noworldsystem.com


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

 



Drugs & Gun Free Zones Again The Cocktail For A Killer


Psychotropic Drugs & Gun Free Zones Again The Cocktail For A Killer

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
February 16, 2008

As the media prepares to launch another blitz of gun control propaganda in the wake of the Northern Illinois University shootings, it’s no surprise to learn that killer Steven Kazmierczak had been taking psychotropic drugs and that the campus was a victim disarmament zone – the two major factors which always breed this kind of tragedy.

Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, as well as 15-year-old Kip Kinkel, the Oregon killer who gunned down his parents and classmates, and Cho Seung Hui, the Virginia Tech killer, were all on psychotropic drugs. Scientific studies proving that prozac encourages suicidal tendencies and psychopathic behavior in young people are voluminous and span back nearly a decade.

Jeff Weise, the Red Lake High School killer was on prozac, “Unabomber” Ted Kaczinski, Michael McDermott, John Hinckley, Jr., Byran Uyesugi, Mark David Chapman and Charles Carl Roberts IV, the Amish school killer, were all on SSRI psychotropic drugs.

The press has tried to spin the fact that Kazmierczak was known to be on the same drugs by pushing the line that he was off his medication. Whether as a result of side-effects or during actual use, psychotropic drugs are admitted to increase psychopathic behavior in young people, read any bottle of prozac and you will see this fact freely admitted.

Gun free campus zones, as was the case again at Northern Illinois University, contribute only to ensuring victim disarmament and a friendly environment for the killer to conduct his rampage unopposed.

The media automatically blame the second amendment whenever a school shooting takes place, but when law-abiding people are allowed to own guns, the fatality toll is always reduced, as was the case at Virginia Appalachian School of Law, where Peter Odighizuwa shot three people dead before other students were able to retrieve guns from their cars and put an end to the carnage before there was more bloodshed.

85% of Americans support the right of a principle or a teacher to have instant access to a safely stored firearm in order to defend the lives of students and prevent a school massacre, but a drive is already underway to disarm more victims and grease the skids for more horrors similar to what unfolded on Thursday.

Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago has already seized on the tragedy for the political purposes of pushing gun control, asserting Friday that the incident provides the latest evidence gun control legislation is needed.

The shootings coincide with an imminent Supreme Court decision on whether or not to overturn the handgun ban in Washington DC, a case that could set the precedent for other cities with strict gun control. Many in the past have noted that school shootings almost always closely precede important legislative gun control cases.

Before serving in the Army for six months, Kazmierczak intended to build a career in the criminal justice system.

“I really believe in the cliche now that the further I go in college, the less I realize I know about a multitude of subjects,” he wrote. “All I know is I want to work in the [criminal justice system] in some capacity; as a social worker or as an overly litigious advocate of prisoners,” said Kazmierczak.

Corporate Media Begins Gun Control Mantra
http://www.infowars.com/?p=288

Another Massacre At A “Gun Free Zone” College Campus
http://www.kxmb.com/News/Nation/209747.asp

UK: Schools Get Knife Detectors
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/..ticle_id=514719&in_page_id=1770

Nugent: Gun-free zones are recipe for disaster
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/commentary.nugent/index.html

Legislators jump on gun control issue
http://www.sj-r.com/index.asp

Daley says NIU shootings underscore need for gun control
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/02/daley-says-niu.html