“Everytime Dick Cheney takes a breath
he murders somebody.”
Mike Hastie
Vietnam Veteran
Attempt to invade Iran - Goals of war - death injury.

Everytime Dick Cheney takes a breath,
he murders somebody.

Mike Hastie
Vietnam Veteran
October 25, 2007
 
Goals of war — Injury and Death

War Without End, Amen: The Sanguinary Vision of Robert Gates
Written by Chris Floyd
Saturday, 13 October 2007
Killed by US air strike
Samarra, Iraq
There are actually some quarters where Pentagon honcho Robert Gates is considered a moderate of some kind, one of the few sensible, responsible figures in the Bush Administration able to restrain — or at least moderate — the raging-bull belligerence of Dick Cheney and his crew.
This has always been a curious reputation for a man who has spent most of his career hip-deep in militarist skullduggery, as Robert Parry, among others, has amply demonstrated. (Here and here, for example.)
But in such desperate and degraded times as these, it's only natural to clutch at the slightest straw of hope that someone, somewhere, will stand between us and the worst excesses of our masters, as we noted here earlier.
(In fact, I'm so old that I can remember all the way back to the year 2000, when Cheney himself was regarded by the peddlers of conventional wisdom as a sensible, responsible figure, a "safe pair of hands" who would restrain the coltish antics of Young Bush and mitigate the extremist zeal of the GOP "base." That really panned out well, didn't it?)
But like Colin Powell — that oh-so-moderate, oh-so-mitigating force of Bush's first term — Gates is just a bagman for the global dominance gang.
They whistle and he jumps — then whistles the same tune to his own minions.
At this stage of the game, after so much death, deceit, and corruption, it is cretinous folly to believe that anyone picked by the Bush Regime for any job would act otherwise.
If they were a different sort of person — if they were indeed sensible, responsible, honorable or moral — they would not be there.
Brother killed by fighting between quisling police and Iraq resistance forces
Kerbala, Iraq
The only "moderation" among these dedicated militarists is in their demeanor.
Some, like Gates, prefer the higher hypocrisy of decorous rhetoric and genial backslapping, while others, like Cheney, scorn the mask and nakedly display their bloodlust and bilious scorn for humanity.
But when it's time to pull the trigger — or divvy up the public purse among their war-profiteering cronies — they all line up together.
Gates gave us a prime example of this on Wednesday, in a speech to an Army group.
In many ways, it was just typical boilerplate: a bland dish without the kind of rabble-rousing red meat that Don Rumsfeld might have served up in steaming heaps.
But it underscored again the true nature of the militarist beast that has devoured the Republic — and not just under Bush, of course, but with the avid assistance of every president, of both parties, for many decades.
As the New York Times reports, Gates' theme was the burning need for the Army to prepare itself for many more Iraq-style wars in the future — wars of conquest, occupation and domination, where nations are chewed to pieces, regimes are overthrown and new client states erected in their place, although the decorous SecDef didn't use such frank terms.
But the underlying, unquestioned — and probably unconscious — assumptions were clear: that America will be involved in ceaseless military incursions into other nations, in conflicts that "will be fundamentally political in nature and require the application of all elements of national power" — and that it is America's God-given right to do so, to shape "the behavior of friends, adversaries, and most importantly, the people in between"… at the point of a gun.
All killed by US air strike attack were farmers women and children
In this speech — uttered by a hack off the shelf who could be replaced tomorrow by any one of thousands of apparatchiks, of either party, without the slightest discernible difference in policy — we see the totality of the militarist vision: wars are launched to achieve political objectives; violence, or the ever-present threat of violence — the "application of all elements of national power" — is politics.
The projection of military power is a fundamental, inextricable element of foreign policy; in the militarist vision, there is simply no other way, no other basis for relations between the United States and other nations — even allies or neutral countries, whose behavior must be "shaped" by American "national power."
Thus Gates warned his Army audience against returning to the outmoded ideas of the past, when the military was seen as simple bulwark against attack by enemy nations; instead, America must be prepared to fight more wars like those in Iraq and Afghanistan — vicious, protracted counterinsurgencies waged largely in urban spaces and civilian areas. Iraq, in particular, has provided "impressive" lessons for the military to follow in the future, Gates said.
The day after his speech brought yet another example of how the war of the future will be fought: an American airstrike on a town north of Baghdad that killed nine children and six women, according to the Pentagon's own admission.
(This massacre must have been a most glaring one indeed, if Bush's brass were willing to own up to such a death toll so quickly; usually, they simply deny that any civilians have been killed in their "precision airstrikes," or obscure the reality behind bromides about the "fog of war," despite the testimony of survivors and officials of the American-backed Iraqi government, and the dead bodies pulled from smoldering ruins.)
The Pentagon claimed that the insurgents they were targeting had chosen "to surround themselves with civilians and then fire upon U.S. forces."
(Naturally it would have been more sporting of the miscreants to gather themselves out in the open desert and wait for the Americans who are occupying the civilian centers to come out and kill them; but we all know the Arab mind is low and devious.)
Here again, we see the militarist mindset at work, the inability to process any reality that falls outside the presumption that America has the right to apply "all elements of national power" anytime and anywhere it so chooses.
Samarra killings by US
October 23, 2007
All killed by US air strike attack were farmers women and children
They cannot grasp this simple question; Why are there insurgents firing on U.S. soldiers in the civilian areas of Iraq?
Because the U.S. military has invaded and occupied Iraq, filling its civilian areas with more than 160,000 troops (and tens of thousands of mercenaries).
If the U.S. soldiers were not there, then there would be no insurgents, and they would not be firing on U.S. soldiers.
There would be no need for American forces "to return a commensurate amount of fire," as a Pentagon spokesman put it in explaining the bludgeoning of civilian residences with bombers.
This then, is one of those "impressive" lessons from Iraq that Gates wants the Pentagon to carry into the many, many future wars to come: in order to "shape the behavior" of the nations you have subjected to "all elements of national power," you will sometimes have to drop bombs on houses filled with women and children.
It's unfortunate, of course, and no one likes it, and no one wants to do it, but hey, it's just like Stalin used to say when he was "shaping the behavior" of friends, adversaries and the people in between: "When wood is chopped, chips fly."
NOTE: And how long will the wood-chopping of the militarist empire-mongers go on?
Why, throughout the entire "new American century," of course, as Nick Turse of TomDispatch.com found when he attended a recent conference on "Joint Urban Operations" with "Pentagon power-brokers, active duty and retired U.S. military personnel, foreign coalition partners, representatives of big and small defense contractors, and academics."
Samarra killings by US
October 23, 2007
All killed by US air strike attack were farmers women and children
The entire piece is worth a read, but his conclusion is most apt for our theme here:
With their surprisingly bloodless language, antiseptic PowerPoint presentations, and calm tones, these men — only one woman spoke — are still planning Iraq-style wars of tomorrow.
What makes this chilling is not only that they envision a future of endless urban warfare, but that they have the power to drive such a war-fighting doctrine into that future; that they have the power to mold strategy and advance weaponry that can, in the end, lock Americans into policies that are unlikely to make it beyond these conference-room doors, no less into public debate, before they are unleashed….
Along with the lack of even a hint of skepticism about the basic premise of the conference went a fundamental belief that being fought to a standstill by a ragtag insurgency in Iraq was an issue to be addressed by merely rewriting familiar tactics, strategy, and doctrine and throwing multi-billions more in taxpayer dollars — in the form of endless new technologies — at the problem.
In fact, listening to the presentations in that conference room, with its rows of white-shrouded tables in front of a small stage, it would not have been hard to believe that the U.S. had defeated North Korea, had won in Vietnam, had never rushed out of Beirut or fled Mogadishu, or hadn't spent markedly more time failing to achieve victory in Afghanistan than it did fighting the First and Second World Wars combined.
To the rest of the world, at least, it's clear enough that the Pentagon knows how to redden city streets in the developing world, just not win wars there; but in Washington — by the evidence of this "Joint Urban Operations, 2007" conference — it matters little.
Advised, outfitted, and educated by these mild-mannered men who sipped sodas and noshed on burnt egg rolls between presentations, the Pentagon has evidently decided to prepare for 100 years more of the same: war against various outposts of a restless, oppressed population of slum-dwellers one billion strong and growing at an estimated rate of 25 million a year.
Village people mourn their loved ones before burial
US Terror State
All of these UO experts are preparing for an endless struggle that history suggests they can't win, but that is guaranteed to lead to large-scale destruction, destabilization, and death.
Unsurprisingly, the civilians of the cities that they plan to occupy, whether living in Karachi, Jakarta, or Baghdad, have no say in the matter.
No one thought to invite any of them to the conference.
Said Shabram drowned despite a rescue attempt by another soldier.
The APA is deliberating whether to charge an officer and two soldiers from 32 Engineer regiment. They could face joint murder charges over his death.
 THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THE US TERROR STATE IS KILLING WITH MISSILES
War Without End — Amen
The Sanguinary Vision of Robert Gates
US working urgently to impose more punitive measures against Tehran.

Rice speaking during a joint news conference with Israel's Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

What's new Rice?

Is Israel really wanting its US taxpayer money in Euros now?

HA!  HA!

Can't have the US politicians receiving less payback from Israel can we?

Can US elite life become more absurd

I guess it probably can!

Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
US working urgently to impose more punitive measures against Tehran, the silly woman says
Rice speaking during a joint news conference with Israel's Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni
What's new Rice?
Is Israel really wanting its US taxpayer money in Euros now?
HA!  HA!
Can't have US politicians receiving less payback from Israel can we?
Can US elite life become more absurd?
I guess it probably can!
But Posse gathering Rice!
For you too!
You cannot go on killing for ever
No!  No!
Really!
You cannot keep killing for ever
 
 
 
 
Caspian Summit: Putin Puts Forward A War-Avoidance Plan
Putin has grasped the fact that what the Cheney Crowd is threatening is World War
by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach
Global Research, October 22, 2007
The visit to Tehran on Oct. 16, by Russian President Vladimir Putin was officially billed as his participation in the second summit of the Caspian Sea littoral nations, convoked to deal with legal and other aspects of resource-sharing in the oil-rich waters.
Although that summit did take place as scheduled, and important decisions were reached by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Iran, the main thrust of Putin's visit was another: The Russian President's trip — the first of a Russian head of state since the 1943 Tehran conference of war-time powers — was geared to register his government's commitment to prevent a new war in the region, at all costs.
That new war is the one on the strategic agenda of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, against Iran.
Putin's participation in the summit, especially, his extensive personal meetings with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, constituted a spectacular gesture manifesting Russian support for war-avoidance factions in the Iranian government, in their showdown with Cheney's neocon war party.
As one Iranian political source put it, Putin's visit was tantamount to saying to Washington: If you want to start a war against Iran, then you have to reckon with me, and that means, with Russia, a nuclear superpower.   Perhaps not coincidentally, Putin right after his return to Moscow, stated in a worldwide webcast press interview, that his nation was developing new nuclear capabilities.
His Iran visit was, as one Arab diplomat told me, a message to the warmongers in Washington, that Russia is still (or again) a superpower, and is treating the Iran dossier as a test for its status as a great power.
The Caspian Sea summit was, in and of itself, productive.   Although the legal status governing the sharing of the sea's resources, was not solved, the points agreed upon in the final document of the summit constitute a great step forward in cooperation among the participating countries.
Most important, the summit explicitly rejected the possibility that any one of its countries could be used for mounting aggressive acts against Iran, or any other country.
It also explicitly endorsed the right of all countries to the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
There was no mention of "concerns in the international community'' about possible military applications of Tehran's program, or the like.
Putin's main point, which he reiterated at every possible opportunity, was: Conflicts can and must be solved through diplomatic, peaceful means.
In his address to the summit on Oct. 16, Putin praised the Caspian Sea countries' problem-solving formulae, "respecting each other's interests and sovereignty, and refraining not only from any use of force whatsoever, but even from mentioning the use of force.''
Putin went on to explain: "This is very important, as it is also important that we talk about the impossibility of allowing our own territory to be used by other countries in the event of aggression or any military actions against any one of the Caspian littoral states.''
In short: The U.S. cannot count on Azerbaijan, as a launching pad for operations against Iran.
The final document also announced the decision to form a Caspian Sea Cooperation organization.
But, even more important than the summit itself, were the bilateral meetings that Putin held with Iran's President and Supreme Leader, who is the ultimate authority in the country.
Ayatollah Khamanei does not routinely receive foreign visitors to Iran, thus his meeting with the Russian President took on a special significance.   During their meeting, Putin reportedly presented Khamenei with a proposal for reaching a solution to the conflict over Iran's nuclear program.   According to the Iranian state news agency IRNA, Khamenei told Putin: "We will ponder your words and proposal.''
Although details of the proposal have not been made public, some news outlets reported that Iranian "hardliners'' had said the proposal called for a "time-out'' on UN sanctions if Iran were to suspend uranium enrichment.
"The main reason for Putin's visit to Iran was to convey this message personally to the ultimate power in Iran,'' one Iranian official was quoted as saying.
Khamenei reportedly told Putin that Iran was serious about continuing its nuclear energy program, including enrichment, but was not interested in "adventurism.''
If Putin did propose a "time-out,'' that would be coherent with what International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director Mohammad ElBaradei has been campaigning for.
It may be that Moscow's offer went beyond that of the IAEA chief.
The {Tehran Times} reported that Ali Larijani, head of the Supreme National Security Council and chief negotiator on the nuclear issue, told reporters that Putin had made a "special proposal,'' and that Khamenei said it was "ponderable.''
According to a well-informed Iranian source I spoke to, Tehran would be willing to suspend its enrichment program, on condition that it received something tangible in return.
This, would be a significant shift, since Iran has, to date, refused any such idea.   Iran would {not}, however, be willing to give up its nuclear program as North Korea has done.
Suspension of enrichment activities would be temporary, in order to facilitate negotiations, which should be oriented towards tangible results, said this source.
Whether or not this was Putin’s message is unclear.   Larijani’s surprise announcement on October 20, that he was resigning, cast shadows over the situation.
After Larijani had reported on the Russian president’s proposal, Ahmadinejad denied any such had been made.
This led to a series of wild speculations in the press, that the "hardliners,” on orders from Ahmadinejad, were ousting Larijani and rejecting the proposal from Moscow.
It must be remembered, however, that the ultimate decisions are made by Ayatollah Khamenei, and that Larijani, according to Iranian wires, will continueto attend meetings of the Supreme National Security Council, in the capacity of representative of the Supreme Leader.
In addition, Russia's state radio RUVR reported on Oct. 16, that Putin proposed that the so-called North Korean recipe be used to settle Iran's nuclear problem.
But what he meant was perhaps not the same recipe in formal terms.
His remarks were reported, just before his meeting with Ahmadinejad.   Putin argued, convincingly, that U.S. threats to use armed force against North Korea had proven futile.
Such threats would hardly prove efficient with regard to Iran either, he said.
Trying to frighten anyone, the Iranian leaders in this case, Putin said, is a waste of time.
"They are not afraid, believe me.''
What should be done, he continued, is to arm oneself with patience and search for a settlement.
But this is hardly possible without a dialogue with the people of Iran and Iran's leadership.
If we do have a chance to maintain direct contact, we shall do it in a bid to achieve a positive joint, let me stress it, joint result, the Russian leader said in conclusion.
Thus, Putin may not have been proposing that an approach be adopted exactly like that used for North Korea — which, had already tested a nuclear weapon — but that the diplomatic process used with Korea also be used with Iran.
Strategic Understanding Between Tehran and Moscow
Whatever was agreed upon behind the scenes between Putin and his high ranking Iranian counterparts, the official, rather extraordinary bilateral statement which was released after their talks, speaks volumes about Russia's commitment to a peaceful solution to the Iran crisis.
The joint statement, in the version translated by Itar-Tass on Oct. 17, was not just a list of points of agreement, but, taken as a whole, constitutes a far-reaching commitment by both sides, to strengthen what has become a strategic understanding between Moscow and Tehran, clearly oriented towards a war-avoidance policy.
The statement begins with the assertion that, "The sides confirmed that mutually beneficial cooperation in the political, economic, cultural and other areas, as well as cooperation on the international stage, meet the national interests of the two sides and play an important role in supporting peace and stability in the region and beyond.''
Economic cooperation is central in this regard, especially as concerns the energy sector: "The sides spoke in favor of increasing efforts to further expand economic ties between the two countries, especially in areas like the oil and gas, nuclear power, electricity, processing and aircraft-building industries, banking and transport.''
As for nuclear energy — the issue being manipulated as a pretext for war — the statement says: "The sides noted bilateral cooperation in the area of peaceful nuclear energy and confirmed that it will continue in full compliance with the requirements of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
In this regard they also noted that the construction and launch of the Bushehr nuclear power plant will be carried out in accordance with the agreed timetable.''
In addition, the joint statement noted a contract for five Tu-204-100 aircraft to be supplied to Iran, as well as the need to create the conditions for advancing joint investment in Russia and Iran.
Regarding regional infrastructure projects, the statement asserted the agreement "to continue work on the development of the north-south international transport corridor, including its automobile, rail and maritime components, in the interest of further strengthening trade and economic ties between Russia and Iran, as well as other countries of the region.
The two sides also reached agreement on "pressing regional problems,'' and stressed cooperation to achieve stability and security in Central Asia.
Here the role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, of which Iran is an observer, was highlighted.
As for the Caspian Sea region, the statement asserts that "the relevant norms of the agreements of 1921 and 1940 between Iran and the former Soviet Union remain in force until there is a convention on the legal status of the Caspian Sea.''
Furthermore, the two sides "advocate the exclusion from the Caspian of military presence of non-Caspian littoral states,'' a clear rejection of any U.S. intentions to establish a presence in the region.
The joint statement also declared an identity of views between Tehran and Moscow on crucial foreign policy issues.
They called for "building a fairer and more democratic world order which would ensure global and regional security and create favorable conditions for stable development ... based on collective principles and the supremacy of international law with the United Nations Organization playing a central coordinating role....''
They explicitly ruled out Cheney-style saber-rattling: "The sides confirmed their refusal to use force or threat of force to resolve contentious issues, and their respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity of the states.''
In the context of statements of their commitment to fight terrorism, the two sides also addressed the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, and "confirmed Russia's and Iran's intention to continue to take part in the post-war reconstruction of Afghanistan, and are interested in strengthening its statehood and the process of that country becoming a peaceful, democratic, independent and flourishing state.''
Iraq was also an important feature of the agreement.
The two sides "expressed vigorous support for Iraq's territorial integrity and sovereignty and for an end to foreign military presence in that country on the basis of the relevant schedule.''
It should be noted that Putin, in his international webcast on his to Moscow, made this a central point of his polemic against Washington.
Also, the joint statement called for a "just settlement” to the Middle East conflict, which may indicate renewed flexibity on Iran’s part, to accept agreements which thePalestinians (united) might make.
Speaking of
learning German and English
Finally, in a short but clear paragraph, the two "noted the need to settle the issue of Iran's nuclear program as soon as possible by political and diplomatic means through talks and dialogue and expressed hope that a long-term comprehensive solution will be found.''
In sum, the joint statement goes far beyond any earlier definition of relations between Russia and Iran, and sends a clear message to the war party in Washington and London, that they can no longer consider Iran in isolation, but must recognize that the country has become a strategic partner of Russia, whose leadership is determined to prevent war.
Europeans Should Know Better
What Putin achieved in Tehran must have sent shivers up and down the spines of Cheney and his de facto sympathizers at home and in Europe.
President Bush indulged in one of his typical ranting sessions Oct. 18, in remarks to the press, in which he threatened that were Iran to achieve the knowledge required to build a bomb, then that would mean World War III were just around the corner.
In Europe, members of the coalition of the spineless, had already weighed in against Putin, even attempting to dissuade the Russian leader from going to Iran.
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have pressured Putin, during their Moscow visit, to join them in threatening Iran with new sanctions, if it did not meet their expectations on the nuclear issue.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy had delivered a similar message.   During his visit to Wiesbaden, Germany, for the Petersburg Dialogue, on Oct. 14-15, Putin was again besieged by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and others, with demands he get tough with Tehran.
And, in case the message had not registered, a wild story was circulated internationally, that a team of suicide bombers was primed to blow themselves and Putin up, as soon as he set foot on Iranian soil.
While Iranian officials denounced the obvious psywar attributed to "foreign'' intelligence services, Putin tossed the story off with a laugh, saying, were he to heed such warnings, he would never leave his home.
The point to be made is that Putin — unlike his European interlocutors — has grasped the fact that what the Cheney crowd is threatening is world war, not some political power play, and has therefore stuck to his guns.
That Russia has been aware of the dangers inherent in Cheney's planned Iran war, is nothing new.
In his speech to the Munich Wehrkunde meeting early in 2007, Putin had lashed out in most undiplomatic terms, against the pretensions of the would-be leader of a presumed unipolar world, to dictate world affairs through military fiat.
And, regarding the Iranian nuclear issue, Russia has been consistent in stating its position that if,
1) Iran abides by international commitments to the NPT and IAEA regime, then
2) Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology must be guaranteed, and
3) that program must not be misconstrued as a weapons program, and thus used as a pretext for military aggression.
Global Research Articles by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach
A New Warsaw Pact Appears
October 10, 2007: The anti-corruption campaign is upsetting former KGB officials who now run many of the security services.
The arrest of five officers of the anti-drug police raised cries of protest from former KGB men who now run most of the government.
While former KGB men occupy many key positions in the government, the entire operations is largely run by a new generation of businessmen and technocrats, who quickly got up to speed on modern management techniques, and how to function in a market economy, back in the 1990s.
The "businessmen" and "secret policemen" agree on one thing, Russia must have its economy modernized and made competitive in world markets.
For too long, Russia has survived by exporting raw materials (like oil) and subsidized substandard industries that sold to a captive audience.
The collapse of the Soviet Union ended that, and the sharp increase in oil and gas prices has brought in a flood of cash.
Unlike many Third World nations awash in oil money, Russia has been investing in its economy.
But it still has a problem with its shrinking population.
The birth rate is declining (although less slowly of late) and life expectancy dwindling (although that is slowing down as well).
Population is being maintained by allowing in ethnic Russians, and others, from former parts of the Soviet Union, as well as Chinese in the far east.
Russians also want to be a super power once more, forgetting that their vast arsenal of nuclear weapons assures them of that status, despite the fact that 80 percent of the Soviet era armed forces have disappeared.
October 8, 2007: In the Caucasus, the continuing violence in Ingushetia and Dagestan, both neighbors of Chechnya, are more the result of long standing ethnic feuds, and competing criminal gangs, than of Islamic terrorists.
The violence is not as bad as it was ten years ago in Chechnya, but is harder to stamp out.
It's more an anti-crime campaign, than a counter-terrorism one.
October 5, 2007: The Warsaw Pact has been revived, sort of.
Throughout the Cold War, the Warsaw Pact (the Soviet Union and the East European communist states) were lined up against NATO.
That ended in 1990.   Now Russia has arranged a treaty of cooperation between the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization).
This joins Russia, China, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Belarus.
In other words, most of the components of the former Soviet Union, plus China.
As a practical matter, the treaty doesn't amount to much.
It's mainly about military cooperation, in the form of exchanging information and making it easier for Russian defense firms to sell weapons to member states.
Most of the members were parts of the Soviet union that were heavily subsidized by Russia.
Now, Russia is offering gifts in return for some token allegiance, and help in security matters.
Same deal with China.
While China is still a communist police state, it recognizes that the Russian democracy has turned into an oligarchy, with Vladimir Putin maneuvering himself into the position of president for life, or at least for as long as he can hold on to power.
KYRGYZ PUNDIT SPEAKS IN FAVOR OF IRAN JOINING SHANGHAI BLOC
9/18/07
A EurasiaNet Partner Post from BBC Monitoring
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) must engage more actively in maintaining regional security, says an article by Kyrgyz political scientist Aleksandr Knyazev, which was published in a Tajik weekly.
Knyazev said the SCO could help Afghanistan in its fight against the drugs trade, given "inability" of the US-led coalition forces to stem drug production in the country.
The pundit also suggested bringing Iran into the organization’s fold on a condition that Tehran’s nuclear programme was overseen by the SCO for its compliance with international norms.
The following is the text of Knyazev’s article, entitled "Invitation to dialogue, the SCO tells the West", published in the independent Tajik weekly Biznes i Politika on 30 August; subheadings have been inserted editorially:
The BiP [Biznes i Politika] editorial staff have turned to its frequent author, political scientist, Prof Aleksandr Knyazev, with a request to share his views on the final documents of the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization; signed at the latest SCO summit in Bishkek].
SCO needs to focus on security
The SCO in its current condition somewhat reminds of our opposition in Kyrgyzstan.
This means that we are in a situation where there is a stimulus for development against something or someone, but there are no distinct contours of some positive stimuli for the sake of what or whom.
There are intentions to create some productive orientation in the work of the SCO.   At least, they are being constantly declared.
But for the time being, these intentions look quite spontaneous, chaotic and not associated with certain structural beginnings.
I have already spoken about this in public, and will say it one more time: I personally believe that it is absolutely unpromising for the SCO to overload itself with various functions in such spheres as economy, water problems and energy, let alone the creation of youth clubs, educational establishments and cultural centres.
The interests of the two countries - Russia and China -which form the backbone of the SCO system are fairly varying.
Therefore, it is necessary to develop relations primarily on those issues, where certain results are being attained and where there are obvious common interests.
First of all, this is the field of security.
This is where the SCO had started and where there is good potential.
Full responsibility for regional security
In principle, this topic was present quite notably at the latest [SCO] summit.
The declaration contains such a line: "... [ellipsis as published] stability and security in Central Asia can be ensured, first of all, by the forces of regional countries on the basis of regional and international associations that have firmly established themselves in it".
It [the declaration] is interesting because it basically sends a signal to the USA and NATO that the job of ensuring security in the region is something that needs to be done by the region itself.
It is the verification of the fact that, up till now, NATO and all the members of the so-called US-led international antiterrorist coalition have fully admitted their impotence.
At present, the Afghans themselves are openly saying that the SCO must make efforts to actively engage in the resolution of the situation in Afghanistan or share this responsibility with NATO or even take it up entirely.
Even though they do not suggest how this should be done, this idea is voiced by Afghan officials.
NATO presence in Afghanistan "destabilizing factor"
The current situation is such that it demands some concrete actions with regard to Afghanistan.
Typically, any activity in relation to the issue of the pulling out of the American military base from Kyrgyzstan acquires a counter-reaction, the key leitmotif of which is the thesis of the reviving Taleban and the emergence of direct threats to the region’s security in case of the US troops’ withdrawal.
The claims about the Taleban’s plans to "conquer" Central Asia and the entire post-Soviet territory do not stand up to any criticism.
The Taleban’s military might has never been commensurate with the capabilities of the armed forces of Central Asian countries, despite all their weaknesses, and more importantly, given Russia’s possible involvement.   Another thing is that the American and NATO military presence in Afghanistan is a destabilizing factor in itself.
I am talking about the aspiration to impose a model of the democratic functioning of society and the state in Afghanistan ! the way the Americans see it.
This sort of persistence in attempts to export democracy will result in a reverse effect.
The significant part of Afghan society do not accept the alterations that are being introduced, and the public’s counter reaction to "democratic reforms" is supplemented with the general negative perception of both the [Afghan] government and its foreign allies.
Afghan drugs
History knows many examples of how none of the modernization models has succeeded in bringing society onto the path of progress.
There can be various solutions to the Afghan problem, except for one solution, namely a military solution.
The production and smuggling of drugs is a real threat to security, and not only to the security of the region.
"Afghanistan proposes turning the fight against the drugs trade into one of the main priorities of the SCO.
It is necessary to work out a real plan on the joint struggle against this phenomenon."
This thesis, voiced by Afghan President Hamed Karzai during his speech to the SCO summit in Bishkek, means the acknowledgement of the inability of the notorious antiterrorist coalition to settle the drugs problem.
This acknowledgement can be placed onto one line with the Bishkek declaration’s thesis on taking up responsibility for regional security.
Then add up Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to hold an international conference under the aegis of the SCO and you will have a complete set of signs testifying to the beginning of a trend that will see the SCO making efforts to take the initiative on the Afghan problem into its own hands.
I personally see only positive things in this trend.   In my opinion, it will be more or less productive, if the region’s security is ensured! by the countries which have a common border with it [presumably Afghanistan], or which are inside it [the region].
Unlike the USA, these are the issues of own survival for regional countries, Russia and China.
Afghan heroin is a rare exception in the USA.   Afghan heroin is a problem of the Old World.
The fact that 185 t [of opium] were produced under the Taleban’s rule in 2001, and that the year 2006 saw the production of 6,200 t of opium speaks for itself.
The UN is to publish a special report on this topic in September.   In 2007, the [opium] production will supposedly grow by 15 per cent on the previous year’s figures.
This problem is a matter of concern for Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Russia, China and European countries.
Afghan heroin is a problem for the Middle East and Maghreb, which has begun to be engulfed by this phenomenon, but not for America.
SCO’s role
I do not think that today one can say the world has got rid of bloc thinking.
[Passage omitted: Headlines on western papers on SCO summit]
This is happening despite the fact that the leaders of the SCO member states have never positioned this organization as something countering the USA, the West as a whole or NATO in military and political terms.
Ever since the holding of the Bishkek summit in August 1999 - of the then "Shanghai five" - the organization has only been clearly declaring the unacceptability of a unipolar world order.
At the conference "Cooperation and integration projects for Central Asia: comparative analysis, opportunities and prospects" held in [the northern Tajik city of] Khujand in June this year, we, a large group of authoritative experts, noted that it would be impossible to achieve common integration in the region for as long as there were no healthy bilateral relations on economic, border, transport and other kinds of issues.
First of all, positive bilateral relations must be established.
The SCO is not an integration alliance.
The SCO could successfully develop in that direction, within the framework of more or less the model which the CSCE [presumably the Council for Security and Cooperation in Europe] used to be before the collapse of the Soviet Union.
By 2010, China, India, Russia and Brazil will add up to their GDPs more than all the G7 countries altogether.
By 2025, the GDPs of these four countries will be twice as much as that of the G7 countries.
We are entering a world that will be dominated by East Asia
The relations between the superpowers of the near future will principally define the quality of this future.
Essentially, for Eurasia the SCO has all the chances of becoming this very mechanism through which the distribution of future roles is going to happen.
This is especially important against a background of the crisis the UN and the OSCE have long been going through.
Having been created as a tool for dialogue in the conditions of "Cold War", these two institutions have been unable to find their places in the changing world.
We have witnessed the marginalization of the issues which once prompted the creation of the CSCE/OSCE, namely the issue of security.
The working out of appropriate rules of regional security for our region in the new geopolitical conditions - something like the 1976 Helsinki Pact - is what could be made the most important objective for the SCO.   Perhaps, the alteration of the organization’s format could also result in a more or less positive influence on the atmosphere of bilateral relations among SCO member states, and on the issues which are virtually overloading the organization today.
However, an aspiration to universality and commonality may ruin the great potential of this organization.
Iran
The resolution of the Iranian [nuclear] issue could become the beginning of the SCO’s transformation into a security organization.
The Iranian issue is one of the issues which currently hinder the adoption of a decision on expanding the organization.
Iran should be admitted to the SCO, but on a condition that its nuclear programmes are put under the control of the organization.
This would make it possible to exercise the control of the Iranian nuclear programme without any confrontation and military threats.
At least, such an attempt could be made.
Iran is interested in the Chinese market, for which it is one of the main suppliers of energy resources.
Iran is also keen that its relations with Russia develop positively, including in the field of nuclear energy.
Iran is interested in the Central Asian market.
In any case, Iran’s actions will be more predictable and controllable for the region’s countries.
Such a scenario will be an objective alternative to what the West is currently trying to do about the Iranian nuclear issue through UN mechanisms.   However, if such a decision proves productive, this will be a good lesson for the West and an invitation for further dialogue.
Editor’s Note: Source: Biznes i Politika, Dushanbe, in Russian 30 Aug 07
Posted September 18, 2007 © Eurasianet
Attempt to invade Iran - Goals of war - death injury 

US working urgently to impose more punitive measures against Tehran.

Rice speaking during a joint news conference with Israel's Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

What's new Rice?

Is Israel really wanting its US taxpayer money in Euros now?

HA!  HA!

Can't have the US politicians receiving less payback from Israel can we?

Can US elite life become more absurd

I guess it probably can!

Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
US working urgently to impose more punitive measures against Tehran, the silly woman says
Rice speaking during a joint news conference with Israel's Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni
What's new Rice?
Is Israel really wanting its US taxpayer money in Euros now?
HA!  HA!
Can't have the US politicians receiving less payback from Israel can we?
Can US elite life become more absurd
I guess it probably can!
Posse gathering Rice!
For you too!
You cannot go on killing for ever
No!  No!
Really!
You cannot keep killing for ever
 
Blair, speaking in New York accuses Iran of backing terrorism and is warning the world faces a situation akin to 'rising fascism in the 1920s'
Attempt to invade Iran - Goals of war - death injury 

Blair speaking in New York, has accused Iran of backing terrorism and is warning the world faces a situation akin to rising fascism in the 1920s

Blair at the 62nd annual Alfred E Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in New York.

Lets make it the 1930's, Wormtongue, and call it correctly — rising fascism is exactly where you are!

(Wormtongue — a wizened figure of a man, with a pale face, heavy lidded eyes and a long pale tongue...

... the wise speak only of what they know, therefore be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth... )
Wormtongue
Lets make it the 1930's, Wormtongue, and call it correctly — rising fascism is exactly where you are!
(Wormtongue — a wizened figure of a man, with a pale face, heavy lidded eyes and a long pale tongue...
... the wise speak only of what they know, therefore be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth... )
Or perhaps we should say it's 1929?
Go on, let's just say we're somewhere in the late 1920's
And let's direct our view, not Eastwards, but Westwards
That's it!
Now you've got it
Posse gathering Blair!
For you too!
Monday, 2 June, 2003
In quotes: Blair and Iraq weapons
There are growing calls for an inquiry into the government's claims about Saddam Hussein's weapons programmes.
Ex-cabinet ministers Clare Short and Robin Cook have both argued evidence about Iraq's weapons was hyped up before the war.
So what claims did the prime minister make about Saddam's weapons?  Here are some of his key quotes.


10 April 2002
"Saddam Hussein's regime is despicable, he is developing weapons of mass destruction, and we cannot leave him doing so unchecked.
"He is a threat to his own people and to the region and, if allowed to develop these weapons, a threat to us also.
"Doing nothing is not an option ... Our way of proceeding should be and will be measured, calm and thought through."
House of Commons


24 September 2002
"(Saddam's) weapons of mass destruction programme is active, detailed and growing.  The policy of containment is not working.  The weapons of mass destruction programme is not shut down.  It is up and running....
"The intelligence picture (the intelligence services) paint is one accumulated over the past four years.  It is extensive, detailed and authoritative.
"It concludes that Iraq has chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam has continued to produce them, that he has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, which could be activated within 45 minutes, including against his own Shia population; and that he is actively trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability....
"On chemical weapons, the dossier shows that Iraq continues to produce chemical agent for chemical weapons; has rebuilt previously destroyed production plants across Iraq; has bought dual-use chemical facilities; has retained the key personnel formerly engaged in the chemical weapons programme; and has a serious ongoing research programme into weapons production, all of it well funded..."
House of Commons


25 February 2003
"The intelligence is clear: (Saddam) continues to believe his WMD programme is essential both for internal repression and for external aggression.
"It is essential to his regional power.  Prior to the inspectors coming back in he was engaged in a systematic exercise in concealment of the weapons.
"The biological agents we believe Iraq can produce include anthrax, botulinum, toxin, aflatoxin and ricin.  All eventually result in excruciatingly painful death."
House of Commons


11 March 2003
"We have 300,000 troops down there now sitting on his doorstep.  You've got the UN inspectors in.  It's unlikely at this very moment in time as we speak that Saddam is going to do anything; that's true.
"But what happened before when he was first given the opportunity to disarm completely was in April 1991 and he was given 15 days then to come forward with an honest declaration of what he had...
"If we don't act now, then we will go back to what has happened before and then of course the whole thing begins again and he carries on developing these weapons and these are dangerous weapons, particularly if they fall into the hands of terrorists who we know want to use these weapons if they can get them."
MTV debate


25 February 2003
"We are asked now seriously to accept that in the last few years-contrary to all history, contrary to all intelligence-Saddam decided unilaterally to destroy those weapons.  I say that such a claim is palpably absurd."
House of Commons

 
March 29, 2003
The Madness of Tony Blair
Matthew Parris

Most of us have experienced the discomfort of watching a friend go off the rails.
At first his oddities are dismissed as eccentricities.
Boys outside house damaged by US
Many men, women and children wounded and killed
An absurd assertion, a lunatic conviction, a sudden enthusiasm or unreasonable fear, are explained as perhaps due to tiredness, or stress, or natural volatility.
We do not want to face the truth that our friend has cracked up.
Finally we can deny it no longer — and then it seems so obvious: the explanation, in retrospect, of so much we struggled to reconcile.
Sometimes the realisation comes fast and suddenly.
It did for me at university when my Arab fellow student Ahmed, who for months had been warning me of the conspiracies of which he suspected we might be victims, pulled me into his room to show me the death-ray he could see shining through his window.
It was somebody’s porch-light.
Likewise, the madness of King George III, which came in spells, was undeniable when it came.
At other times the realisation is a slow, sad dawning of the obvious.
Sometimes it is a friend about whom we worry.
Sometimes it is a prime minister.
I will accept the charge of discourtesy, but not of flippancy, when I ask whether Tony Blair may now have become, in a serious sense of that word, unhinged.
Genius and madness are often allied, and nowhere is this truer than in political leadership.
Great leaders need self-belief in unnatural measure.
Simple fraudsters are rumbled early, but great leaders share with great confidence tricksters a capacity to be more than persuaded, but inhabited, by their cause.
Almost inevitably, an inspirational leader spends important parts of his life certain of the uncertain, convinced of the undemonstrable.
So do the mentally ill.
It can be extremely difficult to distinguish between a person who is sticking bravely to a difficult cause whose truth is far from obvious, and a person who is going crazy.
It took us quite a while to explain David Icke’s beliefs in the only useful way in which they could be explained — and he was on the political fringe.
A national leader commands vastly more respect and will be given the benefit of many more doubts than Mr Icke ever was.
Colleagues, commentators and the wider public are usually late to face up to evidence that the boss has gone berserk, even though the evidence may have been around for quite some time.
There are good reasons for this.
To call somebody mad is bad manners even when fair comment.
Relatives comfort each other after US killing of their children
Many men, women and children wounded and killed
To tackle your opponent’s argument by questioning his sanity can look like a childish copping-out from sensible discussion.
How can the victim answer back?
But the charge is sometimes germane.
It may become the only thing worth considering.
Winston Churchill had lost the plot long before the proper public discussion this deserved got under way.
And I myself believe that one of my political heroes, Margaret Thatcher, began to lose her mental balance well before the end, and before those close to her allowed themselves to consider this explanation of her behaviour.
For me the suspicion first dawned when the then Prime Minister devised for the Lord Mayor’s banquet a dress with such an extravagant train that she needed someone to help her with it into the Mansion House.
This was when she was beginning to refer to herself as “we”, and treating friends who warned her of her fate as treacherous.
A telltale of incipient insanity is when the victim begins to take a Manichaean view of the universe.
There are good reasons why those at the top can go quietly bonkers before their inferiors wake up to the warning signs.
The first is obviously deference.
“The Madness of King Tony” might — I accept — seem an impertinent way of discussing our leader during a war when, whatever application it may have in Tony Blair’s case, it applies to Saddam Hussein in spades.
Beyond deference, however, those at the top of the pyramid who are anxious to impress us with truths which are not obvious have another powerful weapon at their disposal.
They can credibly claim to know more than we can be told.
To the man in the street, the most potent of Mr Blair’s arguments for invading Iraq is that he and George W. Bush are in possession of special intelligence which supports their stand but which cannot be divulged.
And no doubt that is true.
The question is about the amount of support such intelligence lends, not its existence.
Note from your own experience, as well as from the history books, how those with a claim which sounds incredible tend to support it by claiming a private source of information they are unable to share.
Joan of Arc heard voices.
Ahmed said he could feel the lethal qualities of the apparent porch-light and reminded me that his enemies would obviously decoy the ignorant by disguising death-rays in this way.
One or another version of God has been a time-honoured way for madcap leaders to give their actions an authority not apparent to the five senses of their audiences.
Cornered by reality, “private sources” are the last refuge of the deluded.
Is Mr Blair among them?   Let me outline some of my grounds for worry.
Any one of these grounds might be dismissed as negligible, or indicative of nothing more sinister than conviction; but cumulatively I find them worrying.
Medics try to revive victim of US attack
Many men, women and children wounded and killed
Mr Blair has stopped sounding like a career politician.
He has lost the professional polish of a man doing a job, and developed that fierce, quiet intensity which, from long experience of dealing with mad constituents, I know that the slightly cracked share with the genuinely convinced.
He has lost his feel for whom to confront, or when and where, and puts himself into situations (like the slow handclapping by anti-war women) which do not assist his case.
Historians may point to Mr Blair’s private — but publicised — audience with the Pope as an early sign of a dawning unrealism about the perceptions of others.
Did he this week stop for a moment to think what impression would be made on grieving parents by his wild-eyed suggestion (based on misinformation) that two British soldiers had been executed by the Iraqis in cold blood?
Blair’s long-standing tendency to compartmentalise logic (a habit all politicians share to some degree) is now being pushed to extremes.
The speeches the “old” Europeans are making — about giving Iraq more time, accepting gradual progress and not sticking to a literal interpretation of earlier demands — are exactly the speeches Mr Blair himself gives (persuasively) in defence of letting the IRA off the decommissioning hook.
This logic-chopping alarms.
The Prime Minister has lost his sense of how his indignation at Iraqi brutality jars, coming from someone attacking a country whose puny forces are grotesquely outgunned by ours.
His anger at the French (whose position has been consistent and identical to that which Blair held until a year ago) is inexplicable to those of us who are not doctors.
He displays a demented capacity to convince himself that it is the other guy who is cheating.
He has started saying things which are not only unsustainable, but palpably absurd.
The throwaway remark to Parliament that he would ignore Security Council vetoes which were “capricious” or “unreasonable” was more than ill-considered: coming from a trained lawyer it was stark, staring bonkers.
It was breathtaking.
For risibility I would bracket it with Ahmed’s death-ray.
The whole country should have been crying with laughter.
That the British media should have been mesmerised into reporting him in any other way still leaves me dumbfounded.
No sane lawyer could have said what Blair said.
He keeps retreating into a hopeless, desperate optimism: another sign of lunacy.
Hold mattess where young nephew Ali killed by US
Many men, women and children wounded and killed in US attack
He seems to have promised the Americans he could deliver Europe, and told the Europeans he could tame America.
There was scant ground for hope on the first score and none on the second.
The belief that irreconcilables can be reconciled by one’s personal contacts and powers of persuasion is a familiar delusion among people who are not quite right in the head.
While each futile promise is in the process of being demonstrated to be undeliverable, he goes into a sort of nose-tapping, “watch this space” denial.
When finally the promise is abandoned he turns insouciantly away — and makes a new promise.
This week he has been promising to sort out the Americans, and persuade them to let the United Nations supervise the post-conflict administration of Iraq.
He is probably telling the Americans he can sort out the Security Council.
He can do neither.
Meanwhile, he has forgotten that his previous position was that the coalition partners invaded as agents of the UN anyway, so it isn’t up to Washington to give permission.
Any bank manager used to dealing with bankrupts with a pathological shopping habit who have severed contact with arithmetic will recognise the optimism.
Have the rest of the Cabinet tumbled yet to the understanding that this may not be about Iraq at all, but about the Prime Minister?
My guess is that those closest to Mr Blair must be beginning to wonder privately.
It is time people pooled their doubts.
Copyright 2003     Times Newspapers Ltd
 
But you cannot kill this many people...
— as Bush and Blair
The British Labour Party
The Conservative Party
The U.S. Democratic Party
The Republican Party
The US, UK military forces
As all have killed and injured
You cannot kill and injure this many people without there being real evil involved
This is not just madness
This is more than madness
Kewe — TheWE.cc
December 6, 2005
The Posse Gathers
Bush War Crimes
By Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith
Diverse forces are assembling to bring Bush administration officials to account for war crimes.   Cindy Sheehan, Gold Star Mother for Peace, insists: "We cannot have these people pardoned.   They need to be tried on war crimes and go to jail." 1
Paul Craig Roberts, Hoover Institution senior fellow and assistant secretary of the treasury under Ronald Reagan, charges Bush with "lies and an illegal war of aggression, with outing CIA agents, with war crimes against Iraqi civilians, with the horrors of the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo torture centers" and calls for the president's impeachment. 2
Anne-Marie Slaughter, dean of the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton and former president of the American Society of International Law, declares: "These policies make a mockery of our claim to stand for the rule of law.   [Americans] should be marching on Washington to reject inhumane techniques carried out in our name." 3
Can such disparate forces as the peace movement, conservative advocates of the rule of law, and human rights advocates join to halt high government officials demonstrably engaged in criminal enterprise?
Can they reach out and appeal to the deep but vacillating commitment of the American people to the national and international rule of law?
Or will the Bush administration divide the posse and retain for itself the mantle of defender of international law and the U.S. Constitution?
War Crimes: It's Not Just Torture
As Allied armies advanced into Germany, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill declared captured Nazi leaders outlaws subject to summary execution.
But U.S. President Harry Truman, a former small-town judge, insisted instead on formal trials with "notification to the accused of the charge, the right to be heard, and to call witnesses in his defense."
The result was the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal and the start of a revolution that, in U.S. Justice Robert Jackson's words, replaced a "system of international lawlessness" with one that made "statesmen responsible to law."
It is this revolution that may be catching up with the administration of George W. Bush.
Vietnam war crimes
During the Cold War era, Nuremberg was little more than a dimming memory.
Charges by Richard Falk, Marcus Raskin, and others that U.S. actions in Vietnam constituted war crimes helped swell opposition to the war, but U.S. officials were never held to account for their actions.
Starting in the 1990s, however, the revolutionary principle that government officials must be responsible to law became an integral part of the human rights and democratization movements that swept much of the world.
Milosevic was driven out of office and turned over to an international war crimes tribunal.   Pinochet was captured in Spain and eventually sent back to Chile to face charges as a torturer.   The International Criminal Court was established to try war crimes.
Henry Kissinger wrote in alarm in 2001 that "in less than a decade an unprecedented movement has emerged to submit international politics to judicial procedures" and has "spread with extraordinary speed." 4
International law
Critical to this unprecedented movement has been an evolved relationship between national and international law.   In the past, international law was seen as a potential infringement on national sovereignty.
(The Bush administration is trying to resuscitate that view-for example, in its attacks on the International Criminal Court.)
But today the two are increasingly intertwined and mutually reinforcing, much like state and national law in the United States.
Many new democracies see institutions like the International Criminal Court as bulwarks against the restoration of tyranny in their own countries — much as the U.S. Constitution guarantees that its member states will be republics, not monarchies.
Toward this end, many countries have incorporated aspects of international law into their national statutes — the U.S. War Crimes Act, for example, makes grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions a crime under U.S. law, punishable in some cases by death.
Supreme international crime
Several overlapping strands have coalesced into a body of law regarding war crimes.
One is the prohibition on aggressive war.   As the Nuremberg Tribunal put it, "To initiate a war of aggression" is " the supreme international crime."
A second strand is humanitarian law, which protects both combatants and civilians from unnecessary harm during war.
The devastation associated with World War II led to the recognition of "crimes against humanity," which involve acts of violence against a persecuted group.
War crimes were codified in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and have been further developed in subsequent protocols and agreements.
The Nuremberg Tribunal was criticized on the grounds that it represented not impartial justice but "victor's justice," that it provided impunity for the bombing of civilians and other heinous acts committed by the victors, and that it prosecuted people "ex post facto" for acts that had not been declared crimes when they were committed.
These charges had considerable justification.
But today there is a body of national and international law that clearly defines war crimes and a set of procedures for applying them comparable to the procedures used to judge other crimes.
Those are the standards by which allegations of American war crimes must be judged.
Law must — and the international law of war crimes now does — provide a single standard of judgment that can be applied without discrimination to different cases.
If an act is a war crime, then it is a war crime whether it is perpetrated by Saddam Hussein or by George Bush.
American War Crimes in Iraq and Beyond
The charge that the U.S. attack on Iraq was a war crime was raised even before the war began.
No evidence Blackwater convoy came under fire directly or indirectly
Not hit even by a stone — spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh
Blackwater guards killed 17 people
23 people wounded in 16 September shooting
More than 1,000 law professors and U.S. legal institutions organized in opposition to the U.S. war crime of launching an "aggressive war in violation of the UN Charter" against Iraq.
Violation of international law was also a central theme in worldwide demonstrations against the war.
The attack on the illegality of the war has been revived by the leak of the Downing Street memo; 130 members of Congress joined Rep. John Conyers in demanding that the Bush administration come clean about the invasion — supported by a half million citizen signatures gathered in barely a week.
"Scootergate" is fundamentally about the cover-up of White House lies justifying the war.
Torture
Illegal detention and torture are also war crimes.
Starting with the exposure of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, cascading revelations have established that these cases exemplify a pattern of abuse authorized at the highest levels of government.
Human rights groups like the Center for Constitutional Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Human Rights First sued in U.S. and foreign courts against Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others for breaching the U.S. Constitution and the Geneva Conventions.
The Senate's 90-9 vote to restore the military's traditional prohibition against torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners — prompting the Bush administration to threaten a veto — sets the stage for a major confrontation over adherence to both the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Constitution.
Crimes against peace and crimes against humanity
Despite massive cover-ups, the evidence is emerging: the Bush administration planned an illegal war of aggression against Iraq, conned the American people and their representatives into supporting it, conducted an illegal occupation marked by massive violation of Iraqi human rights, and justified and promoted systematic torture.
Now the White House seeks opportunities for further criminal attacks against Iran, Syria, and other countries around the world, issuing threats to use death squads and nuclear weapons at will.
These acts violate American law, international law, and the basic values of the American people.
They are crimes against peace and crimes against humanity.
They are outlawed by the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, and treaties against torture and other human rights abuses.
Lake Tharthar
U.S. attack helicopters
Six women and nine children included in killing on October 13, 2007
They are war crimes, and those who ordered and condoned them are war criminals.
War Crimes and the Rule of Law
The Nuremberg principle that statesmen are "responsible to law" extended to international relations the principle of "government under law" already enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
Indeed, no principle of American democracy is more fundamental or more widely accepted than the precept that no one is above the law.
But a central endeavor of the Bush administration has been to put the government, and more particularly the president, above both U.S. and international law.
So extreme
This was made clear in President Bush's refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions to prisoners of war captured during the Afghanistan War.
Soon after, the United States refused to adhere to UN Charter requirements regulating the use of force.
Then the Justice Department argued that courts would not have jurisdiction over Guantanamo detainees even if they were being summarily executed.
The Ninth Circuit Court commented, "the U.S. government has never before asserted such a grave and startling proposition," a position "so extreme that it raises the gravest concerns under both American and international law." 5
As Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman put it, the claim that the president is above the law "strikes at the very heart of our democracy.
Genuine conservatives
It was the centerpiece of President Richard Nixon's defense in Watergate — a defense that was rejected by the courts and lay at the foundation of the articles of impeachment voted against him by the House Judiciary Committee."
It is ironic that such a doctrine should emerge from a movement that calls itself "conservatism" and purports to have limitation of government as its fundamental principle.
Indeed, it is more than ironic; it is totally hypocritical.
Government crime
And this claim of unlimited presidential powers has turned many genuine conservatives — ranging from former government and military officials to the many corporate lawyers defending Guantanamo inmates — against the Bush administration.
Law entails more than an individual or social preference; it obligates individuals and institutions to act.
Describing his evolving viewpoint, Daniel Ellsberg wrote that he saw the U.S. involvement in Vietnam "first as a problem; then as a stalemate; then as a crime."
Each of these perspectives called for "a different mode of personal commitment: a problem, to help solve it; a stalemate, to extricate ourselves with grace; a crime, to expose and resist it, to try to stop it immediately, to seek moral and political change." 6
A focus on government-sponsored crime has the potential to open a discourse with those across the political spectrum — from civil rights advocates to military attorneys — who believe that government must not be exempt from the rule of law.
US troops opened fire on unarmed car
Wounding 3 people two in critical condition
It draws on a democratic, constitutionalist tradition and the powerful popular conviction that law and law enforcement are necessary and that they must apply to all, including the government and its highest officials.
Toward Convergence
Bush administration malfeasance can be described as a problem of democracy, of human rights, of usurpation, of the rule of law, of constitutionalism, or of war crimes.
These terms all point to the same fundamental problem: those in charge of the political and military apparatus of the U.S. government are using it to further a criminal enterprise in violation of national and international law.
Resistance to government criminality
Each step of this criminal behavior has been contested by different constituencies and on somewhat differing grounds.
If those constituencies could unite around a common frame, they could halt the entire Bush enterprise.
The role of the Bush administration in promoting war crimes in Iraq and beyond can provide that unifying frame.
Resistance to such government criminality can unify diverse constituencies who believe in rule of law.
Accusations of American war crimes have long been a staple of left-wing groups like ANSWER and the International Action Center.
But many mainstream peace activists have been wary.
As one well-known leader put it earlier this year:
"War-crimes talk pushes people away.   People don't want to hear it.   Polls indicate that the population says under some circumstances torture is OK, and that what's being done is not torture.
People blame bad apples.
They want to prosecute the bad apples so they can have a cleaner war.
Besides, they say, we're dealing with horrible people who cut off people's heads.
What is our end goal?
If our objective is to stop the occupation, then war crimes is not the best angle."
These are legitimate concerns.
Right and obligation of all people to hold their governments accountable
However, they imply not that the issue of war crimes shouldn't be raised but rather that it should be raised wisely with due respect for the feelings of the American people.
War crimes accusations should not be presented as anti-American but rather as an appeal to the American people to share the right and obligation of all people to hold their governments accountable.
By rejecting the Bush administration's attempt to blame torture and other abuses on "bad apples" at the bottom, accountability can be placed squarely on those at the top.
The crimes of U.S. opponents can be acknowledged without justifying those perpetrated in Washington.
Illegal detention, prisoner abuse, and torture can be presented as part of a larger pattern of war crimes.
As Justice Jackson noted at Nuremberg, a war of aggression differs from other war crimes only in that "it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Girl killed by US puppet — quisling soldiers
Shot and killed in village near Baquba
If the peace movement can connect with the American public's belief in the rule of law, the days of George Bush's criminal enterprise will be numbered.
Moral and religious conviction
The war crimes frame also provides the peace movement a way to reach out to Americans on the basis of moral and religious convictions.
Religious opponents of the war, such as the ecumenical Fellowship of Reconciliation and the Catholic 'St. Patrick's Four,' have frequently stressed international law as a basis for their actions.
The faith-based group Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice calls it a way to reach out to "the people in the pews."
Clean war?
Some sectors of the human rights movement have been outspoken opponents of the Iraq War from before its start.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, for example, organized lawyers nationwide to declare it illegal under national and international law.
But other human rights advocates have tried to separate torture and prisoner abuse as a "human rights issue" from the broader questions of war and occupation, leading some to portray their objective as "a clean war."
Human rights advocates need to recognize that the use and legitimation of torture by the Bush administration is just an extreme manifestation of a broader illegal enterprise.
Fallujah — Tal Afar
Both the peace and the human rights movements need to pay more attention to current and planned future war crimes.
Last year's attacks on Fallujah were condemned as war crimes around the world, but there was not much response in the United States.
The withholding of food and water to civilian populations in recent attacks on Tal Afar are clear violations of international law that would have provided a clear opportunity to raise the question of war crimes as they occurred. 7
Plans to turn targeting of U.S. air strikes over to the Iraqi military, recently revealed by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker, could be challenged as likely to greatly increase civilian casualties. 8
Nucler war crime
U.S. plans to use nuclear weapons against Iran, openly discussed by Vice President Cheney, surely constitute a war crime.
These ongoing daily events provide a target both for action and for public education.
The Bush administration's crimes of aggression, occupation, and torture are all part of one sordid story.
Father mourns for daughter
Shot and killed by quisling soldiers
That story can best be told when these actions are called by their proper name — war crimes.
Checks and Balances
There are four obvious objectives for a movement against U.S. war crimes:
Halt the crimes. This requires withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq, closing the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, releasing or immediately putting on trial all captives, and shutting down U.S.-controlled death squads all over the world.
Bring war criminals to justice. Impunity breeds crime.
The mechanisms for investigation, prosecution, and trial of criminals must be applied to anyone — from the president on down — who is responsible for war crimes.
Every agency charged with investigating governmental crimes must end its paralysis and perform its duties.
Those responsibilities should include congressional committee hearings on war crimes, a Sept. 11-style investigative commission, appointment of a special prosecutor, and an in-depth congressional investigation into whether impeachable offences have been committed.
Draw the lessons. Unchecked presidential authority and flouting of international law led the United States to a national catastrophe in Vietnam, but the obvious lessons were deliberately obscured or denied.
We are paying the price today.
Only an extensive and extended public confrontation with the implications of U.S. war crimes can lay the basis for averting similar catastrophes in the future.
Establish barriers to future war crimes. The Bush administration's war crimes were made possible by the dismantling of legal and constitutional barriers to government secrecy, deceit, manipulation, and lawlessness.
Their perpetuation has been enhanced by the dismantling of legal restrictions on presidential authority and the seduction or intimidation of those whose duty it is to enforce such restrictions.
The U.S. democratic heritage and recent experiences of many countries in eliminating dictatorships point to specific institutional arrangements — from independent prosecutors to battlefield legal supervision and from freedom-of-information laws to international courts empowered to hear war crimes charges — that can be effective in preventing war crimes in the future.
New chapter
A national repudiation of war crimes and an end to impunity for those who order them could open a new chapter in America's relations with the rest of the world.
Mother cries for daughter
Shot and killed in village near Baquba by quisling soldiers
It might help the United States re-engage with Iraq and the rest of the Middle East on an entirely new basis — one cleansed of the legacy of Fallujah and Abu Ghraib.
It would evidence America's good faith if Washington utilized international law to address such genuine problems as terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.
Ending impunity for those responsible for U.S. war crimes would help restore the role of international law in constraining self-aggrandizement by any nation.
Out-of-control criminal government
After being convicted for pouring his own blood on a Lansing, NY military recruitment center, war protestor Peter DeMott declared the real crime to be that:
"Our government conspired against the American people and lied us into an illegal and immoral war.
The task is now upon us all to better understand the criminality of our government's aggression and, as citizens, to act accordingly to demand that our government adheres to international law." 9
As Cindy Sheehan put it to more than 100,000 war protesters assembled in Washington, DC, "We'll be the checks and balances on this out-of-control criminal government." 10
End Notes
1. Mike Ferner, "What One Mom Has to Say to George Bush," August 9, 2005, available at .
2. Paul Craig Roberts, "Impeach Bush Now," available at , September 3, 2005.
3. Quoted in Robert Kuttner, "Will Bush Wriggle Out of This One?" Boston Globe, September 10, 2005.
4. Henry Kissinger, "The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction: Risking Judicial Tyranny," Foreign Affairs, July-August 2001.
5. See Gherebi v. Bush, Ninth Circuit, December 18, 2003.
6. Quoted in Norman Solomon, "Cindy Sheehan's Message Repudiates George Bush — and Howard Dean," Common Dreams, August 13, 2005.
7. The UN's Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food recently described the withholding of food and water by U.S. forces in Iraq as "a clear violation of international law." Eulalia Iglesias, "UN Food Expert Condemns U.S. Tactics in Iraq," Inter Press Service, 11/30/05.
8. Seymour M. Hersh, "Up in the Air: Where Is the Iraq War Headed Next?" New Yorker, December 5, 2005.
Brother cries for loss of sister
Shot and killed in village near Baquba by quisling soldiers
9. Press release, September 26, 2005.
10. "Thousands in Wash Protest War, Econ Globalization," Reuters, September 24, 2005.
Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith, with Jill Cutler, are the co-editors of In the Name of Democracy: American War Crimes in Iraq and Beyond (New York: Metropolitan/Holt, 2005) and co-founders of War Crimes Watch.
Flying Kites....
Friday, October 12, 2007
I really don't know what is going on here...
The other day was Pink and today it is Pastel colors.
Not a fitting time of the year for pastel colors.   After all, it is the beginning of Autumn, with its golden brown, rusty red and dying green...
But pastel colors have been obsessing me...ever since those pink and red taints.
Maybe because it is the Eid, the feast that marks the celebration of the end of our fasting month, Ramadan.
Painting: Iraqi female artist, Sawsan Al Sarraf. 'Immigration'
Artist,
Sawsan
Al
Sarraf
I remember the Eid in Baghdad, what used to be the Eid...
We have a tradition for the Eid, we must wear something new.   I remember young and old saving that new piece, that untouched garment, for the Eid.
I remember the little boys and girls dressed in their new clothes, laughing as they rock on their swings, as they cry with joy on their merry-go-rounds...
Eating "shaar al Banat" or "ghazl al Banat" as some may call it.
You know, that fluffy hair-like sugar, dyed in pastel colors, that feels like cotton in your mouth, wrappped around a wooden stick and glues all over your face and leaves your tongue colored in pastel...pink, green, blue, yellow and...white.
I also remember the conversations...
"Baba, baba, shoof, anee helwa?" — Daddy, daddy look, am I pretty? would ask a little one raising her eyes to her dad.   Showing off her new pastel colored dress and the pastel ribbons in her hair...
"Mama, mama, shofee shlon atayerhom" — Mom, mom, look how I can make it fly! would shout a little one to his mother, pointing his finger to his brand new kite made of pastel colored paper...
And the father would respond "Hadha shlon Jamal" — What beauty you are.   Or,
the mother would say "Shater, ibnee, enta shater" — Clever my son, you are clever.
I can still hear their giggles, their laughs and their shouts of excitement...
I can still see the joy in their shining innocent eyes, their funny faces, their tender smile...
I can still feel their hugs, their wet kisses smelling of candies and their warm little heads on my shoulder, when tired from too much running around...tired from too much play.
I am lucky to have such memories.   I am lucky to have witnessed them.
Today's children in Iraq are either too scarred or will not live to remember or... are already dead.
Only two days ago, 11 little ones were severly wounded by a mortar attack.   Yesterday, 9 little ones were killed in a so called counter-insurgency attack by your brave boys.   Today, at least 2 little ones were blasted away when a bomb placed in a toy cart exploded in their curious little faces...on the day of the Eid.
Our little ones are nothing but appetizers for you.   Your anti-pasti, your hors d'oeuvres... The more, the merrier...
In the name of Liberty.   In the name of Democracy.   In the name of Freedom.   In the name of the o' so civilized West that you are.
For 13 years, our little ones suffered, our little martyrs... Over half a million died as a result of your o' so civilized sanctions, while you were watching...
Thirteen fucking years and you watched, in silence, tasting your hors d'oeuvres in front of your TV screens.
Thirteen years of a deafening, utter silence.
Silence from the so called left and anti-war clowns.   Silence from the international community.   Silence from the so-called Islamic Ummah.
So silent, that the silence turned into a lullaby of agonies that you can still hear in the mass graves of our little ones.   So silent, that they have slept, never to wake up again... A murderous lullaby.
The little ones who survived, experienced their final liberation in 2003.
God damn you.   God damn you.   That is all I can repeat for now.   I will have to stop. I need to regain my composure.   Recompose what you have decomposed...
Am back... The composed, rational, polite Arab woman... I am now wearing my satin gloves, lest your sensitivities get ruffled...
But let me ask you something, are you as ruffled by an average of 40,000 little ones killed each year because of an occupation carried out in your name, with your money, under your "benevolent" eyes?
40,000 is the conservative estimate figure from the 2006 U.N Human rights report.
The real figure for 2006 is much higher.   Way higher.   And am not counting the orphans in the thousands...
Only yesterday, a new report warns of an ever-deepening humanitarian crisis, never seen before, since World War II... And I say, it is much worse than what this report states.
Come and see our overflowing morgues and find our little ones for us...
You may find them in this corner or the other, a little hand poking out, pointing out at you...
Come and search for them in the rubbles of your "surgical" air raids, you may find a little leg or a little head... pleading for your attention.   Come and see them amassed in the garbage dumps, scavenging morsels of food...
Well over half of our little ones are under nourished or dying from disease.   Cholera, disentery, infections of all sorts....
Under nourished does not mean on a diet like your fat little kids.   It means not having food to eat.   It means cannot find food to eat.   It means starved.
Come and see, come....
See them being trafficked, raped, sold and "finally" killed by your brave boys.   The "final solution."   Remember that one?   It was not so long ago... Except this time it is carried out by the "greatest Democracy on earth."
And if you are too sensitive to such scenes, and your stomach can't take it, even though your hands and pockets contribute daily to it, come and search for them in the alley ways of Damascus, Amman or Cairo...
Search for them, hiding behind walls.   Find them selling or begging in street corners.
Look for them behaving like a 40 year old adult, fending for a whole family...
Come and see...
The other day, I overheard a 6 years old saying to her mother, "I want to die."
Just in case one of your bullets does not get to her, you have ensured that she will finish it off herself...
Come and see them stutter, hear them shout at night during their sleep and see their wet beds...
This is no lost innocence.   This is a raped innocence, a murdered innocence...
Raped and murdered by you.   I will net let you off the hook that easily.   I guess you know me by now.
As for the little assholes (I guess am losing my composure again) who call me a whining Arab bitch, let me not wish the same on your children...
Because by God, if I did, you would strangle yourselves in grief and...remorse.
An article in Haaretz states that the Holocaust is still affecting the granchildren of the survivors... and that is well over 60 years, later.
How many decades, centuries would it take our surviving little ones to get over being freed by "Democracy"?
Painting: Iraqi artist, Mohanad Al-Hayali. 'Flying Kites'
Artist,
Mohanad
Al
Hayali
In the meantime, the little survivors of your Holocaust, those who were born under your bombs, under your occupation, under your destruction, in your ghettoes, in your prisons, in your new Iraq, and who have known nothing else but you, their primal "caretaker", if they ever make it to adulthood, will bear witness on the day of Eid...
They, who have not known the Spring, Summer, of their lives.   They who have witnessed nothing but the cold of the Winter.   The coldness of Death...
They will remember, as I am doing now, the blown up cart of toys, the overflowing morgues, the rubbles of their homes, the mortars falling on their heads, the noise of explosions squatting their ears, their sisters and brothers in pieces, in front of their very eyes...
They will remember it, like some ugly melody, like some ugly lullaby...you lulled to them during their "liberated" childhood...
And those who have not and will not survive your "Liberation", will be flying high above like the pastel colored balloons of the Eid, like the kites made of pastel colored paper, like some white feather plucked from an innocent Dove...
Only to fall on the ground like dying, dried up, Autumn leaves...
Layla Anwar's blog — click here
'Paramedic Sattar Taha killed by American bombing Aug. 8, 2007'
Attempt to invade Iran - Goals of war - death injury 

Ahmadinejad demonstrations outside the United Nations.

Photo: Aljazzera/Gallo/Getty
Ahmadinejad demonstrations outside the United Nations
Photo: Aljazzera/Gallo/Getty
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Ahmadinejad's message to the world
By Mark LeVine
It was quite a week for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president.
First he faced down the president of Columbia University and a host of hostile questioners in Harlem.
Then he headed down to Midtown Manhattan, where for 45 minutes he held the world's attention at the United Nations, before heading farther south, to Caracas, Venezuela, for talks with his close ally, President Hugo Chavez.
Local papers, such as the Daily News and The New York Post, featured headlines announcing that "The Evil has Landed" and lambasting the "Mad Iran Prez" for his past denials of the Holocaust, refusal to unequivocally renounce a quest for nuclear weapons, and call to have Israel "wiped off the map."
So much nonsense in one phony man
Not to mention the Orwellian lies he spewed
(An inaccurate translation of the Persian "bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad," which is better — but less violently and therefore less usefully — rendered in English as "erased from the page of time" or "fate").
Even Lee Bollinger, the president of Columbia University, introduced him with an unprecedented — and to the minds of many academics, not to mention Iranians, uncouth — verbal attack, accusing him of being little more than a "petty dictator".
[Ignorance, not to mention a knee-bending pandering to the elite, sadly has become the most prominent feature of University Presidents in the waxing fascist state that now is the US, a practice now copied by many teachers of academics in Western countries - Kewe TheWE.cc]
In its critiques of Ahmadinejad's speech at Columbia, the mainstream US press focused most of its attention on Ahmadinejad's tendentious claim that "there are no homosexuals in Iran" (belied by an evening stroll through Tehran's famous Daneshjoo Park), and his attempt to redefine his position on the Holocaust (it happened, but more research is needed to know its true extent).
At the UN, his criticism of "widespread human rights violations" elicited the expected derisive response in light of his own government's increasingly repressive policies, while his declaration that the nuclear case against Iran "is closed" suggested, to most commentators, continued intransigence by Iran in the face of supposedly universal opposition to its nuclear programme.
Students protest, but not at Columbia at their stupid University President, the protest is in Tehran, at Ahmadinejad
The President of the country has a history of going to the university and getting booed (by the children of the rich Iranian elite)
Send in the police goons to taser the students?
Unknown in Iran today
Discourteous treatment'
Few commentators considered how Ahmadinejad's words were heard outside of the US media circus.
And those who did, such as Timothy Rutton of the LA Times, focused purely on the reaction in the Muslim world, arguing that, as a "totalitarian demagogue", Ahmadinejad gained legitimacy because of the discourteous treatment by Columbia's president.
Rutton wrote: "Bollinger's denunciation was icing on the cake, because the constituency the Iranian leader cares about is scattered across an Islamic world that values hospitality and its courtesies as core social virtues."
"To that audience, Bollinger looked stunningly ill-mannered; Ahmadinejad dignified and restrained."
Underlying Rutton's argument is the still-widespread belief, whose roots lie deep in Europe and America's histories as imperial powers, that Muslims and the other formerly colonised peoples value "honour", "pride" and "hospitality" far more than they do issues of substance.
Indeed, they remain incapable of making well-reasoned and documented criticisms of a West, and the United States in particular, that remains by definition technologically, politically, and morally superior to the developing world.
'Poverty and deprivation'
It's no wonder, then, that almost no one in the American media focused on the substantive claims of Ahmadinejad's speech at the UN.
Chief among them were his argument regarding the "alarming situation of poverty and deprivation".
"Let me draw your attention to some data issued by the United Nations," he said, before calling to the attention of the world's leaders the fact that close to one billion people live on less than $1-a-day and that there is a rapidly increasing gap between the world's rich and poor.
He mentioned the continued disgraceful figures for infant mortality, schooling and related human development indicators in the developing world.
Perhaps wanting to be courteous, Ahmadinejad blamed "certain big powers" for the plight of a large share of humanity — he might have added that according to UN estimates almost half the world lives on less than $2 per day.
But he didn't need to name names; most of the developing world, including the Muslim world, share his belief that their plight is linked to a world economic system whose goal, for more than half a millennium, has been to exploit the peoples and resources of the rest of the world for the benefit of the more advanced countries of the West.
Students protest at the Presidents visit to Tehran University
(Protest by the children of the rich Iranian elite, unhappy small portions of the family wealth is being transferred to the poorer populations)
Discourteous treatment
That is precisely why so many people in the developing world remain opposed to Western-sponsored globalisation, which for most critics, including in the Arab/Muslim world, is little more than imperialism dressed up in the rhetoric of "free markets" and "liberal democracy".
It is this much wider audience, from the favelas of Rio De Janeiro and the shanty towns of Lagos as much as the slums of Casablanca, Sadr City or Cairo, to whom Ahmadinejad was speaking.
His discourse was strikingly similar to that of his biggest ally, Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, who in his speech before the assembly last year had fewer qualms (perhaps because he's neither Arab nor Muslim) about pointing fingers at whom he considers responsible for the sorry shape of so much of the world.
Hoisting Noam Chomsky's Hegemony or Survival above his head, he exclaimed that "the hegemonic pretensions of US imperialism ... put at risk the very survival of humankind".
America, not Iran, Chavez argued, is "the greatest threat looming over our planet".
The Ahmadinejad-Chavez axis has been compared by American politicians such as Florida Republican Congressman Connie Mack to the relationship between Fidel Castro and Russia.
Such analogies are far off the mark.
A more accurate historical comparison would be to the relationship between Egypt's Gemal Abdel Nasser and India's Jawaharlal Nehru, when both came together at the Bandung conference in 1955 to attempt to build a coherent bloc of nations that could protect its interests against those of the two major superpowers, the US and the Soviet Union.
'Human underdogs'
Writing after attending the Bandung Conference, the American novelist Richard Wright exclaimed that it was a meeting of "the despised, the insulted, the hurt, the dispossessed - in short, the underdogs of the human race".
It was this shared experience of oppression that grounded the "Bandung Spirit", which leaders such as Nasser used to develop the "pan-" ideologies (-Arab, -African, -American, -Islamic) that proved a thorn in the side of US policymakers for much of the Cold war.
The difference between Chavez and Ahmadinejad and their "Third World" predecessors, is, in a word, oil.
'Courteous treatment'
— that's how you do it, Columbia
Iran and Venezuela possess the third- and seventh-largest oil reserves in the world, totaling well over 200 billion barrels — that's not much less than the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia.
The two countries will earn well over $80bn in revenues this year alone.
As important, both countries possess non-oil sectors that are surprisingly robust, according to many estimates, for the majority of both Iran's and Venezuela's Gross Domestic Product.
This provides both countries with billions of dollars to spend on foreign aid, as demonstrated by Ahmadinejad's stopover in Bolivia, where he pledged $1bn in Iranian aid and development to the poverty stricken country.
US policymakers' view of the world through the "you're either with us or against us" prism divides the globe into those who support the US and Europe (and the "West" more broadly), and those who support al-Qaeda and "Islamofascism", a term which has been created precisely to ensure that Americans conflate Osama bin Laden with Ahmadinejad, and both with Hitler.
But few people outside of the West buy this comparison, or the larger black-and-white world-view it reflects.
Instead, in Africa and Latin America, Ahmadenijad's argument that "humanity has had a deep wound on its tired body caused by impious powers for centuries" resonates far more deeply than George Bush's hollow-sounding calls for democracy and "ending tyranny".
Colonial rule
The West advises Africa to "get over" colonialism, but the pain of colonial rule is still felt by those suffering under the policies imposed by the IMF and/or the World Bank, or from the continued subsidisation of American and European agribusiness while their countries are flooded with below-market wheat, soy or corn.
It is to those people whom Ahmadinejad promised — in language that strikingly mirrors US President Bush's often religiously-hued speeches — that "the era of darkness will end" with the "dawn of the liberation of, and freedom for, all humans".
Americans may not like Ahmadinejad's or Chavez's internal politics, ideological orientations, or foreign policies.
But for most of the third world, which is tired of centuries of domination by the West, the two leaders are a breath of fresh air, who are coming not as conquerors, but as comrades.
They are free of the condescending "civilising mission" that, from Napoleon's invasion of Egypt to the US invasion of Iraq, always seem to include war, occupation, and the appropriation of strategic natural resources under foreign control as part of their mandate.
And because of this, most of the citizens of the developing world, rightly or wrongly, couldn't care less about Ahmadinejad's positions on Israel, the Holocaust, and nuclear weapons, never mind homosexuals, none of which affect them directly.
They care only that he is sticking-it-to their old colonial or Cold war masters, and offering "respect", "friendship" and billions of dollars in aid with no strings attached.
Americans, Europeans and Israelis can fret about it all they want, but it will not change this reality.
Only a reorientation of the world economy towards real sustainability and equality will dampen his appeal, and that's not likely to happen soon.
Which means that Americans will be hearing a lot more of Ahmadinejad and leaders like him in the future.
The question is, will they be listening?
Subtitles, captions, added by TheWE.cc
TEHRAN — Speaking of business as unusual.
A mere two months ago, the news of a China-Kazakhstan pipeline agreement, worth US$3.5 billion, raised some eyebrows in the world press, some hinting that China's economic foreign policy may be on the verge of a new leap forward.
A clue to the fact that such anticipation may have totally understated the case was last week's signing of a mega-gas deal between Beijing and Tehran worth $100 billion.
Billed as the "deal of century" by various commentators, this agreement is likely to increase by another $50 billion to $100 billion, bringing the total close to $200 billion, when a similar oil agreement, currently being negotiated, is inked not too far from now.
The gas deal entails the annual export of some 10 million tons of Iranian liquefied natural gas (LNG) for a 25-year period, as well as the participation, by China's state oil company, in such projects as exploration and drilling, petrochemical and gas industries, pipelines, services and the like.
The export of LNG requires special cargo ships, however, and Iran is currently investing several billion dollars adding to its small LNG-equipped fleet.
Still, per the admission of the head of the Iranian Tanker Co, Mohammad Souri, Iran needed to purchase another 87 vessels by 2010, in addition to the 10 already purchased, in order to fulfill the needs of its growing LNG market.
Iran has an estimated 26.6-trillion-cubic-meter gas reservoir, the second-largest in the world, about half of which is in offshore zones and the other half onshore.
It is perhaps too early to digest fully the various economic, political and even geostrategic implications of this stunning development, widely considered a major blow to the Bush administration's economic sanctions on Iran and particularly on Iran's energy sector, notwithstanding the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) penalizing foreign companies daring to invest more than $20 million in Iran's oil and gas industry.
While it is unclear what the scope of China's direct investment in Iran's energy sector will turn out to be, it is fairly certain that China's participation in the Yad Avaran field alone will exceed the ILSA's ceiling; this field's oil reservoir is estimated to be 17 billion barrels and is capable of producing 300 to 400 barrels per day.
And this is besides the giant South Pars field, which Iran shares with Qatar, alone possessing close to 8% of the world's gas reserves.
Iran applying
for church to
become a
UNESCO
World Heritage
Site
To open a parenthesis here, until now Tehran has been complaining that Qatar has been outpacing Iran in exploiting its resource 6-1.
In fact, Iran's unhappiness over Qatar's unbalanced access to the South Pars led to a discrete warning by Iran's deputy oil minister and, soon thereafter, Qatar complied with Iran's request for a joint "technical committee" that has yet to yield any result.
For a United States increasingly pointing at China as the next biggest challenge to its Pax Americana, the Iran-China energy cooperation cannot but be interpreted as an ominous sign of emerging new trends in an area considered vital to US national interests.
But, then again, this cuts both ways, that is, the deal should, logically speaking, stimulate others who may still consider Iran untrustworthy or too radical to enter into big projects on a long term basis.
Iran's biggest foreign agreement prior to this gas agreement with China was a long-term $25 billion gas deal with Turkey, which has encountered snags, principally over the price, recently, compared with Iran's various trade agreements with Spain, Italy and others, typically with a life-span of five to seven years.
Thus some Iranian officials are hopeful that the China deal can lead to a fundamental rethinking of the risks of doing business with Iran on the part of European countries, India, Japan, and even Russia.
Concerning India, which signed a memorandum of understanding with Iran initially in 1993 for a 2,670-kilometer pipeline, with more than 700km traversing Pakistani territory, the Iran-China deal will undoubtedly give a greater push to New Delhi to follow Beijing's lead and thus make sure that the "peace pipeline" is finally implemented.
The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to Russia, which has as of late been dragging its feet somewhat on Iran's nuclear reactor, bandwagoning with the US and Group of Eight (G8) countries on the thorny issue of Iran's uranium-enrichment program.
The Russians must now factor in the possibility of being supplanted by China if they lose the confidence of Tehran and appear willing to trade favors with Washington over Iran. Russia's Gazprom may now finally set aside its stubborn resistance to the idea of entering major joint ventures with Iran.
Iran appears more and more interested to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and form a powerful axis with its twin pillars, China and Russia, as a counterweight to a US power "unchained".
The SCO comprises China, Russia, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.
China, Russia and Iran share deep misgivings about the perception of the United States as a "benevolent hegemon" and tend to see a "rogue superpower" instead.
Even short of joining forces formally, the main outlines of such an axis can be discerned from their convergence of threat perception due to, among other things, Russia's disquiet over the post-September 11, 2001, US incursions in its traditional Caucasus-Central Asian "turf", and China's continuing unease over the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan; this is not to mention China's fixed gaze at a "new Silk Road" allowing it unfettered access to the Middle East and Eurasia, this as part and parcel of what is often billed as "the new great game" in Eurasia.
Indeed, what China's recent deals with both Kazakhstan (pertaining to Caspian energy) and Iran (pertaining to Persian Gulf resources) signifies is that the pundits had gotten it wrong until now: the purview of the new great game is not limited to the Central Asia-Caspian Sea basin, but rather has a broader, more integrated, purview increasingly enveloping even the Persian Gulf.
Increasingly, the image of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a sort of frontline state in a post-Cold War global lineup against US hegemony is becoming prevalent among Chinese and Russian foreign-policy thinkers.
For the moment, however, the Iran-Russia-China axis is more a tissue of think-tanks than full-fledged policy, and the mere trade interdependence of the US and China, as well as Russia's growing energy ties to the US alone, not to mention its weariness over any perceived Chinese "overstretch", militate against a grand alliance pitted against the Western superpower.
In fact, the Cold War-type alliances are highly unlikely to be replicated in the current milieu of globalization and complex interdependence; instead, what is likely to emerge in the future are issue-focused or, for the lack of a better word, issue-area alliances whereby, to give an example, the above-said axis may be inspired into existence along geostrategic considerations somewhat apart from purely economic considerations.
Hence what the SCO means on the security front and how significant it will be hinges on a complex, and complicated, set of factors that may eventually culminate in its expansion, from the current group of six, as well as greater, alliance-like, cooperation.
It is noteworthy that in Central Asia-Caucasus, the trend is toward security diversification and even multipolarism, reflected in the US and Russian bases not too far from each other.
In this multipolar sub-order, neither the US is capable of exerting hegemony, nor is Russia's semi-hegemonic sway without competition.
In the Caspian Sea basin, for example, Kazakhstan has opted to take part in several distinct, and contrasting, security networks, including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Partnership for Peace program, the Commonwealth of Independent States' Collective Security Organization, the SCO, and membership in OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe).
Kazakhstan is not, however, an exception, but seemingly indicative of an expanding new rule of the (security and strategic) game played out throughout Central Asia-Caucasus.
Economically, both Kazakhstan and Russia are members of the Central Asia Economic Cooperation Organization, and all the Central Asian states are also members of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), which was founded by the trio of Iran, Turkey and Pakistan.
Certain economic alliances are, henceforth, taking shape, alongside the budding security arrangements, which have their own tempo, rationale and security potential.
Concerning the latter, in 1998, the ECO embarked on low security cooperation among its members on drug trafficking and this may soon be expanded to information-sharing on terrorism.
Also, Iran has also entered into low security agreements with some of its Persian Gulf neighbors, including Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.
The SCO initially was established to deal with border disputes and is now well on its way to focusing on (Islamist) terrorism, drug trafficking and regional insecurity.
Meanwhile, the US, not to be outdone, has been sowing its own bilateral military and security arrangements with various regional countries such as Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, as well as promoting the Guuam Group, which includes Azerbaijan and Georgia, formed alongside the BTC (Baku-Tiblisi-Ceyhan) pipeline as a counterweight to Russian influence.
Consequently, the overall picture that emerges before us is, as stated above, a unique multi-trend of military and security multipolarism defying the logic of Pax Americana.
In this picture, Iran represents one of the poles of attraction, seeking its own sphere of influence by, for instance, entering into a military agreement with Turkmenistan in 1994, and, simultaneously, exploring the larger option of how to coalesce with other powers in order to offset the debilitating consequences of (post-September 11) unbounded Americanization of regional politics.
A glance at Chinese security narratives, and it becomes patently obvious that Beijing shares Iran's deep worries about US unipolarism culminating in, as in Afghanistan and Iraq, unilateral militarism. Various advocates of US preeminence, such as William Kristol, openly write that the US should "work for the fall of the Communist Party oligarchy in China".
Unhinged from the containment of Soviet power, the roots of US unilateralism, and its military manifestation of "preemption", must be located in the logic of unipolarism, thinly disguised by the "coalition of the willing" in Iraq; the latter is, in fact, as aptly put by various critics of US foreign policy, more like a coalition of the coerced and bribed than anything else.
But, realistically speaking, what are the prospects for any regional and or continental realignment leading to the erasure of US unipolarism, notwithstanding the US military and economic colossus bent on preventing, on a doctrinal level, the emergence of any challenger to its global domination now or in the future?
The strategic debates in all three countries, Russia, China and Iran, feature similar concerns and question marks.
For one thing, all three have to contend with the difficulty of sorting the disjunctions between the different sets of national interests, above all economic, ideological and strategic interests.
This aside, a pertinent question is who will win over Russia, Washington, which pursues a coupling role with Moscow vis-a-vis Beijing, or Beijing, trying to wrest away Moscow from Washington?
For now, Russia does not particularly feel compelled to choose between stark options, yet the situation may be altered in China's direction in case the present drift of US power incursions are heightened in the future.
The answer to the above question should be delegated to the future.
For now, however, the quantum leap of China into the Middle East and Caspian energy markets has become a fait accompli, no matter how disturbed its biggest trade partner, the US, over its geopolitical ramifications.
Article published in 2004
Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) and "Iran's Foreign Policy Since 9/11", Brown's Journal of World Affairs, co-authored with former deputy foreign minister Abbas Maleki, No 2, 2003.   He teaches political science at Tehran University.
Copyright 2004, Asia Times Online
Sick person
Sick mentally and spiritually
Calls Iran 'the centre of global terror'
Look a little closer Peres
Iran applying for ancient Armenian church
to become a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
“The goals of this war are not hard to find.
They were laid out in Paul Wolfowitz's Defense Policy Guidance in 1992
And again in the neoconservative manifesto: 'The Project for a New American Century's Rebuilding America's Defenses' — in September 2000”
Iraq — an ever changing story line
“Bush can't answer her question.
There is no answer to Cindy's question.
There is no noble cause that Cindy's son died fighting for.
And Bush knows it.”
“It was three-thirty in the morning and they were all asleep, Yassin a second grade schoolboy and his friends Fahed and Walid Khaled.
There was an American patrol outside and then suddenly, a Bradley armoured vehicle burst through the gate and wall and drove over Yassin.
You know how heavy these things are.
He died instantly.
But the Americans didn’t know what they’d done.
He was lying crushed under the vehicle for 17 minutes.
Um Khaled, his friends’ mother, kept shouting in Arabic: 'There is a boy under this vehicle.'”


The Independent
Saturday, 13th August 2005 by Robert Fisk
There’s the wreckage of a car bomb that killed seven Americans on the corner of a neighbouring street.
Close by stands the shuttered shop of a phone supplier who put pictures of Saddam on a donkey on his mobiles.
He was shot three days ago, along with two other men who had committed the same sin.
In the al-Jamia neighbourhood, a US Humvee was purring up the road so we gingerly backed off and took a side street.
In this part of Baghdad, you avoid both the insurgents and the Americans — if you are lucky.
Yassin al-Sammerai was not.
On 14 July, the second grade schoolboy had gone to spend the night with two college friends and — this being a city without electricity in the hottest month of the year — they decided to spend the night sleeping in the front garden.
Let his broken 65 year-old father Selim take up the story, for he’s the one who still cannot believe his son is dead — or what the Americans told him afterwards.
July 6, 2005     Washington Post     Staff Writer Bradley Graham
Military Expands
...And it asserts the president's authority to deploy ground combat forces on U.S. territory "to intercept and defeat threats."
The document, titled "Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support," was signed June 24 by acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England and is now a basis for organizing troops, developing weapons and assigning missions.
It was released late last week without the sort of formal news conference or background briefing that often accompanies major defense policy statements.
"The move toward a domestic intelligence capability by the military is troubling," said Gene Healy, a senior editor at the Cato Institute, a nonprofit libertarian policy research group in Washington.
"The last time the military got heavily involved in domestic surveillance, during the Vietnam War era, military intelligence kept thousands of files on Americans guilty of nothing more than opposing the war," Healy said.
"I don't think we want to go down that road again."
July 6, 2005        http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/    
Former intelligence officer speaks out on coming U.S. martial law
Garden Plot was fundamentally that the Government would install a military government, imposed on state and local public saftey resources, with of course the addition of very active counterintelligence presence from the services — martial law.
The Pentagon opened a complete war room to which field agents routinely reported by telephone.
Resources from various agencies tapped phones and listened to radios of people they thought suspicious, just suspicious.
In 1965 at the CI school at Fort Holabird, I was warned that reading the New York Times, as I did occasionally; would bring me under suspicion for character and loyalty defects.
COINTELPRO was a program run out of the Justice Department, far as I can tell, designed to do "black bag" and "black propaganda" jobs, like the one they did on Martin Luther King.
Again, it used Army and other services resources.
There is much more to tell. This was the reason the Church Committee in the 1970s restricted the activities and authorities of the major intel agencies and services — which was a real service to the country — much wailed about by all those to who like the "black stuff" and considered the violation of the civil liberties of anyone just another days work.
So, this is not a fairy tale. The goblin is back garbed in khaki and just as determined as ever to practice on you and I as they are soon to run out of countries to invade and torture, even if it is because we can no longer afford our military abroad.
So, what will you do when they snoop and poke into your lives; set you up with local Gestapos; and simply harass you endlessly — to the loss of your job, reputation, etc?
And, just as now, everyone will (1) not believe and (2) be too scared to raise the questions.
What will you do?
Which side are you on?
The Independent
Saturday, 13th August 2005 by Robert Fisk
He died instantly
"It was three-thirty in the morning and they were all asleep, Yassin and his friends Fahed and Walid Khaled.
There was an American patrol outside and then suddenly, a Bradley armoured vehicle burst through the gate and wall and drove over Yassin.
You know how heavy these things are.
He died instantly.
But the Americans didn’t know what they’d done.
He was lying crushed under the vehicle for 17 minutes. Um Khaled, his friends’ mother, kept shouting in Arabic: "There is a boy under this vehicle."
According to Selim al-Sammerai, the Americans’ first reaction was to put handcuffs on the two other boys.
But a Lebanese Arabic interpreter working for the Americans arrived to explain that it was all a mistake.
"We don’t have anything against you," she said.
The Americans produced a laminated paper in English and Arabic entitled "Iraqi Claims Pocket Card" which tells them how to claim compensation.
And nowhere — but nowhere — on the form
does it suggest that the raid destroyed the life
of the football-loving Yassin al-Sammerai.
The unit whose Bradley drove over Yassin is listed as "256 BCT A/156 AR, Mortars".
Under "Type of Incident", an American had written: "Raid destroyed gate and doors."
No one told the family there had been a raid.
And nowhere — but nowhere — on the form does it suggest that the "raid" destroyed the life of the football-loving Yassin al-Sammerai.
Inside Yassin’s father’s home yesterday, Selim shakes with anger and then weeps softly, wiping his eyes.
"He is surely in heaven," one of his surviving seven sons replies.
And the old man looks at me and says: "He liked swimming too."
U.S. forces attacked houses
Three brothers killed
Photo: Hadi Mizban
Women and wives react during a funeral procession for
three brothers killed during an early morning raid
Thursday, Aug. 18. 2005, in Baghdad, Iraq.
The Independent
Saturday, 13th August 2005 by Robert Fisk
A former technical manager at the Baghdad University college of arts, Selim is now just a shadow.
He is half bent over on his seat, his face sallow and his cheeks drawn in.
This is a Sunni household in a Sunni area.
This is "insurgent country" for the Americans, which is why they crash into these narrow streets at night.
Several days ago, a collaborator gave away the location of a group of Sunni guerrillas and US troops surrounded the house.
A two-hour gun-battle followed until an Apache helicopter came barrelling out of the darkness and dropped a bomb on the building, killing all inside.
There is much muttering around the room about the Americans and the West and I pick up on this quickly and say how grateful I am that they have let a Westerner come to their home after what has happened.
Selim turns and shakes me by the hand.
"You are welcome here," he says.  "Please tell people what happened to us."
Outside, my driver is watching the road; it’s the usual story.
Any car with three men inside or a man with a mobile phone means "get out".
The sun bakes down.
It is a Friday.
"These guys take Fridays off," the driver offers by way of confidence.
"The Americans came back with an officer two days later," Selim al-Sammerai continues.
"They offered us compensation.
I refused.
I lost my son, I told the officer.  ’I don’t want the money - I don’t think the money will bring back my son.’
That’s what I told the American."
There is a long silence in the room.  But Selim, who is still crying, insists on speaking again.
"I told the American officer: ’You have killed the innocent and such things will lead the people to destroy you and the people will make a revolution against you.  You said you had come to liberate us from the previous regime.  But you are destroying our walls and doors.’"
I suddenly realise that Selim al-Sammerai has straightened up on his seat and his voice is rising in strength.
"Do you know what the American said to me? He said, ’This is fate.’  I looked at him and I said, ’I am very faithful in the fate of God - but not in the fate of which you speak.’"
Then one of Yassin’s brothers says that he took a photograph of the dead boy as he lay on the ground, a picture taken on his mobile phone, and he printed a picture of it and when the Americans returned on the second day they asked to see it.
"They asked me why I had taken the picture and I said it was so people here could see what the Americans had done to my brother.
They asked if they could borrow it and bring it back.
I gave it to them but they didn’t bring it back.  But I still kept the image on my mobile and I was able to print another."
And suddenly it is in my hands, an obscene and terrible snapshot of Yassin’s head crushed flat as if an elephant had stood upon it, blood pouring from what had been the back of his brains.
"So now, you see," the brother explains, "the people can still see what the Americans have done."
In the heat, we slunk out of al-Jamia yesterday, the place of insurgents and Americans and grief and revenge.
"When the car bomb blew up over there," my driver says, "the US Humvees went on burning for three hours and the bodies were still there.
The Americans took three hours to reach them.
Al the people gathered round and watched."
And I look at the carbonised car that still lies on the road and realise it has now become a little icon of resistance.
How, I ask myself again, can the Americans ever win?
 
Actor Richard Dreyfuss holds up a sign at a candlelight vigil in the North Hollywood area of Los Angeles on August 17, 2005. 

Image: REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni
Actor Richard Dreyfuss holds up a sign at a candlelight vigil in the North Hollywood area of Los Angeles on August 17, 2005.
www.truthout.org/
Thursday 18 August 2005   By Marjorie Cohn
Cindy Sheehan is still in Crawford, Texas, waiting for Bush to answer her question:  What noble cause did my son die for?
Her protest started as a small gathering 13 days ago.
It has mushroomed into a demonstration of hundreds in Crawford and tens of thousands more at 1,627 solidarity vigils throughout the country.
Why didn't Bush simply invite Cindy in for tea when she arrived in Crawford?
In a brief, personal meeting with Cindy, Bush could have defused a situation that has become a profound embarrassment for him, and could derail his political agenda.
Bush didn't talk with Cindy because he can't answer her question.
There is no answer to Cindy's question.
There is no noble cause that Cindy's son died fighting for.
And Bush knows it.
The goals of this war are not hard to find.
They were laid out in Paul Wolfowitz's Defense Policy Guidance in 1992, and again in the neoconservative manifesto — The Project for a New American Century's Rebuilding America's Defenses — in September 2000.
Long before 9/11, the neocons proclaimed that the United States should exercise its role as the world's only superpower by ensuring access to the massive Middle East petroleum reserves.
To accomplish this goal, the US would need to invade Iraq and establish permanent military bases there.
If Bush were to give an honest answer to Cindy Sheehan's question, it would be that her son died to help his country spread US hegemony throughout the Middle East.
But that answer, while true, does not sound very noble.
It would not satisfy Cindy Sheehan, nor would it satisfy the vast majority of the American people.
So, for the past several years, Bush and his minions have concocted an ever-changing story line.
Cindy Sheehan of Vacaville, California, takes a moment during a sunset candlelight vigil at her roadside protest in Crawford, Texas, August 17, 2005.

Photo:  REUTERS/Jason Reed
Cindy Sheehan of Vacaville, California, takes a moment during a sunset candlelight vigil at her roadside protest in Crawford, Texas, August 17, 2005.
www.truthout.org/
Thursday 18 August 2005   By Marjorie Cohn
First weapons-of-mass-destruction and mushroom clouds
First, it was weapons-of-mass-destruction and the mushroom cloud.
In spite of the weapons inspectors' admonitions that Iraq had no such weapons, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and Bolton lied about chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
Bush even included the smoking gun claim in his state of the union address: that Iraq sought to purchase uranium from Niger.
It was a lie, because people like Ambassador Joe Wilson, who traveled to Niger to investigate the allegation, had reported back to Cheney that it never happened.
The Security Council didn't think Iraq was a threat to international peace and security.
In spite of Bush's badgering and threats, the Council held firm and refused to sanction a war on Iraq.
The UN weapons inspectors asked for more time to conduct their inspections. But Bush was impatient.
He thumbed his nose at the United Nations and invaded anyway.
After the "coalition forces" took over Iraq, they combed the country for the prohibited weapons.  But they were nowhere to be found.
Faced with the need to explain to the American people why our sons and daughters were dying in Iraq, Bush changed the subject to saving the Iraqis from Saddam's torture chambers.
Then the grotesque photographs emerged from Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad.
They contained images of US military personnel torturing Iraqis.
Bush stopped talking about Saddam's torture.
Most recently, Bush's excuse has been "bringing democracy to the Iraqi people."
On June 28, 2004, he ceremoniously hailed the "transfer of sovereignty" back to the Iraqi people.
Yet 138,000 US troops remained in Iraq to protect US "interests."
And Iraq's economy is still controlled by laws put in place before the "transfer of sovereignty."
The US maintains a stranglehold on foreign access to Iraqi oil, private ownership of Iraq's resources, and control over the reconstruction of this decimated country.
For months, Bush hyped the August 15, 2005 deadline for Iraqis to agree on a new constitution.
But as the deadline came and went, the contradictions between the Shias, Sunnis and Kurds over federalism came into sharp focus.
The Bush administration admitted that "we will have some form of Islamic republic," according to Sunday's Washington Post.
So much for Bush's promise of a democratic Iraq.
The constitutional negotiations are far removed from the lives of most Iraqis.
When journalist Robert Fisk asked an Iraqi friend about the constitution, he replied, "Sure, it's important.  But my family lives in fear of kidnapping, I'm too afraid to tell my father I work for journalists, and we only have one hour in six of electricity and we can't even keep our food from going bad in the fridge.  Federalism?  You can't eat federalism and you can't use it to fuel your car and it doesn't make my fridge work."
Fisk reports that 1,100 civilian bodies were brought into the Baghdad morgue in July.
The medical journal The Lancet concluded in October 2004 that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died in the first 18 months after Bush invaded Iraq.
Unfortunately, the picture in Iraq is not a pretty one.
Bush knows that if he talked to Cindy Sheehan, she would demand that he withdraw from Iraq now.
But Bush has no intention of ever pulling out of Iraq.
The US is building the largest CIA station in the world in Baghdad.
And Halliburton is busily constructing 14 permanent US military bases in Iraq.
George Bush knows that he cannot answer Cindy Sheehan's question.
There is no noble cause for his war on Iraq.
       
A Young Man Dies in Iraq
By Chris Christensen    Tomdispatch.com
'He didn't know it, but as a small town southerner he was being trained for his death since early childhood.'
Editor's Note: This letter was written by Chris Christensen, an airline pilot
and Vietnam War veteran living in a small Texas town.
In our small town of Columbus, Texas (pop. 3900), we buried one of our local sons on his 19th birthday. He was killed in action in Iraq. He was a friend of my two oldest sons and his father a friend of mine.
There is not a lot for a young man to do in our town, and most leave for college, jobs... etc. Christopher came to see me at his father's request prior to enlisting last summer.   I am an Air Force vet from Southeast Asia.   I talked blue in the face to try to get Christopher to go with me to an Air Force or Navy recruiter.   In fact, I told him in no uncertain terms that the Army would put a gun in his hand and send him out to be a target.   No soap.
His head was already filled with a lot of crud from the recruiter about being a scout, riding a 4-wheeler ATV around — big fun! (Christopher was an Eagle Scout.)   He had an acquaintance who had been doing that (not in Iraq), and I got the sense that this acquaintance was giving him the hard sell too.   I wonder if the Army has a referral bonus system.   Do you know?
Christopher also had this inexplicable desire to "go shoot some 'Raqis."   Some latent desire maybe from too much video gaming.   I heard that in the weeks before his death, he was involved in a brief fire-fight and froze in terror.   No doubt reality caught up to him at the speed of a 7.62.   Too bad his recruiter or buddy had not told him about the fear he would experience when he realized someone wanted to really hurt him or kill him.
I was crying for our country
When I learned of Christopher's death, I was sitting at a PC in a hotel lounge in Manhattan.   (I'm an airline pilot and was on a layover in New York.)   I broke down and cried.   There were lots of others around and I'm sure they were wondering... but none asked.   I found I was crying not so much for the senseless loss of a young life, or even the grief our friends would bear.   As I thought about it, I was crying for our country.   What have we come to?
As I mentioned, there is not much for a young man to do in small towns like ours after high school.   Christopher had mentioned to me when we talked last, before his enlistment, about riding that 4-wheeler ATV around as an Army scout and having a good time.   His recruiter had him hooked.   He also mentioned going to shoot some "'Raqis."
This is my sadness.   Our children are being weaned on hatred and violence in this country.   It starts with television, gets reinforced and is refined with violent video games (one, in particular, produced and distributed by the U.S. Army), and finally the infection spreads through violent team sports in high school.   Football in the South is the battlefield training ground for the next generation of cannon fodder.   Kids are told to go out there and "hurt 'em, tear 'em up, kill 'em."   It is ingrained.
(Careful now, don't get me confused with the liberal left.   I own guns and support the right.   There is a huge difference between defense of home and property and exporting violence to other countries.)
As I travel in other countries I see no parallel.   There are of course team sports, but violence and undercurrents of hatred that lurk within are, as much as I can tell, not there.
Christopher didn't know it, but as a small town southerner he was being trained for his death since early childhood.
Our little town votes mostly Democrat on local elections, but typically Republican in presidential races.   Discussion or debate about policy in public is seldom heard and somewhat discouraged.   What a shame.   Most people around here take a passing interest in national or foreign policy for a week or two prior to an election, then just turn back to football, or whatever is covered on the sports page that day.
Death or dismemberment at the hands of an enemy
The notion of death or dismemberment at the hands of an enemy is so foreign as to be incomprehensible to most American youth.   Our media does such a precise job of keeping images and details of such things out of the public eye.   Not so for many foreign presses.   Our schools would never consider teaching children about anything so morbid or unpleasant.
The thought that a boy like Christopher would so lightly desire to kill some people he knew nothing about is very distressing to me.   On the one hand, Christopher was a pretty gentle and easy-going kid.   If someone said to him, "Hey let's go shoot some kids from Sealy," a rival school, he would obviously have said, "You're crazy — get lost!" But Iraqis, why, it's open season.
Developed enough hatred to override his sense of right and wrong
He only saw the differences.   He had somehow developed enough hatred to override his sense of right and wrong, and any teaching of love of fellow man.   He went to the Southern Baptist Church here, and I know it was taught to him.   On the other hand, the president of the Southern Baptist convention declared this a "just war."   A little hypocrisy there and probably confusing for Christopher.   We left that Church, by the way.
I know of a few men and women who knew Christopher, who have been supporting the occupation, and are beginning to change their minds.   His death is the second our rural county has experienced in the last few months.   It is beginning to change some attitudes here — but too late I'm afraid.
I hope that we learn sooner than we did in Vietnam that we can't successfully force our ideals on another society unwilling to adopt them or defend them for themselves.
There just aren't enough Christophers to go around. "

© 2005 Independent Media Institute.   All rights reserved.
June 1, 2007
47 Years Later in Havana
Return to Cuba
By SAUL LANDAU
I landed at Jose Marti International airport in May of 1960, 17 months after a young, bearded man and his fellow barbudos had captured control of the island and sent a hated dictator fleeing.
Musicians played a lively tune as the passengers deplaned, a young woman pushed a rum-flavored drink into my hand and I spotted a young, uniformed man with lieutenant's bars on his shoulders.
I gave him the note that Raulito Roa (of the Cuban UN delegation) had given me in New York, saying I was a young progressive writer and to provide me with help in understanding the revolution.
Cuba signs trade agreements with Vietnam General Secretary Nong Duc Manh
Bola de Nieve performing at Hotel Nacional where Meyer Lansky ran Mafia operations until January 1959
Richard's velocity of speech outpaced my meager comprehension of Spanish, but I did understand that "the revolution had opened the prisms of hope in the eyes of the Cuban people," and that I should wait outside the Hotel Presidente at 8 a.m. to get picked up for a trip to eastern Cuba.
I spent a few hours walking around Havana and trying to engage people in conversations.
I had a rum drink at Club Red and heard a singer called La Lupe.
I saw a sign for Bola de Nieve performing at the Hotel Nacional where Meyer Lansky ran Mafia operations until January 1959.
I saw the sign Habana Libre, flashing from the hotel that used to say Havana Hilton.
Disabled children and dolphins play
Cuba's National Aquarium has been helping children with special needs
I hadn't yet realized Santeria played a more powerful role in spiritual life of the island than the Church
I didn't hear explosions and shooting in the street, although the CIA's terrorist campaign from Florida was well underway.
I walked along the Malecon (the ocean walk), passing couples necking, others fishing.
In the morning, a jeep stopped in front of the hotel, a young man asked my name, introduced himself as Julio, grabbed my suit case and motioned for me to hop in.
I shared the ride with three Chileans back to the airport, bound for Santiago de Cuba, some 500 miles to the east.
What kind of revolution is this, I thought, filled with music and dancing in a Catholic country — I hadn't yet realized that Santeria played a more powerful role in the spiritual life of the island than the Church.
Marta, one of the Chileans, questioned Cuba's growing connection to the Soviet Union as well as the ever advancing role of the Cuban Communist Party in revolutionary decisions.
Dolphins, sea tortoises and sea lions all get into the action
We cruised the countryside outside Santiago de Cuba seeing the revolution's new construction and slum clearance projects
In the October 1959 election for head of Cuba's National Labor council Fidel personally had stepped in to prevent the victory of David Salvador who was an outspoken anti-communist.
In the same time period, Fidel personally arrested Huber Matos, who commanded Camaguey Province.
Matos had objected to the sweeping land reforms and to the growing relationship with Moscow.
The militant anti-imperialist and anti-Yankee language of Che Guevara, for example, and Raul Castro's past links with Cuba's Communist Youth movement had provoked U.S. newspaper columnists and Congressmen alike to question Fidel's commitment to the very axioms of the Cold War: anti-Sovietism uber alles.
By June 1960, we cruised the countryside outside Santiago de Cuba and saw the revolution's new construction and slum clearance projects; I heard only praise for the Soviets from revolutionary cadre.
Marta's skepticism increased.
 Cuba's National Aquarium
April, 11, 2007
Disabled child watches
The slum neighborhood seemed endless as we trudged through mud and slime
The Manzana de Gomez, a slum neighborhood in Santiago, seemed endless as we trudged through mud and slime, rickety shacks made of every leftover substance one could imagine on either side.
A trickling stream filled with garbage and feces wound its way through the center of the makeshift street.
One middle aged man, seemingly drunk, offered a girl, of about 13 or 14, to the Chilean men and me.
His daughter?
The Cuban guides said something harsh to him.
He laughed.
Some women seemed intent on sweeping their dirt floors; some even looked clean, with ironed dresses.
Mostly, I recall the barefoot kids, the emaciated dogs
Mostly, I recall the barefoot kids, the emaciated dogs, my sense of being inside chaos and cacophony.
It had seemed like hours of watching a live horror show. My watch indicated that we had only walked for ten minutes.
"Seen enough?" one of the guides asked.
You can not make this stuff up folks
The United States is in Spain asking that Spain use its influence to get Cuba to change its ways
It should not be permitted for human to live like this
One of the Chilean men shook his head, his complexion slightly green.
Marta looked angry. "It should not be permitted for human to live like this," she said:
"But in Chile there are similar shantytowns.
I would imagine that almost every city in Latin America has them."
By the end of the visit Marta had become convinced that Cuba could not rely on any help from the United States, and had no option but to turn to Moscow. "But in Chile there are similar shantytowns.
"This one won't be here long," one of the Cubans pledged.   "But in Chile there are similar shantytowns."
"The plans to raze it and construct new housing are well underway.
But under the old regimes no one cared to do anything about such conditions.
This is why we're showing it to you, so you'll understand why we had to make a revolution."
 No, you really cannot make this up
Rice reproaches Spain for its business contacts with Cuba, says Spain should be killing more Afghanistan people as the United States is doing.
Madrid, Spain
June 1, 2007
 
The jeep took us about a thousand feet up into the Sierra Maestra where the guerrillas successfully operated for two years between late December 1956 and their successful capture of the island in January 1959.
I asked Julio how a few hundred men could possibly have defeated an army that numbered some fifty thousand.
He smiled.
"We had will, determination, the cooperation of a large underground organization and the vast majority of the people.
The Batista government had no support, except from Washington.
They not only tortured and murdered; they did nothing for the people.
Look around.
Moreover, Cuba's institutions did not function, which made it ripe for revolution."
The villages we saw had neither electricity nor running water.
Kids ran barefoot.
I saw no school or a church in most of the villages.
In two, I noticed a crude, hand painted sign: "El Dios se encuentra aqui. (God is here)"
"Protestants," explained our guide.
"Some kind of primitive religion," said Julio.
The sun seemed to toast the ground.
The villages had no electricity or running water.
The thatched-roof houses, bohios, had existed even before Columbus, one guide asserted.
I didn't ask how he knew.
The rocky dirt roads worsened as we climbed.
Patches of corn and malanga, clusters of coffee trees and unhealthy farm animals dotted the landscape.
The villagers filled sacks with ripe coffee beans, loaded them on burros and brought them down the dirt roads to market.
      Saul Landau      www.counterpunch.org      June 1, 2007
 
US Terror State
US Militarism
Canberra, Australia
47 Years Later in Havana
— Return to Cuba
By SAUL LANDAU
D ark-skinned peasants, in dirty yellowish hats and weathered faces waved or nodded as we passed their caravans of animals with jingling bells on their necks.
Often the men rode on horseback; their wives — I presumed — walked next to them.
"Seen enough?" Julio asked, as one Chilean complained of physical discomfort — kidney exercise in the jeep.
I tried to imagine Fidel and his bearded men disembarking to face an ambush, cries of betrayal amidst rifle and machine gun fire
Then the guides brought us to the place near Manzanillo where the yacht Granma landed in early December 1956.
I tried to imagine Fidel and his bearded men disembarking to face an ambush, cries of betrayal amidst rifle and machine gun fire, the sight and smell of human blood on the road lined with white shelled crabs, crawling to and from the swampy grasses on either side of the road.
Fidel and a small group of sick, wounded and exhausted guerrillas somehow escaped and climbed to the high points of the nearby mountains.
One of the guides told us of Fidel peering across the island and commenting to the weary survivors: "The days of the dictatorship are numbered."
US Militarism
US Terror State
Madrid, Spain
As we drove downhill, I wondered whether President Eisenhower, who had supposedly authorized the CIA to organize anti-Castro Cuban exiles to in the near future invade the island and overthrow the revolutionary government, had any idea of the already living legend he would be facing.
Plans to redistribute wealth to and make investment in the impoverished countryside
Julio talked of plans to redistribute wealth to and make investment in the impoverished countryside.
The revolutionaries had already expropriated large estates and many other businesses, including major U.S. companies.
Shortly after I returned to Havana, in July 1960, Fidel took over the U.S.-owned oil refineries, which had refused on orders from Washington to refine imported Soviet oil.
Eisenhower retaliated by cutting the Cuban sugar quota, depriving Cuba of badly needed cash and credit as well.
Walking from the bus to the Tropicana to hear a jazz combo, we ran into Guillermo Cabrera Infante, then editor of Lunes de Revolucion, the cultural supplement of Revolution, the government's newspaper, and passed a demonstration denouncing Ike.
"Sin cuota pero sin amo" read the placards carried by chanting marchers.
Rice, US Dollars
and Torture
Cabrera Infante sneered: "Sin cuota pero sin ano."
(Without a quota but without an ass).
I chuckled at his wit.
I also feared both slogans might be right.
(Lunes de Revolucion was closed in 1961. Cabrera Infante served as Cuba's cultural attaché in Belgium. He defected in 1964 and in England wrote several acclaimed novels before his death.)
When I left Cuba in February 1961 I saw young men hoisting four barreled anti aircraft guns onto the roof of the lobby of the Hotel Riviera.
Others planted dynamite under bridges.
All of Cuba awaited the U.S.-backed invasion that finally came in April 1961 at the Bay of Pigs.
When the battle ended, Cuba had symbolically lost its boss and still had its ass.
Over the next decades it struggled to keep it.
 Boy buys bread at Agro (farmers market)
March 1962, Cuba guarantee citizens a basic amount of food at low prices
Havana
June 1, 2007
I would look that way also if I were a member of the U.S. congress visiting Cuba, May 29, 2007
No, you really cannot make this stuff up.
Rice is in Spain two days later reproaching Spain for its business contacts with Cuba, saying Spain should be killing more Afghanistan people as the United States is doing
 Kisses Dolphin
 
Ecuador's Vice President Lenin Moreno tours Old Havana during his official visit to Cuba May 27, 2007
 
From Kewe      TheWE.cc
It is not possible for me to adequately express wording for what has taken place in American society, from Bush down, with regard to the U.S. government's practices of torture.
Needless to say all who have been involved should not in the future — to human, animal or insect — have any contact.
All in the medical profession, all psychologists and psychiatrists, all military personnel, all government servants involved, should be tried as war criminals of the highest order.
A court based upon the Nuremberg trials must be convened.
These people do need to be removed from society.
As for torture itself, no one has spoken of it better that Orwell:
"The object of torture is torture!"
Friday, June 1st, 2007
"The Task Force Report Should Be Annulled" - Member of 2005 APA Task Force on Psychologist Participation in Military Interrogations Speaks Out — Click Here
In 2005, the American Psychological Association convened a Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security that concluded psychologists' participation in military interrogations was "consistent with the APA Code of Ethics."
It was later revealed that six of nine voting members were from the military and intelligence agencies with direct connections to interrogations at Guantanamo and elsewhere.
In a Democracy Now! broadcast exclusive, we speak with two members of the task force, Dr. Jean Maria Arrigo and Dr. Nina Thomas.
Arrigo says the task force report "should be annulled," because the process was "flawed."
As an example, Arrigo says she was "told very sharply" by one of the military psychologists not to take notes during the proceedings.
She later archived the entire listserve of the task force and sent it to Senate Armed Services Committee.
We also speak with Dr. Eric Anders, a former Air Force officer who underwent harsh training in "SERE" (Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape) techniques, as well as Dr. Leonard Rubenstein, Executive Director of Physicians for Human Rights.
 NATO STATES militarism
NATO Terror States
More than 380 Afghanistan people killed Jan to May 2007 not including resistance members
A man carries his brother, who was injured by a car bomb which killed two and wounded nine.

Falluja due to the presence of American forces is still under war-like conditions.

Resistance is active to clear the Americans from the city.

The young brother is being taken to Al Falluja hospital in Falluja, 50 km (32 miles) west of Baghdad, August 17, 2005.
 
Photo:  REUTERS/Muhanned Faisal
A man carries his brother, who was injured by a car bomb which killed two and wounded nine.
Falluja due to the presence of American forces is still under war-like conditions.
Resistance is active to clear the Americans from the city.
The young brother is being taken to Al Falluja hospital in Falluja, 50 km (32 miles) west of Baghdad, August 17, 2005.
ESTIMATED NUCLEAR WARHEADS, STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL
Map showing declared, suspected and potential nuclear nations.

The US is also said to have some 3,000 warheads in reserve, while Russia has about 11,000 in non-operational stockpiles.

Israel declines to confirm it has nuclear weapons.

North Korea — 1 test underground, October 2006.

Iran is accused by the US of ambitions to build nuclear arms.

The United states had drawn up a battle plan for the potential use of nuclear weapons in Iraq and the United States has been involved in planning potential nuclear use scenarios for Iran.

The United States is now involved in a massive program to overhaul its nuclear arsenal.

In fact they're working to replace every nuclear warhead and all of the existing delivery systems in the arsenal to ensure prompt precision global strike capabilities.

Jackie Cabasso — Western States Legal Foundation
The United States has conducted 1,127 nuclear and thermonuclear tests — 217 in the atmosphere.
The Soviet Union/ Russia conducted 969 tests — 219 in the atmosphere.
France, 210 tests, 50 in the atmosphere.
The United Kingdom, 45 tests — 21 in the atmosphere.
China, 45 tests — 23 in the atmosphere.
India and Pakistan — 13 tests underground.
Israel — possible 1 test atmosphere South Africa 1979.
North Korea — 1 test underground, October 2006.
“The United states had drawn up a battle plan for the potential use of nuclear weapons in Iraq and the United States has been involved in planning potential nuclear use scenarios for Iran.”
“The United States is now involved in a massive program to overhaul its nuclear arsenal.   In fact they're working to replace every nuclear warhead and all of the existing delivery systems in the arsenal to ensure prompt precision global strike capabilities.”
Jackie Cabasso — Western States Legal Foundation
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Western Elite War Crimes
'Oh!   You don't believe the 9-11 official version,' they say.
'You mean where they want you to accept the buildings were not blown up from below.
'Plane fuel!   Substance never burns higher then a gas stove!   That it caused the inner core steel to melt!
'Steel melting!
'Concrete vaporizing!
' 'No!   I don't believe that conspiracy theory.
'Cheney!   Bush!   Rudy Giuliani!   HA!  HA!
'Tower 7 that never had a plane hit — just came tumbling down!
'You believe that, eh!
'Ever think it had to be blown up because the plane scheduled to fly into it was off getting shot down.
'Thermite in Tower 7's walls, you see — incriminating evidence — impossible to get out without people watching!
Had to be blown up!
'Next you'll be saying Obama is not a Wall Street Illuminati banker stooge?
'Take your pick:   The partner in a comedy team who feeds lines to the other comedians.
'Him who allows himself to be used.
'Oh!   I can't really blame you,   Television it turns minds to pulp.
'Turn off the television.   It's the only way.'
'Turn off the television?'
'Get rid of it really.   I mean what else is there to do!'
'Get rid of the television?'
'Don't forget all radio garbage is propaganda, even the songs.
'Then those five minute propaganda hits they send you every hour!
'The ones they refer to as News
'Get rid of all the propaganda from your brain, the only way to do it.'
'Stop being hooked on those Hollywood movies — even those that make you think they are making you think'
'All paid performers to make your brain dead.
'You turn the brainwashing off, you'll begin to become yourself.
'It really is the only way!'
'Oh!'
Kewe — TheWE.cc
 
 
  Protests around world every 11th of month
Danish scientist Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 on nano-thermite in the WTC dust.

911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

2,606 people lost their lives in the World Trade Center buildings on September 11, 2001.

125 people lost their lives at the Pentagon on 9/11.

246 people lost their lives on the four planes on 9/11.

Image: Danish TV2
Danish scientist Niels Harrit on nano-thermite in the WTC dust.

Niels Harrit, you and eight other researchers conclude in this article that it was nano-thermite that caused these buildings to collapse.

We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center.

One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.

The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC).

The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

The carbon content of the red material indicates that an organic substance is present.

This would be expected for super-thermite formulations in order to produce high gas pressures upon ignition and thus make them explosive.

Photo: agenda911.dk
Danish scientist Niels Harrit on nano-thermite in the WTC dust
Transcript of interview with Niels Harrit on Danish TV2 News 6th April 2009.
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
Danish TV2   International researchers have found traces of explosives among the World Trade Center rubble.
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Explosives in World Trade Center - international researchers have found traces of explosives.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

The believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Nano-thermite contains more energy than dynamite and can be used as rocket fuel.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

The believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

So you found nano-thermite in the World Trade Center buildings, why do you think it caused the collapses?

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

The believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.

Image: Danish TV2
A new scientific article concludes that impacts from the two hijacked aircraft did not cause the collapses in 2001.
We turn our attention to 9/11 — the major attack in New York.
Apparently the two airplane-impacts did not cause the towers to collapse, according to a newly published scientific article.
Researchers found nano-thermite explosive in the rubble, that cannot have come from the planes.
They believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.
Niels Harrit, you and eight other researchers conclude in this article, that it was nano-thermite that caused these buildings to collapse. What is nano-thermite?
Niels Harrit   We found nano-thermite in the rubble.
We are not saying only nano-thermite was used.
Thermite itself dates back to 1893.
It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat.
The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 °C.
This can be used to do welding.   It can also be used to melt other iron.
Nanotechnology makes things smaller.   So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed.
When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly.
Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive.
It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel.
Danish TV2   I Googled nano-thermite, and not much has been written about it.   Is it a widely known scientific substance?   Or is it so new that other scientists are hardly aware of it?
Niels Harrit   It is a collective name for substances with high levels of energy.
If civilian researchers (like myself) are not familiar with it, it is probably because they do not do much work with explosives.
As for military scientists, you would have to ask them.
I do not know how familiar they are with nanotechnology.
Danish TV2   So you found this substance in the WTC, why do you think it caused the collapses?
Niels Harrit   Well, it's an explosive.   Why else would it be there?
Danish TV2   You believe the intense heat melted the building?s steel support structure, and caused the building to collapse like a house of cards?
Niels Harrit   I cannot say precisely, as this substance can serve both purposes.
It can explode and break things apart, and it can melt things.
Both effects were probably used, as I see it.
Molten metal pours out of the South Tower several minutes before the collapse.
This indicates the whole structure was being weakened in advance.
Then the regular explosives come into play.
The actual collapse sequence had to be perfectly timed, all the way down.
Danish TV2   What quantities are we talking about?
Niels Harrit   A lot.   There were only two planes, but three skyscrapers collapsed.
We know roughly how much dust was created.
The pictures show huge quantities, everything but the steel was pulverised.
And we know roughly how much unreacted thermite we have found.
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Nano Thermite can explode and break things apart and it can melt things.

Explosives in World Trade Center - international researchers have found traces of explosives.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Both effects were probably used by the use of Nano Thermite as I see it.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

The use of nano thermite indicates the whole structure was being weakened in advance.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

Image: Danish TV2
This is the “loaded gun”, material that did not ignite for some reason.
We are talking about tonnes.   Over 10 tonnes, possibly 100 tonnes.
Danish TV2   Ten tonnes, possibly 100 tonnes, in three buildings?   And these substances are not normally found in such buildings?
Niels Harrit   No.   These materials are extremely advanced.
Danish TV2   How do you place such material in a skyscraper, on all the floors?
Niels Harrit   How you would get it in?
Danish TV2   Yes.
Niels Harrit   If I had to transport it in those quantities I would use pallets.   Get a truck and move it in on pallets.
Danish TV2   Why hasn't this been discovered earlier?
Niels Harrit   By whom?
Danish TV2   The caretakers, for example.     If you are moving 10 to 100 tonnes of nano-thermite around, and placing it on all the floors.     I am just surprised no-one noticed.
Niels Harrit   As a journalist, you should address that question to the company responsible for security at the WTC.
Danish TV2   So you are in no doubt the material was present?
Niels Harrit   You cannot fudge this kind of science.
We have found it.   Unreacted thermite.
Danish TV2   What responses has your article received around the world?
Niels Harrit   It is completely new knowledge for me.
It was only published last Friday.   So it is too early to say.
But the article may not be as groundbreaking as you think.
Hundreds of thousands of people around the world, have long known that the three buildings were demolished.
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Once the nano thermite was used then the regular explosives come into play.

Explosives in World Trade Center - international researchers have found traces of explosives.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

The actual collapse sequence had to be perfectly times, all the way down.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

And we know roughly how much unreacted thermite we have found.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

No.  These nano thermite materials are extremely advanced.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

The believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

Nano thermite in the buildings - almost ten years have passed.

Nano-thermite contains more energy than dynamite and can be used as rocket fuel.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

The believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.

Image: Danish TV2
911 Controlled Demolition - Thermite - Nano Thermite - Iron Microspheres Confirm Unexplained Extreme Temperatures.

Niels Harrit interview on Danish TV2 television.

So you found nano-thermite in the World Trade Center buildings, why do you think it caused the collapses?

It was by chance that someone discovered nano thermite two years ago.

Researchers found nano-thermite explosives in the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center buildings that cannot have come from the planes.

The believe several tonnes of explosives were placed in the buildings in advance.

Image: Danish TV2
This has been crystal clear.
Our research is just the last nail in the coffin.
This is not the 'smoking gun', it is the 'loaded gun'.
Each day, thousands of people realise that the WTC was demolished.
That is something unstoppable.
Danish TV2   Why has no-one discovered earlier that there was nano-thermite in the buildings?   Almost ten years have passed.
Niels Harrit   You mean in the dust?
Danish TV2   Yes.
Niels Harrit   It was by chance that someone looked at the dust with a microscope.
They are tiny red chips.
The biggest are 1 mm in size, and can be seen with the naked eye.
But you need a microscope to see the vast majority.
It was by chance that someone discovered them two years ago.
Danish TV2   It has taken 18 months to prepare the scientific article you refer to.
Niels Harrit   It is a very comprehensive article based on thorough research.
Danish TV2   You have been working on this for several years, because it didn't make sense to you.
Niels Harrit   Yes, over two years actually.
It all started when I saw the collapse of Building 7, the third skyscraper.
It collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.
And there were only two airplanes.
When you see a 47-storey building, 186m tall, collapse in 6.5 seconds, and you are a scientist, you think “what?”.
I had to watch it again… and again.
I hit the button 10 times, and my jaw dropped lower and lower.
Firstly, I had never heard of that building before.
And there was no visible reason why it should collapse in that way, straight down, in 6.5 seconds.
I have had no rest since that day.
Danish TV2   Ever since 9/11 there has been speculation, and conspiracy theories.   What do you say to viewers who hear about your research and say, “we?ve heard it all before, there are lots of conspiracy theories”.   What would you say to convince them that this is different?
Niels Harrit   I think there is only one conspiracy theory worth mentioning, the one involving 19 hijackers.
I think viewers should ask themselves what evidence they have seen to support the official conspiracy theory.
If anyone has seen evidence, I would like to hear about it
No-one has been formally charged.   No-one is 'wanted'.
Our work should lead to demands for a proper criminal investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attack.
Because it never happened.   We are still waiting for it.
We hope our results will be used as technical evidence when that day comes.
Danish TV2   Niels Harrit, fascinating, thanks for coming in.
Niels Harrit   My pleasure
ITALIAN SAYS 9-11 SOLVED
It’s common knowledge, he reveals
CIA — Mossad behind terror attacks
By the Staff of American Free Press
Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga, who revealed the existence of Operation Gladio, has told Italy’s oldest and most widely read newspaper that the 9-11 terrorist attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad, and that this was common knowledge among global intelligence agencies.
In what translates awkwardly into English, Cossiga told the newspaper Corriere della Sera:
“All the [intelligence services] of America and Europe… know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the Mossad, with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part … in Iraq [and] Afghanistan.”
Cossiga was elected president of the Italian Senate in July 1983 before winning a landslide election to become president of the country in 1985, and he remained until 1992.
Cossiga’s tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political establishment, and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio.
This was a rogue intelligence network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in the 1960s, 1970s and ’80s.
Gladio’s specialty was to carry out what they termed 'false flag' operations — terror attacks that were blamed on their domestic and geopolitical opposition.
In March 2001, Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony:
“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game.
The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”
Cossiga first expressed his doubts about 9-11 in 2001, and is quoted by 9-11 researcher Webster Tarpley saying:
“The mastermind of the attack must have been a sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only to recruit fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel.
I add one thing: it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and flight security personnel.”
Coming from a widely respected former head of state, Cossiga’s assertion that the 9-11 attacks were an inside job and that this is common knowledge among global intelligence agencies is illuminating.
It is one more eye-opening confirmation that has not been mentioned by America’s propaganda machine in print or on TV.
Nevertheless, because of his experience and status in the world, Cossiga cannot be discounted as a crackpot.
Free to redistribute as long as credit given to American Free Press
We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center.

One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.

The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC).

The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

The carbon content of the red material indicates that an organic substance is present.

This would be expected for super-thermite formulations in order to produce high gas pressures upon ignition and thus make them explosive.

Photo: Bentham-Open.org
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
Photo: Bentham-Open.org
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center.
One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC).
The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.
The carbon content of the red material indicates that an organic substance is present.
This would be expected for super-thermite formulations in order to produce high gas pressures upon ignition and thus make them explosive.
 
Your life, your children's lives —
Will you live or die?
Decided by small group of elite.
Pure evil
It doesn't get any clearer than this
 
Published on Friday, March 2, 2007 by the Los Angeles Times
US to Develop New Hydrogen Bomb
by Ralph Vartabedian
The Energy Department will announce today a contract to develop the nation's first new hydrogen bomb in two decades, involving a collaboration between three national weapons laboratories, The Times has learned.
The new bomb will include design features from all three labs, though Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the Bay Area appears to have taken the lead position in the project. The Los Alamos and Sandia labs in New Mexico will also be part of the project.
Why are the West's elites trying to start a nuclear war?
Because you pay for it
BBC — Thursday, 6 September 2007
UK jets 'chase Russian bombers'
UK MoD image of Tupolev-95 Bear bomber

An MoD photo shows RAF Typhoon shadowing a Russian Bear-H
Norway says Russia has increased military flights in the Arctic
The UK's Royal Air Force has launched fighter jets to intercept eight Russian military planes flying in airspace patrolled by Nato, UK officials say.
Four RAF F3 Tornado aircraft were scrambled in response to the Russian action, the UK's defence ministry said.
The Russian planes - said to be long-range bombers - had earlier been followed by Norwegian F16 jets.
Russia recently revived a Cold War-era practice of flying bombers on long-range patrols.
A Norwegian officer, Lt Col John Inge Oegland, told the BBC the Russian Tupolev Tu-95 Bear bombers flew in international airspace from the Barents Sea to the Atlantic, before turning back.
Two Norwegian F-16s shadowed them on Thursday morning and another two went up later, he said.
There have been several similar incidents in recent months, Lt-Col Oegland added.
"Norway is following the increased Russian activity in the far north with interest," he told the BBC News website.
He said the Russian flights were not causing alarm in Norway.   "Our systems are adequate," he said, when asked whether Norway was bolstering its security in the area.
Pilots for 911 truth — click here
9/11
By all accounts, the unprecedented events of September 11th, 2001 changed the way our country functions, and in turn, the world.
It is therefore critical that conscientious Americans, as well as people around the globe, understand these events in detail.
Unfortunately the official reports, including The 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST WTC Report, written by those working under the direction of the Bush Administration, have been proven to be elaborate cover-ups.
Film: 9/11 Revisited
September 11th Revisited is perhaps the most riveting film ever made about the destruction of the World Trade Center.
This is a powerful documentary which features eyewitness accounts and archived news footage that was shot on September 11, 2001 but never replayed on television.
Featuring interviews with eyewitnesses & firefighters, along with expert analysis by Professor Steven E. Jones, Professor David Ray Griffin, MIT Engineer Jeffrey King, and Professor James H. Fetzer.
This film provides stunning evidence that explosives were used in the complete demolition of the WTC Twin Towers and WTC Building 7.
For Film: 9/11 Revisited
— Click Here
Film: 9/11 Press for Truth
An excellent documentary about the families of the victims of 9/11 and their fight to uncover and expose the truth about what happened that day.
For Film: 9/11 Press for Truth
— Click Here
Film: 9/11 Mysteries
90 minutes of pure demolition evidence and analysis, laced with staggering witness testimonials.
Moving from “the myth” through “the analysis” and into “the players,” careful deconstruction of the official story set right alongside clean, clear science.
The 9/11 picture is not one of politics or nationalism or loyalty, but one of strict and simple physics.   How do you get a 10-second 110-story pancake collapse?
Every missile has a home.

Photo: Alaska Image Library
Every missile has a home
(No Mortgages to Worry About)
Image: Natasha Mayers
Published on Monday, July 4, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
by Sheldon Drobny
Justice O'Connor's decision in Bush v. Gore led to the current Bush administration's execution of war crimes and atrocities in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places in the Middle East that are as egregious as those committed by the Third Reich and other evil governments in human history.
US destroyed Fallujah as it tries to destroy the rest of Iraq
The lesson is clear.
Those people who may be honorable and distinguished in their chosen profession should always make decisions based upon good rather than evil no matter where their nominal allegiances may rest.
Justice O'Connor was quoted to have said something to the affect that she abhorred the thought of Bush losing the 2000 election to Gore.
She was known to have wanted to retire after the 2000 election for same reason she is now retiring.
She wanted to spend more time with her sick husband.
Unfortunately, she tarnished her distinguished career with the deciding vote in Bush v. Gore by going along with the partisan majority of the Court to interfere with a democratic election that she and the majority feared would be lost in an honest recount.
She dishonored herself and the Supreme Court by succumbing to party allegiances and not The Constitution to which she swore to uphold.
And the constitutional argument she and the majority used to justify their decision was the Equal Protection Clause.
The Equal Protection Clause was the ultimate basis for the decision, but the majority essentially admitted (what was obvious in any event) that it was not basing its conclusion on any general view of what equal protection requires.
The decision in Bush v Gore was not dictated by the law in any sense—either the law found through research, or the law as reflected in the kind of intuitive sense that comes from immersion in the legal culture.
The Equal Protection clause is generally used in matters concerning civil rights.
The majority ignored their basic conservative views supporting federalism and states' rights in order to justify their decision.
History will haunt these justices down for their utter lack of justice and the hypocrisy associated with this decision.
Sheldon Drobny is Co-founder of Air America Radio.
Unspeakable grief and horror
                        ...and the circus of deception continues...
He says, "You are quite mad, Kewe"
And of course I am.
Why, I don't believe any of it — not the bloody body, not the bloody mind, not even the bloody Universe, or is it bloody multiverse.
"It's all illusion," I say.   "Don't you know, my lad, my lassie.   The game!   The game, me girl, me boy!   Takes on interest, don't you know.   T'is me sport, till doest find a better!"
Pssssst — but all this stuff is happening down here
Let's change it!
Mother her two babies killed by US
More than Fifteen million
US dollars given by US taxpayers to Israel each day for their military use
4 billion US dollars per year
Nanci Pelosi — U.S. House Democratic leader — Congresswoman California, 8th District
Speaking at the AIPAC agenda   May 26, 2005
There are those who contend that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is all about Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.   This is absolute nonsense.
In truth, the history of the conflict is not over occupation, and never has been:  it is over the fundamental right of Israel to exist.
The greatest threat to Israel's right to exist, with the prospect of devastating violence, now comes from Iran.
For too long, leaders of both political parties in the United States have not done nearly enough to confront the Russians and the Chinese, who have supplied Iran as it has plowed ahead with its nuclear and missile technology....
In the words of Isaiah, we will make ourselves to Israel 'as hiding places from the winds and shelters from the tempests; as rivers of water in dry places; as shadows of a great rock in a weary land.'
Pelosi
      
      Chechnya, North Ossetia, Ingushetia, Palestine, Iraq — War and Death — September 2004 photos      
       Dimona Reactor threat      

       Iran tests missile — Israel postures      
Najaf, Basra, Sadr City — War and Death in Iraq — August 2004 photos.
Afghanistan — Terror?

Photos over past three months.
World War Two soldiers did not kill Kill ratio Korea, Vietnam. Iraq.
More atrocities — Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying
The House of Saud and Bush
             December 2004 photos
All with U.S. Money:

More on the building of the wall.       US and Israel's use of chemical agents
             November 2004 photos
al-Sadr City
All with U.S. Money:

Israel agents stole identity of New Zealand cerebral palsy victim.

(IsraelNN.com July 15, 2004) The Foreign Ministry will take steps towards restoring relations with New Zealand. New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark today announced she was implementing diplomatic sanctions after two Israelis were sentenced on charges of attempting to obtain illegal passports. Despite Israeli refusal to respond to the accusations, the two are labeled in the New Zealand media as Mossad agents acting on behalf of the Israeli intelligence community.

Foreign Ministry officials stated they will do everything possible to renew diplomatic ties, expressing sorrow over the "unfortunate incident".
Darfur pictures and arial views of destruction — 2003 — 2005
             October 2004 photos
Suicide now top killer of Israeli soldiers
Atrocities files — graphic images
'Suicide bombings,' the angel said, 'and beheadings.'

'And the others that have all the power — they fly missiles in the sky.

They don't even look at the people they kill.'
       The real Ronald Reagan       
       — Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, South Africa        
             Photos September 2004
Follow the torture trail...
             Photos August 2004
Should the dam break, as attempts are being made in Saudi Arabia
             Photos July 2004
US Debt
             Photos June 2004
Lest we forget — Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying
        When you talk with God        
         were you also spending your time, money and energy, killing people?         
       Are they now alive or dead?       
American military: Abu Gharib (Ghraib) prison photos, humiliation and torture
— London Daily Mirror article: non-sexually explicit pictures
             Photos April 2004
The celebration of Jerusalem day, the US missiles that rained onto children in Gaza,
and, a gathering of top articles over the past nine months
             Photos March 2004
The Iraq War — complete listing of articles, includes images
             Photos February 2004
US missiles — US money — and Palestine
             Photos January 2004
Ethnic cleansing in the Beduin desert
             Photos December 2003
Shirin Ebadi Nobel Peace Prize winner 2003
             Photos November 2003
Atrocities — graphic images...
             Photos October 2003
Aljazeerah.info
             Photos September 2003
 The WE News Archiveskewe archives      kewe archiveskewe archive calendarTheWE.cc