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq’s position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.

But the accord also threatens to provoke a political crisis in the US. President Bush wants to push it through by the end of next month so he can declare a military victory and claim his 2003 invasion has been vindicated. But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November.

The timing of the agreement would also boost the Republican candidate, John McCain, who has claimed the United States is on the verge of victory in Iraq – a victory that he says Mr Obama would throw away by a premature military withdrawal.

America currently has 151,000 troops in Iraq and, even after projected withdrawals next month, troop levels will stand at more than 142,000 – 10 000 more than when the military “surge” began in January 2007. Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.

The precise nature of the American demands has been kept secret until now. The leaks are certain to generate an angry backlash in Iraq. “It is a terrible breach of our sovereignty,” said one Iraqi politician, adding that if the security deal was signed it would delegitimise the government in Baghdad which will be seen as an American pawn.

The US has repeatedly denied it wants permanent bases in Iraq but one Iraqi source said: “This is just a tactical subterfuge.” Washington also wants control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft and the right to pursue its “war on terror” in Iraq, giving it the authority to arrest anybody it wants and to launch military campaigns without consultation.

Mr Bush is determined to force the Iraqi government to sign the so-called “strategic alliance” without modifications, by the end of next month. But it is already being condemned by the Iranians and many Arabs as a continuing American attempt to dominate the region. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful and usually moderate Iranian leader, said yesterday that such a deal would create “a permanent occupation”. He added: “The essence of this agreement is to turn the Iraqis into slaves of the Americans.”

Iraq’s Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is believed to be personally opposed to the terms of the new pact but feels his coalition government cannot stay in power without US backing.

The deal also risks exacerbating the proxy war being fought between Iran and the United States over who should be more influential in Iraq.

 

US issues threat to Iraq’s $50bn foreign reserves in military deal

Patrick Cockburn
London Independent
June 6, 2008

The US is holding hostage some $50bn (£25bn) of Iraq’s money in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to pressure the Iraqi government into signing an agreement seen by many Iraqis as prolonging the US occupation indefinitely, according to information leaked to The Independent.

US negotiators are using the existence of $20bn in outstanding court judgments against Iraq in the US, to pressure their Iraqi counterparts into accepting the terms of the military deal, details of which were reported for the first time in this newspaper yesterday.

Iraq’s foreign reserves are currently protected by a presidential order giving them immunity from judicial attachment but the US side in the talks has suggested that if the UN mandate, under which the money is held, lapses and is not replaced by the new agreement, then Iraq’s funds would lose this immunity. The cost to Iraq of this happening would be the immediate loss of $20bn. The US is able to threaten Iraq with the loss of 40 per cent of its foreign exchange reserves because Iraq’s independence is still limited by the legacy of UN sanctions and restrictions imposed on Iraq since Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in the 1990s. This means that Iraq is still considered a threat to international security and stability under Chapter Seven of the UN charter. The US negotiators say the price of Iraq escaping Chapter Seven is to sign up to a new “strategic alliance” with the United States.

The threat by the American side underlines the personal commitment of President George Bush to pushing the new pact through by 31 July. Although it is in reality a treaty between Iraq and the US, Mr Bush is describing it as an alliance so he does not have to submit it for approval to the US Senate.

Iraqi critics of the agreement say that it means Iraq will be a client state in which the US will keep more than 50 military bases. American forces will be able to carry out arrests of Iraqi citizens and conduct military campaigns without consultation with the Iraqi government. American soldiers and contractors will enjoy legal immunity.

Read Full Article Here

Recent News:

Iran: ’US security pact will enslave Iraqis’
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=58683&sectionid=351020101

’Ayatollah will not allow US-Iraq deal’
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=57198&sectionid=351020201

Secret Security Pact Will Ensure Permanent Iraq Occupation
http://www.infowars.net/articles/june2008/050608Iraq.htm

Shell-shocked Iraq veterans housed next to firing range
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/..-housed-next-to-firing-range-in-US.html

Nearly 20% Of Army In Afghanistan Is On Prozac
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1811858,00.html

Analysis: May marks most violent month in Afghanistan since 2001
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/03/..fghanistan-since-2001/

Iraqi Parliamentarian: 70 Percent Of Iraqis Want Withdrawal
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/04/iraq-parliament/

Report: Bush Misused Iraq Intelligence
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iraq_usa_intelligence_dc

Iraq At Odds With U.S. Over Troop Presence
O’Reilly gets angry while interviewing Scott McClellan
Canada May Give Asylum To U.S. War Resisters

 



Pentagon planning ‘boots on ground’ in Waziristan

Pentagon planning ‘boots on ground’ in Waziristan

Pakistan Daily Times
June 2, 2008

WASHINGTON: “So alarmed is the Pentagon, that Defence Secretary Robert Gates’ plans to send US ground forces into the FATA are being rapidly advanced,” writes journalist Eric Margolis in his syndicated column read worldwide.

“Apparently, Washington’s criticism of Islamabad’s recent peace deals in the tribal territories has sharply intensified. American conservatives are claiming Pakistan has ‘sold out’ to Al Qaeda and Taliban, and is sheltering Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts.”

US fears: Margolis writes about Washington’s desperate efforts to keep President Pervez Musharraf afloat because it fears that a fully civilianised government in Islamabad would be more responsive to anti-American sentiment in Pakistan and wash its hands of the war on terror at a time when more, not less, Pakistani support is needed to help US troops in Afghanistan confront the Taliban summer offensive.

“Musharraf’s slow-motion fall from power has also wrong-footed Washington because it was counting on using US bases there in the event of an attack on Iran,” reveals Margolis. “The US capitol is again buzzing with rumours of an impending air campaign against at least 3,000 targets in Iran that will be launched sometime before November elections to boost the fortunes of the embattled Republicans. Israel’s American supporters are waging an all-out campaign for war against Iran. This week, they began running TV commercials claiming Iran was attacking the United States.”

Margolis argues that as Pakistan’s economy takes a battering over soaring oil prices and political instability, and faces a punishing recession, if not an outright financial crisis, it will become increasingly dependent on US aid. “That is Washington’s last hope. Pakistan will have the Hobson’s choice of either continuing to support the US-led war in Afghanistan, and incur growing armed resistance in Pashtun tribal areas, or be left in the cold and without US financial aid when its failing economy finally hits the wall.”

He explains that the Pentagon is angry and frustrated over the failing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and dismayed with Pakistan for being ‘non-responsive’ to US demands. “Washington is so used to getting its way that it cannot abide the natives being insubordinate. The mood in Washington is increasingly warlike and grim as the beleaguered Bush administration enters its final days.”

 



High Tide: The Ron Paul Revolution Continues


High Tide: The Ron Paul Revolution Continues
Grassroots effort stresses continuing the Ron Paul Revolution, restoring the spirit of freedom in the country and turning back the tide of sprawling foreign wars and disastrous economic policy

Jones Report
March 13, 2008

The High Tide could be a lifting anthem for the Ron Paul Revolution as it seeks ways to voice its message in the post-campaign era. The video features high quality 3-D animation and Dr. Ron Paul’s voice. It’s stunning imagery dramatically portrays the dark landscape of spreading wars and an unfolding economic wasteland that have resulted from bad policy.

It carries also the spirit of freedom that Ron Paul hoped his campaign would rekindle– and in many ways already has– as people across the country are now sparking debate over scaling back government power and following constitutionally-based policies.

Grassroots supporter Nate Evans (ArcFx, WeAreChange.org) donated months of work to put together the 3-D promo (click here for high quality) that will have to settle for underscoring the high-point of an unusual presidential campaign that has now receded from hopes of winning the GOP nomination. Nevertheless, the campaign succeeded in shedding light on the skewed policies of the phony candidates who shared the stage with him. His disenfranchisement in polls, electronic voting and media coverage demonstrated the manipulation over so-called free elections.

Ron Paul recently conceded that “convention victory” had been lost, but that the fight would continue. “Many victories have been achieved due to your hard work and enthusiasm,” said Paul.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3MLTvYBQy0

“I don’t mind playing a key role in the revolution, but it has to be more than a Ron Paul revolution,” he said. Somehow, that is reflected in this animated video that transcends the mere man Ron Paul is individually and elevates instead the ideas and history his policy is based upon.

So, what will be the high mark of the Ron Paul Revolution, in their campaign for the presidency? What is its the lasting impact, and in what form will it continue?

Paul urges the continuation of meet-up groups, and even campaign races in effort to gain more delegates and take small victories where they are still available in the election, if only to stretch the political muscle for a future contest.

“At the rate our economy is slipping, we will likely see the disintegration of the American empire,” said Paul. “Today’s events should be seen as a tremendous opportunity to change our country for the good.”

The Ron Paul Revolution intends to make an lasting impression when it will march together in Washington. Which direction that will take us, is the next step.

 

Ron Paul On The Alex Jones Show – (3/14/2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Gz5JC8QcNU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99rpIl9XVB0

 



Montel Fired For Criticizing Fox News War Coverage

Speak the truth, get fired: Montel and FOX
Fox-owned stations opted not to renew Montel’s show for the 2008-09 season

Hanlon’s Razor
January 31, 2008

If you’re familiar with The Internets, you undoubtedly caught this video of Montel Williams smacking Fox News Sunday around over their asinine coverage of Heath Ledger (whose death is undoubtedly a tragedy and whose family my heart goes out to) over the more than two dozen Americans who have died in Iraq since the new year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co3Spcq6Uzs

Well here’s the followup. Montel’s been booted from FOX.

Fate of “The Montel Williams Show” was sealed when key Fox-owned stations opted not to renew it for the 2008-09 season. But a number of other stations had cleared the show for next season, prompting CBS to offer the “Best of” package. The rerun package is sold on an all-cash basis, which is a boon to stations that had been handing over 3½ minutes of barter ad time per seg to CBS for the firstrun episodes.

Coincidence? Please.

Was Montel Williams Kicked Off the Air for Criticizing Fox News?
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/75800

Montel Fired for Speaking Truth to Fox News
http://nallforgovernor.blogspot.com/200..red-for-speaking-truth-to-fox.html

Two bombs kill 72 in Baghdad
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlene..C_0_UK-IRAQ.xml

Soldier Suicides at Record Level
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-..0/AR2008013003106_pf.html

Federal Reserve Stealing Iraqi Oil Revenues Level
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/010208_stealing.htm

Soldier Suicides at Record Level
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-..0/AR2008013003106_pf.html

Vermont Bill Would End Iraq Guard Use
http://www.timesargus.com/app..EWS01/801300344/1002/NEWS01

Bush Waves Ban On Permanent Iraq Bases
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/29/signing-statement-iraq/

 



McCain: Occupy Iraq for “Ten Million Years”

McCain: Occupy Iraq for “Ten Million Years”

Hit Him Again
January 5, 2008

What we have in Iraq is no longer a war, it is a military government exercising control over an occupied nation or territory. There is no standing enemy, just disorganized criminals who resent our presence. We can build dozens of bases there, there is no enemy to oppose it. We can build an embassy the size of the Vatican, there is no enemy to oppose it. And apparently, we can keep our troops there for the next “ten million years,” says John McCain.

McCain insist[ed] that what matters most is ending American casualties, not their presence in Iraq. He said he would be fine with keeping troops in Iraq for decades as long as they weren’t being harmed, similar to the arrangements that exist in South Korea, Japan and other countries.

“A thousand years. A million years. Ten million years,” McCain said. “It depends on the arrangement we have with the Iraqi government.”

Watch him fight with a questioner from the audience on this point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf7HYoh9YMM

McCain cannot articulate a benefit to having troops in Japan, South Korea, Germany, or any of the other 130 countries our military currently occupies. Most importantly, the cost of keeping troops in Iraq for the next 10 million years is exorbitant. Considering that the “war” in Iraq has cost $480B over the last 4 four years on a pretty linear projection, we can estimate the cost, assuming a ridiculously-low 1% constant rate of inflation (I had to do this because the typical 3% breaks the calculator), over the next 10 million years.

The Total Cost: $3.28×10^43219 That’s a “3? with 43,000 zeros after it.