6/21/7 Palestinian "Final Solution" Attempts; U.S: "I Like This Violence"; More "Sectarian Strife" Mosque Bombings; The Alb

Dear readers, thanks for your concern and patience. Incoming & outgoing mail is back to normal finally thanks to MAC & my local indie ISP.

Isma'il Haniyah: 'We are the legitimate government'
Interview with Palestinian [National] Authority Prime Minister Isma'il Haniyah by Patrick de Saint-Paul in Gaza.

Bush, Olmert praise Abbas as 'president of all the Palestinians'
U.S. President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert both threw their support behind Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday, with Bush praising Abbas as "a voice for moderation" and calling him the true "president of all the Palestinians."

from reactionary World Net Daily report:
Hamas lists seized U.S. weapons
Claims over $400 million in munitions, equipment taken from compounds
By Aaron Klein
© 2007

Hamas and Popular Resistance Committees leaders told WND upon taking over Gaza City's Fatah compounds, particularly the Preventative Security Services building and intelligence compound, they seized the purported CIA files and that prior to Hamas' advances, Fatah officials attempted to destroy the CIA files but only succeeded in eliminating some.

U.S. security coordinators the past few years maintained a presence at Fatah's Gaza headquarters.

Hamas' Al Aqsa Television last week broadcast footage of Hamas gunmen brandishing American assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, rocket launchers and ammunition the U.S. reportedly provided to Fatah over the past few months.
Members of Hamas' so-called "military wing" today sent WND a preliminary list of U.S. weaponry and equipment they claimed they obtained during last week's coup. The Hamas members clarified it was possible a small quantity of munitions on the list were provided to Fatah by other countries besides the U.S., but they claimed the vast majority of weapons and equipment they detailed were transferred by Washington.

The list of claimed seized U.S. material included:
"Dozens" of mounted machine guns
Approximately 7,400 American M-16 assault rifles
About 800,000 rounds of bullets.
Eighteen armored personnel carriers
Seven armored military jeeps
"Tens" of armored civilian cars, including pickup trucks and magnums.
Eight massive trucks equipped with water cannons for dispersing protests
Fourteen military-sized bulldozers
Hamas sources said the terror group was still sifting through the weapons and equipment it obtained. They said the list they provided didn't include what they said were large quantities of U.S.-provided rocket propelled grenades, grenade launchers, explosives, and military equipment, such as boots and tents.
Abu Abdullah, a senior member of Hamas' so-called military wing, told WND Hamas estimates they obtained at least $400 million worth of American weapons and equipment. That number couldn't immediately be verified. The average cost of an M-16 in Gaza yesterday was $16,911, and the average cost of a bullet there was $12.07, meaning the cost in Gaza of U.S. assault rifles and bullets Hamas claims to have obtained amount to over $137 million. Abu Abdullah said Hamas officials and "military" leaders were surprised Fatah didn't evacuate some of the heavy machinery it left behind, including the bulldozers and armored personnel carriers. "I am surprised Fatah weren't directed by their Zionist and American handlers to evacuate the heavy equipment. It could have been brought out through the Egyptian border," Abu Abdullah said.

U.S. pledges more aid to Abbas
The Hamas list of purportedly seized American weapons comes as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced this week the U.S. will resume "full assistance to the Palestinian government," lifting an economic and political embargo against the Palestinian government enacted after Hamas came to power in March 2006.
Rice said she will ask Congress to rework a previous $86 million aid package to Abbas that was lowered following concerns by some lawmakers some of the money would end up financing terrorism. Congress in April only approved about $59 million of the aid package and stipulated the money cannot be used to purchase weapons. Rice intends to request Congress now grant the full $86 million.
Rice also said the U.S. would contribute an additional $40 million to the United Nations to help Palestinians, particularly in the Gaza Strip, which is now controlled by Hamas.
According to Palestinian and Israeli diplomatic sources, the bulk of the $86 million is slated to be used to fund Force 17, which serve as de facto police units in the West Bank and previously patrolled the Hamas-seized Gaza Strip. Many members of Force 17 are also openly members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, which took responsibility together with Islamic Jihad for every suicide bombing in Israel the last two years

"Like the American weapons in Gaza we told you will come to Hamas, also the weapons and aid the Americans are giving to Abu Mazen (Abbas) as part of their conspiracy against us in the West Bank will finds its way to the Palestinian resistance and Hamas," said Abu Abdullah.
Hamas' Abu Abdullah said, "Now our job is to study these files, which are already showing that they are crucial for our fight against the Zionists and anyone who collaborates with them, including the Americans."...
Abdullah said the CIA documents they browsed so far contain "information about the collaboration between Fatah and the Israeli and American security organizations; CIA methods on how to prevent attacks, chase and follow after cells of Hamas and the Committees; plans about Fatah assassinations of members of Hamas and other organizations; and American studies on the security situation in Gaza."
Abdullah claimed the documents also detailed CIA networks in other Arab countries and "how to help beat Islamic allies of Hamas in other Arab countries, including Egypt and Jordan."
"We will use these documents and make portions public to prove the collaboration between America and traitor Arab countries," Abdullah said.

...Fath under Arafat was always more willing to fight other Palestinians than to fight Israel. Fath under Arafat fought other Palestinian organizations prior to Black September in Jordan, and then did the same in Lebanon. But what is new today is that the entire Palestinian leadership of the Fath movement was eliminated (assassinated by Israel and its allies), and a new leadership was installed by the US and Israel (with the support of client Arab regimes). We have never had in the history of Palestinian struggle a more open collaborationist regime in Palestine.... And it is openly aligned with Israel and the US: this is unprecedented. I mean, even under the Village Leagues and the notorious Muhammad `Ali Al-Ja`bari: there were those silly denials of collaboration, and the Palestinians made sure that those attempts don't go very far. Not anymore. And you see press reports to Salam Fayyad as "independent". Independent? Who brought this World Bank official to Palestine? Who forced him on Yasir Arafat? The Palestinian people? His own popularity or popular base? He is as much an independent as much as Mr. Bush is a "uniter not a divider." And the characters in this saga are just almost fictional. Yesterday, the official statement or Ottoman Faraman (it was really drafted and read as a faraman) by Mahmoud Abbas was read by none other than Tayyib `Abdur-Rahim. Are you kidding me? He was dressed in a fancy suit, but this is `Abdur-Rahim. We knew him from his days in Lebanon. He was known as Abu At-Tayyib: he was in charge of Force 17. Force 17 was responsible under Arafat of dirty tricks and dirty fighting and dirty murders. That was its mission. And to have this same man yesterday speak on "constitutional matters" was laughable. But less laughable than Condoleezza Rice offering opinions on the proper constitutional procedures in Palestine. Don't get me wrong: I have never been a fan of Hamas: not of its ideology and not of its practices...
The Saudi media--without a sense of irony--are now resorting to equating Hamas with Taliban and Al-Qa`idah: as if what works in New York City can really work in the Arab world. They think that they can really convince Arab public opinion that they (House of Saud and its allies) represent a secular alternative? And please, don't give me that line that Fath is "a secular organization." We know Fath well, and know that Arafat was guilty of arming and financing fanatical religious groups since his days in Lebanon: just like what Arab regimes and Israel (and US) have done. Khalid Mish`al today responded to that allegation in his press conference by denying that Hamas plans to impose a religious order....both Hamas and Hizbullah tried to do that in years past before they realized that they can't continue to grow if they did not change. Neither the Lebanese nor the Palestinians would put up with a religious order. Both are sinful people, thankfully.

U.S. Mideast Envoy On Palestinian Civil War: "I Like This Violence"'s David Welch, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and US Envoy to the Middle East, speaking in private several weeks before Rice. This appears on p.21 of the leaked report (pdf) by Alvaro de Soto, former UN coordinator for the Middle East:
"...the US clearly pushed for a confrontation between Fateh and Hamas -- so much so that, a week before Mecca, the US envoy declared twice in an envoys meeting in Washington how much "I like this violence"... because "it means that other Palestinians are resisting Hamas".

Who is Mohammad Dahlan?
Arjan El Fassed, The Electronic Intifada
Some have called Mohammad Dahlan the Palestinian Ahmad Chalabi, because he reportedly negotiated with the US and Israel about taking control of Gaza after the August 2005 disengagement plan. In April 2002 testifying before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer said he had offered control of the Gaza Strip to Dahlan. In exchange, Dahlan, who had control of the most significant military force on the Gaza Strip, would be obligated to ensure complete quiet along the border. He is believed to have drawn up an early agreement at a January 1994 meeting in Rome with senior Israeli military and Shin Bet officials to contain Hamas, and was actively involved in subsequent negotiations with the Israelis...

JERUSALEM, June 17 (Reuters) - The U.S. government began to lay the ground for President Mahmoud Abbas to dismiss the Hamas-led Palestinian government at least a year before the Islamist group's violent takeover of the Gaza Strip last week.
Western, Israeli and Palestinian official sources said over the weekend that, far from being an ad hoc response to Hamas's offensive, Abbas's declaration of a state of emergency and his replacement of a Hamas prime minister with Western favourite Salam Fayyad marked the culmination of months of backroom deliberations, planning and U.S. prodding.... Western officials said Abbas was able to move swiftly this week to form a new government because much of the advance work had already been done. In one closed-door briefing with U.S. lawmakers earlier this year, a senior U.S. official said Abbas could rule by decree for 6-12 months before elections are held. On Sunday, faced with a constitutional article demanding any new government be approved by parliament, where Hamas has a majority, Abbas simply issued a decree scrapping that provision.
Despite Fatah's Gaza setback, some U.S. and Israeli officials see opportunities in Hamas's victory. Abbas's unity government blurred the line between Hamas and Fatah. Now, one European diplomat said, things may be more "black and white".
"It does clarify things" and may help Israel and the United States create a broader front against Hamas and its major backer, Iran, said a former Bush administration official. Hamas, they note, has been left isolated in a sealed-off, densely populated scrap of coast. Renewing the flow of funds to Abbas in the much bigger West Bank, where stability is more critical to Israel, could help drive a wedge between the Hamas leadership and Gaza's increasingly impoverished population. Some Western and Palestinian officials argue Washington fanned the flames as soon as Hamas and Fatah formed a short-lived "unity" government in March. U.S. officials pushed Abbas into giving Hamas's nemesis, Mohammad Dahlan, control over security and then pushed him to deploy Fatah forces in Gaza.

Not for sale:
Palestinians won’t accept a Vichy government
By Khalid Amayreh
Occupied Jerusalem, 17 June 2007 -- -The vast bulk of Palestinians, at home and in the Diaspora, will not accept a quisling government in Ramallah that might be at Israel’s beck and call. This is precisely what the Bush administration and Israel expect the new government, headed by Salam Fayyad, to be.
The Palestinian masses know very well what the US symbolize for them, their children and their enduring cause. It symbolizes oppression in its ugliest forms. It symbolizes mass murder, land theft, dispossession, deprivation and ultimate mendacity and hypocrisy. America is the enabler, sustainer and justifier of 40 years of Israeli Nazism whose ultimate goal is the obliteration of Palestinians as a nation, by arrogating their homeland for them and making their future as precarious as possible. In short, America to the Palestinians is very much like what Nazi Germany was to the Jews. Hence, any government agreeing to throw itself into the American lap will lose its legitimacy if not its very existence

PA, R.I.P.
Tony Sayegh, Palestinian Pundit
Hamas resisted the dissolution of the PA and kept pursuing the mirage of "national unity" with the people it knew of being collaborators with Israel and stooges who get their instructions from the CIA. Now Hamas has the records of that collaboration in the documents seized in Gaza from the headquarters of the PA intelligence services. Two key elements, which I repeatedly urged, are the dissolution of the PA and the pursuit of resistance in an underground, clandestine manner. Critics used to argue that these suggestions were impractical, that if Hamas was not part of the PA and part of the political process, then the other side would sellout the cause and conclude an agreement with Israel at the expense of the national constants. Well, here we are. The other side has finally removed the mask and has declared its own, collaborationist Vichy "government." The question was and still is what to do with this quisling entity? My answer has always been to deal with it and with its instruments (security, etc) in the same way people under occupation have always dealt with quislings. Iraq under occupation illustrates the point. The other point, which is now forced on Hamas, is to go underground. This is becoming evident in the West Bank, where Hamas and anything even remotely related to it, such as schools, charities or even journalists and university professors are being hunted down. For all practical purposes Hamas and anyone even suspected of having sympathy (let alone support) for it are being persecuted. It is a witch hunt, pure and simple. In the West Bank, Hamas will have to fight this proxy of the occupation and fight for its very existence as a movement... in an intelligent, organized and clandestine way. In this regard it could potentially become more effective in the West Bank against the occupation and its surrogates. Again Iraq is the model. Gaza is different and unpredictable. In the short term Hamas, being the only power, will by definition be above ground to ensure order and meet the needs of the population. But this situation will not last very long. The IOF is likely to invade in a big way and will try to reinstall the Palestinian quislings....

How Israelis Torture Captives
The twilight zone / 'Now you are paralyzed, as we promised'
Gideon Levy, Haaretz
June 18, 2007
We have to make you do a little sports," the Shin Bet interrogator said, launching four successive days of questioning accompanied by brutal physical torture. The result: Luwaii Ashqar can no longer stand on his feet. He sits in his wheelchair...
Was there a judgment by the High Court of Justice? There was. It banned precisely the types of torture he underwent: the "banana posture," the "shabah" (body stretching with hands tied to a chair), "invisible" blows and the "frog posture" (being forced to stand for hours on the toes in a crouching position) - all the way to a vicious kick to his chest that bent his body backward while he was tied to a chair with his arms and legs, and which was the probable cause of the partial paralysis of his legs.
Throwing up with the vomit entering his nostrils, losing consciousness and being given only saltwater to drink, relieving himself in his pants, not sleeping or resting - all of that for four consecutive days and nights.
Ashqar is not alone. The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel has just issued a new report containing the testimonies of nine torture victims (English version: ). As the authors of the shocking report say, the testimonies "paint a dismal picture in which can be discerned various categories of secret-keeping collaborators, who, in keeping silent, protect the [Shin Bet] system of torture." ...

This is the response received by Haaretz from the Shin Bet:
Luwaii Ashqar was arrested in April 2005, after serious suspicions were raised against him concerning his involvement in terrorism, including possession of weapons and assistance to wanted individuals - terror activists from Islamic Jihad...The suspect was tried and convicted in a plea bargain, and sentenced to 14 months in prison and another 14 months in prison stemming from a pending conditional sentence, so that all told he was sentenced to 26 months in prison. In addition, he received a 28-month suspended sentence.

His interrogation was carried out according to the rules and directives, with constant review of the interrogation process.
During the interrogation, the above-named put forward medical complaints, which were examined and treated by the appropriate medical authorities, including an examination he underwent in hospital.
It should be noted that during the interrogation he did not cite medical complaints of the same seriousness as those mentioned in the query.
Complaints relating to his interrogation, from, among other sources, the Committee Against Torture and the Red Cross, were referred to the State Prosecutor's Office for examination, which ordered an examination by the Ombudsman of Interogees' Complaints.
The examination of the complaints did not turn up any excesses in the interrogation, and in the wake of this, the official in charge of the OIC in the State Prosecutor's Office decided to close the examination file.

Killing the Palestinians
Sonja Karkar, Global Research

A drive through the West Bank quickly dispels any notions one might have of Israel’s beneficent intentions. There are none. The first ugly blight on the horizon are gleaming white structures clumped together on hilltops. They jut out treeless, naked and unashamed as below them the green valleys continue to gently undulate in their menacing shadows. A shimmering sliver cuts through the land or over it, every now and then brought to life by cars that speed along these highways towards Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or Haifa: and below them, life barely moves at all. A looming watchtower confirms the feeling of something very wrong. Grey and threatening with cavernous windows, behind which shadows watch and aim at things that move, this is one of hundreds of such towers overseeing the mass of humanity waiting endlessly at yet another checkpoint that makes every journey torture for every Palestinian.
Soldiers, machine guns, tanks make up the rest of the set pieces as does the razor wire which coils around the kilometres of fencing before it comes up against the Wall – mammoth in size and structure and even more monstrous in the reason for its existence.

Closing in
The Wall is Israel’s provocative solution to the Palestinian problem in the West Bank. It is a wall ostensibly built for Israel’s security, yet its path does not follow the borders between Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Instead, at many points it goes deep into the heart of Palestinian territory. The Wall is being built, despite an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice that condemned it. It is being built despite a similar wall coming down almost two decades ago between East and West Berlin. Then, the whole world breathed a sigh of relief that such barbarity had finally come to an end – in the West at least. Israel’s Prison Wall - much higher and longer and begun only 4 years ago – hardly raises a whimper of protest where it counts, despite it being built contrary to the Court’s ruling. It is a wall, the like of which most people cannot imagine – 8 metres high in places and up to 100 metres wide in others and running 720 kilometres the length and breadth of the West Bank – a wall in some places and electrified razor fencing with ditches and a no-man’s land in others. Already 180 kilometres of wall run right through thousands upon thousands of acres of private land – Palestinian land. Half of that wall encircles East Jerusalem, isolating the city from the rest of the occupied West Bank and separating it from its Palestinian neighbourhoods which are dependent on Jerusalem for their survival. In the process, the Wall has skirted around three of the largest illegal Jewish settlement blocs –aggressively staking out more territory – and connected them to Israel, wiping out all the areas needed for Palestinian natural growth and economic development.
The Wall is the most dangerous phase of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land because it allows for the continual expansion of illegal Israeli settlements deep inside the West Bank. The end result for the Palestinians will be three miserable truncated enclaves without access to valuable water resources or the fertile agricultural land on which they have depended for centuries. Certainly, there will be no contiguity between them or the walled-in Gaza Strip on the coast. It also means that Palestinian movement will have to be severely curtailed within the West Bank in order to protect these implanted illegal settlements. And these illegal activities are still going on while everyone continues to talk in absolute terms about a two-state solution and totally ignoring the realities on the ground. The wall has relegated Palestinian self-determination in their own sovereign state to the bulldozed, treeless dust heap of a prison that Israel has deliberately and systematically succeeded in diminishing. This is the land that Israel wants and is taking, while herding Palestinians into ever smaller disconnected Bantustans, in order to establish an exclusively Jewish state.

How it happened
The actual owners of all of historic Palestine - the Palestinians - have watched their land being dispensed, taken, fragmented, violated and bartered over since 1947 with no regard for their ownership by stint of their birth, residence, contributions, achievements, and continuous ancestry going back to time immemorial. Not only were they - the majority population - driven from it, made refugees and refused their right to return home, those who remained in what was left, have now found themselves living under a brutal regime of occupation...
Emerging out of British and European colonialism and a desire to protect Western interests, the United Nations had arbitrarily given 55 per cent to European Jewish immigrants and left the Palestinians with 45 per cent of their own country. The Palestinians did not accept this, but soon news of massacres and the razing of villages began filtering through which terrified Palestinians into fleeing for their lives. A war ensued involving the Arab states and the newly-created Israel, but it was a war for which the Palestinians were not prepared. The exodus of Palestinian families gathered momentum and became a tragic turning point in their history known as al-Nakba or "the Catastrophe". The fleeing families sought refuge in neighbouring Arab countries until they could return home. This never happened: most of them are still languishing in pitiful circumstances in refugee camps waiting for the day they can return and/or receive compensation for the terrible damage done. For those who stayed, the only concession the world made was to allow them a reduced 22 per cent of their own land. But, the Palestinians never really had it – the West Bank and East Jerusalem was controlled by Jordan, and the Gaza Strip, by Egypt. Israel waited in the wings.
In 1967, Israel wrested control of all the remaining lands of historic Palestine when it won the 6-day war – an occupation that has continued for 40 long and bitter years and now affects some 4 million Palestinians. Israel never adhered to the requirements of international law and conventions that required it to withdraw to the 1949 armistice "Green" line once hostilities had ceased...
Like any people, the Palestinians want to be free and independent and to live in peace: they have pursued all avenues towards that end. None of them have been successful, despite umpteen United Nations resolutions supporting their inalienable right to self-determination. America holds veto power in the Security Council and uses it always in favour of Israel. Also, the effects of the Israel Lobby’s powerful influence have been felt not only in government circles, but also the media, business, NGOs, academia and even in trade unions and religious organizations at the highest levels. Therefore, as long as the world’s only superpower - the United States of America - supports Israel, the international community is powerless to implement the UN resolutions. Only at the grassroots level is there a chance for people to come together and force the issue by demanding truth and justice for the Palestinians. But, time is running out.

Today, the Palestinians are facing imminent ruin as Israel embarks on yet another reprehensible program that deliberately regards the Palestinians as "non-existent"... the 1.4 million Palestinians citizens of Israel... are the subject of an elaborate system of laws and administrative regulations that have been designed to discriminate against non-Jews – essentially the Palestinians – in order to create and preserve an exclusively Jewish state. Now, all the Palestinians are being discriminated against in favour of Jews from anywhere in the world who want to make Israel their home, including those who want to settle in the illegal settlements being built in the areas that have long been designated for a future Palestinian state.M Those deviant laws and regulations have allowed Israel to expropriate Palestinian land, confiscate their property and demolish some 18,000 homes since 1967 to make way for the illegal settlements, Israeli-only roads, prohibited military areas and the Wall. The result has been the breaking up of lush and productive farming communities and a centuries-old Palestinian society that prospered in ancient cities like Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nablus, Hebron, Jenin and Ramallah. Long used to visiting and trading between these towns, the Palestinians have been forcibly stopped from moving freely by a grid of Israeli military checkpoints that make it difficult and sometimes impossible to get to work, school, shops, hospitals, or just visiting friends and family. At these checkpoints, Palestinians are humiliatingly subjected to endless waiting, never knowing if they will be refused permission to continue their journey or be detained or even die. Such is daily life for every Palestinian in the Occupied Territories ....

The final solution – ethnic cleansing
The diabolical endgame is closing in. Left on the board are apartheid, enslavement, transfer, ethnic cleansing and genocide. Unpalatable as these terms are, more and more people are beginning to see just where Israel’s policies and practices are heading.
The first person to coin the term "genocide" was a Polish-Jewish legal scholar Raphael Lemkin whose idea was widely accepted by the international community and it became one of the legal bases of the Nuremburg Trials. It is interesting to see the parallel between his definition and what is happening to the Palestinians today:
"Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups." Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (Wash DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1944), p79.

For those people who think that what is happening to the Palestinians is not apartheid or ethnic cleansing or genocide, ask the Palestinian parents who have just lost their children, the Palestinian families who are watching bulldozers rip into their homes, the Palestinian children who are too afraid to go to school, the elderly and the handicapped who are too afraid to stay at home, the Palestinian mothers who have lost their babies, the Palestinian children who wet their beds, the half-alive Palestinians without legs and arms and only half their face.

Ask the Palestinians who have collapsed from heart attacks and strokes because ambulances are not allowed through. Ask Palestinians who must scramble over torn up bitumen and take the long way round while Israelis zoom along modern highways built only for their use. Ask the Palestinians who are spat on and ridiculed, stripped, taunted and humiliated in front of the waiting crowds by the Israeli soldiers for whom it has become a sport.

Ask the Palestinians who come home weary from all that waiting and all that shame to find their family homes reduced to rubble, their children sobbing, their possessions scattered and buried. Ask the Palestinians who come back to the ruins of their offices and their schools only to find walls and files and books and pictures smeared with soldiers’ excrement and fouled with their urine. Ask the thousands of Palestinians who have been woken at gunpoint in the early hours of the morning and herded outside. And then ask the families how they feel when their fathers, brothers, grandfathers, and sons are bound and blindfolded, beaten up and taken away and then killed or jailed or simply disappear without a trace.

Ask the Palestinians how they feel when they hear the rumble of 200 Israeli tanks mass along a 9 kilometre stretch outside their cities. Ask the Palestinians if they shudder when they hear the scream of F-16 bombers slice the skies, or hear the whirr of Apache helicopters hovering overhead. Ask the Palestinians how it feels to have a gun pointing at you when you have been waiting at the checkpoints in the hot sun or the bitter wind and icy rain for hours.

Ask the Palestinians what it is like to be stateless, to have no papers, no passport, no legitimacy. Ask the Palestinians who apply for a laissez passez allowing them to travel overseas, what it is like to be refused re-entry by Israel if they are late for any reason. Ask what it is like to then have to move from country to country because no one will accept you as a citizen. Ask the Palestinian refugees who are languishing in camps without any future or hope for their children because Israel refuses to allow them to return home. Ask Palestinians who have tried to seek asylum and have been told that they must be held in detention for the rest of their lives because Israel will not accept them and neither will any other country. Ask the Palestinians who "write born in Palestine" on forms when it really was Palestine and have it crossed out because no such place is recognised even though legally and actually it is right.

Ask the Palestinian workers who come home empty-handed because a wall rises between them and their jobs, the Palestinian farmers whose crops are rotting on trees they cannot get to and whose farming land has been turned into roads and Israeli settlements. Ask the men who wait at gates in the wall to open, sometimes all day, to tend to their land so that Israel cannot use the Absentee Laws against them.
Ask what you would say if all this was happening to you and every door to freedom was slammed shut forcing you to stumble from one dead end to another. Ask what you would do, what you would accept. Ask if it is human and if you could see it done even to the least of mankind... Forty years of oppression and almost sixty years of dispossession are too many years of pain for any human being. It is time for the Palestinians to be released from Israel’s vice-like control. It is time to balance the scales of justice. It is time to stop killing the Palestinians.
Sonja Karkar is the founder and President of Women for Palestine in Melbourne, Australia. See

Desert Peace
It's come down to a 'numbers game'.... how long will it take the population of Gaza to run out of food? The speculation has already started with Abbas, Olmert and Bush doing the guessing. 10 days seems to be the general opinion.... What then? What surprises will be in store for a people that have already had their lives destroyed by a joint Israeli/American conspiracy against them.... now that a section of their own has joined forces with that devil?...

Hamas: We can prove Fatah link to CIA: The headquarters of the General Security Service, commanded by Ramallah-based General Tawfik Tirawi, fell to Hamas gunmen. Hamas said documents it found there prove that the Fatah-affiliated security apparatus has close ties with the Central Intelligence Agency

Abbas seeks Israel's cooperation in West Bank
Abbas' aides have asked Israel to assist Salam Fayyad's new cabinet in the battle over public opinion, against Ismail Haniyeh's Hamas government, which is refusing to resign. Ynet has learned that even before Fatah's last outpost in the Strip was taken over by Hamas, Hajj Ismail Jaber, deputy commander of the Palestinian security forces, began negotiating the issue with Israel.

Fatah Troops Enter Gaza With Israeli Assent
Hundreds Were Trained in Egypt Under U.S.-Backed Program to Counter Hamas
Washington Post Foreign Service

"War is nothing but a continuation of politics by other means."
von Clausewitz

VIDEO: Rumsfeld ordered torture
  Former head of Abu Ghraib, Karpinski, willing to testify

Women: weapons and booty of unjust wars and unjust "peace"
US Soldier Sodomised Female Iraqi Detainee:
June 17, 2007
Seymour Hersh interview with General Anthony Taguba, who investigated Abu Ghraib, confirms details of the abuse not previously public. It also confirms that the torture was sanctioned from the top.

"The United States must cultivate a mental view toward world settlement after this war which will enable us to impose our own terms, amounting perhaps to a pax-Americana."
U.S. Department of State - Source: Minutes S-3 of the Security Subcommittee, Advisory Committee on Postwar Foreign Policy, 6 May, 1942, Notter File, Box 77, Record Group 59, Records of the Department of State, National Archives, DC.

US military launches massive assault in Iraq
By Bill Van Auken
20 June 2007
Backed by armored columns and helicopter gunships, some 10,000 US troops have launched a massive assault on the provincial capital of Baquba and other areas north and east of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad. The operation, dubbed Arrowhead Ripper, is one of the largest since the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It is being portrayed as an offensive aimed at clearing Al Qaeda [SIC] terrorists from Diyala province, which is said to have become a new stronghold for the group. In reality, the attack is directed at crushing opposition to the US occupation in a region where the overwhelming majority of the population opposes the American presence and is therefore a center of resistance in which Al Qaeda plays a decidedly limited role.

In one of its first communiqués, the Pentagon claimed that a “quick-strike nighttime air assault” by the 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division had included an assault by attack helicopters and ground forces which had “engaged and killed 22 anti-Iraqi forces in and around Baquba.” “Anti-Iraqi forces” is the Orwellian term used by the American military command to describe any Iraqis who resist the US occupation of their country. ....

The operation is the largest since US troops laid a murderous siege to the predominantly Sunni city of Fallujah in November 2004, killing thousands, reducing most of its buildings to rubble and turning tens of thousands more into refugees. Baquba, about 30 miles northeast of Baghdad, is roughly the same size as Fallujah—both had pre-war populations of over 300,000. Whether it will be subjected to similar devastation remains to be seen. The siege of Baquba was joined with a series of other actions by US and allied forces in the southern suburbs of Baghdad as well as in the predominantly Shia south of the country. In the Arab Jubour area south of the capital, an offensive began with a nighttime raid by American B-1 bombers, which dropped “precision-guided bombs” in heavily populated areas.
Meanwhile, further south in Maysan province, US and British forces launched attacks on Shia militiamen, who fought back with machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. The US-led forces called in air strikes, which left dozens dead.
From each of these fronts in the US-led counteroffensive against the Iraqi resistance there emerged reports of atrocities, civilian deaths and sweeping house-to-house raids together with the roundup of many Iraqis as “security detainees.” Television broadcasts from Baquba included footage of long lines of blindfolded Iraqi males being held at gunpoint or herded into vehicles for transfer to one of the large US prison camps in the country.

The Mahdi Army and the [puppet] government forces burned the mosque Khodeir al-Janabi in Baghdad
Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq (AMSI) June 13, 2007
This afternoon the Mahdi Army militia burned the mosque Khodeir al-Janabi in al-Baiah neighborhood in Baghdad. Local sources stated that the Mahdi Army militiamen attacked the mosque in collaboration with the forces of the so-called "Save the System". Last week the Fattah Pasha Mosqueal-Baiah was bombed by these militias and by government forces backing them.

Sceptical After Second Shrine Attack
Inter Press Service
By Ali al-Fadhily*
"We now realise the plot more than we did before," Mustafa Hussain from the predominately Shia area of Sadr City in Baghdad told IPS, "I am not sure who is doing this and I do not have the habit of speculating, but now I, and most Iraqis, are sure it is just a conspiracy to divide Iraqis into Shiite and Sunnis. All this was planned and paid for by people outside our country and community."
"They are dreaming of evicting the people of Samarra in order to deepen the wound in the Iraqi flesh," 35-year-old Yassir al-Samarrai'i, a local television reporter from Samarra told IPS in Baghdad, "Their problem is that Iraqis are still reluctant to engage in full scale civil war despite all the dirty business the occupiers have conducted to ignite it by these shrine explosions."
"I am a Shiite, but I know for sure that Sunnis have the same respect we have for holy shrines and they would never do anything to humiliate their sacred status," 29-year-old Ruqaya Salih told IPS in Baghdad, "Americans must know that there are Iraqis who realise that they are planning to divide the community."

"They attacked ten mosques in Basra including the one that has the grave of Talha Bin Obaidillah, Mohammad's companion," Sheik Abdul-Wahab Hassan
in Baghdad told IPS, "Sunnis will not fall for such acts, knowing the fact that their Shiite brothers would not commit such crimes except those Shiite
who collaborate with the occupying forces and Iran."** Dahr Jamail's MidEast Dispatches ** ** Website by **

Destroying once again the Two Imams' Shrines' Minarets in Samarra
The Arab Baath Socialist Party
It is becoming clearer every passing day that the sectarian strife or Fitna is one of the most important pillar of the US, Iranian and Zionist's plan, theoretically and practically and today's attack against Samarra's Imams Ali Al Hadi's and Hassan al Askari's shrines, comes within this framework. Now, a year and four months have passed since the first destruction took place uncovering the US -Iranian involvement in that destruction for the shrine was heavily guarded by two military and security US and Iraqi puppets belts! Despite that the explosion took place in a well studied technical way and with no obstacles. This destruction bears the evident US - Iranian signature to fuel a sectarian war all over Iraq, and we know that those who undertook such action are Iran's agents and namely Jaber Soolagh, allowing Mahdi army to move to serve a US and Iranian plan to ethnically cleanse Baghdad and transform Iraq's Capital from a city for all Iraqis into a city for a specific sect only and for Persians imported from Iran, leading to the most horrible inter sectarian cleansing throughout all Iraq's history...

"Suicide Bombings" Cover Story For US Military Ops In Iraq
Joe Quinn Signs of the Times
Al-sarafiya bridge which, until two days ago, spanned the Tigris in Baghdad, linking Shia and Sunni neighborhoods of the city.
"Suicide bombings" are a daily occurrence in Iraq, and are the major propaganda tool used by the US government and its mainstream media to convince the world that there is still some "freedom and Democracy" work to be done by US troops in Iraq. But what if they are a cover for something else?...
The Tigris river now serves as a de facto dividing line between the mostly Shiite east and the largely Sunni west of the city, with the bridges the only connection between them. It's called "counter insurgency strategy" - divide and conquer. [...]

Seamus McGraw, Aftermath News
...Lax enlistment standards have inadvertently allowed thousands of gang members to join the military, including young men who belong to the Crips, Bloods, Latin Kings, and various white supremacist groups.... no gang has infiltrated the armed forces as deeply as the Gangster Disciples, a 100,000-member Chicago-based syndicate that has been linked to an assortment of crimes ranging from murder to mortgage fraud. "There’s no doubt about it—the Gangster Disciples are the biggest [gang] in the Army," says Chicago Police Lieutenant Robert Stasch, who has spent 30 years tracking the group’s rise from a handful of street-corner hoodlums to what he calls "the most sophisticated criminal enterprise in the United States." Founded three decades ago by Larry Hoover, the Gangster Disciples have worked to burnish their image, says Stasch. They have courted politicians and sought to enhance their legitimacy. At one point Hoover changed the group’s name to "Growth and Development" and tried to portray himself as the leader of a community organization. According to Stasch, "They even set up a political action committee…that would actually go to various cities and states, and even to the federal level, in an attempt to get gang-friendly legislation enacted." Now, with the unintended [SIC] help of the U.S. Army, the gang is extending its reach worldwide. According to a Chicago Sun-Times article last year, Gangster Disciple graffiti has been spotted all over Iraq. The gang’s initials and main symbol, the six-pointed star, have been tagged on concrete blast barriers, armored vehicles, and even remote firebase guard shacks. In an astonishing study of just three Army bases over the past four years, a Department of Defense detective identified more than 300 active gang members. Some experts estimate that up to 2 percent of the soldiers on active duty—perhaps as many as 20,000—have sworn allegiance to one gang or another.[...]

Uncle Sam's "Islamic Terrorists": "Black Ops" against Iran, Lebanon and Syria
By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research
The Bush administration has admitted that covert actions of an aggressive nature were applied against Iran and Syria. The stated objective was to wreck
the countries' economies and currency systems. The infamous Iran-Syria Policy and Operations Group (ISOG) created in early 2006, integrated by officials from the White House, the State Department, the CIA and the Treasury Department, had a mandate to destabilize Syria and Iran, and bring about "Regime Change":

Wilsonian imperialism, then and now
... The US is lauding Pakistan's contribution to the 'war on terror', although the Pakistani military is apparently a bit wary of battling the Talibs.
Meanwhile, the New York Times wing of US capitalism wonders if Pakistan can 'mix well with democracy'. Describing the opposition as 'pro-Western moderates', it nevertheless wonders if the US might make 'the same mistake as in Iraq' by supporting democracy in a country that 'can't change', and where it is therefore 'better' 'having someone with a heavy hand' etc etc. This - which only reports what is openly stated by think-tanks and both Democrat and Republican candidates - is a breathtaking mixture of hypocrisy and racism. These places - being, y'know, populated by dark-skinned people - are simply unready for self-government, which is why the US's Wilsonian mission to bring about a set of democratic revolutions has failed. Interestingly, this sort of drivel is not so very far from Woodrow Wilson's own convictions about 'self-government'. His entire vision of the global political order, as well as the domestic one, was permeated by a 'natural' 'racial' hierarchy, in which the 'Aryans' were the 'nobler' race and the source of the best forms of government, especially since their state had originated from the 'patriarchal' family (whereas, he maintained, the more 'stationary' races permitted 'kinship by motherhood alone'). In fact, he too maintained that America should rule the Philippines - this was the first time America maintained a direct long-term colonial occupation of another country without annexing it - "with a strong hand that will brook no resistance, and according to principles of right gathered from our own experience, not from theirs, which has never yet touched the vital matter that we are concerned with … They are children and we are men in these deep matters of government and justice"....

US Military Threat directed against Iran: Muffled Voices, ElBaradei’s Unheard Assessments
by Shirin Saeidi

... the consistently erroneous portrayal of Iranian officials by news sources for this trend has accelerated in recent weeks and is part of a greater US attempt to vilify the country. For example ....
These media distortions exist in the greater context of American funding of terrorist organizations within Iranian territory (The Independent, “Fear grips Iranian academics as radical groups launch campaign of intimidation,” 16 June 2007), the refusal of American forces to return five Iranian diplomats taken hostage in Irbil in January, and arresting three other diplomats in Iraq on Friday June 15th (Islamic Republic News Agency, IRNA, “Iran strongly condemns arrest of 3 diplomats in Iraq,”16 June, 2007), American attempts to halt international business with Iranian banks and institutes (AFP, “US Treasury chief urges allies to blacklist Iran's banks,” 15th June 2007), and American funding of exile organizations and domestic NGO’s, “the survival of Iranian non-governmental organisations is being threatened by the US administration's continuing attempts to fund the country's civil society, leading activists have warned….But there is no sign the US administration will retreat. Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, made clear last month the US would not be deterred from funding pro-democracy efforts in Iran by requesting a sharp increase in spending to $75m for -"civil society and human rights projects in Iran" in 2008” (Financial Times, “US funds put Iran's activists in line of fire,” 15 June 2007). 

G7 Play Thermonuclear Chess with Putin
by F. William Engdahl
The most significant outcome of the recent G8 Summit at Heiligendamm was not Chancellor Merkel’s “victory” on the contentious issue of greenhouse gas emissions. It was the shrewd chess play by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin on the US Missile Defense strategy for Europe.
Putin outplayed his US counterpart Bush as he laid on the table a new proposal to deal with Washington’s ostensible argument why it must build its ballistic missile defense system in Poland, the Czech Republic and perhaps also Ukraine and Bulgaria. The proposal was as simple as it was devastating for the US argument in favor of Czech and Polish ABM sites.
At a joint press conference following their private talks, Putin declared, “We have our own ideas. I outlined them in detail. The first proposal involves the joint use of the Gabala radar station that Russia leases from Azerbaijan. I spoke with the President of Azerbaijan about this just yesterday. Our present agreement with Azerbaijan would allow us to do this and the President of Azerbaijan stressed that he would be happy if his country could contribute to ensuring global security in this way.
“We can do this automatically,” Putin added, “and in this case the system we established would include all of Europe without exception, rather than simply one part of the continent. This would completely eliminate the possibility of missiles falling on European countries because they would fall either into the sea or into the ocean. It would eliminate the need -- or, more accurately -- allow us to refrain from changing our position and retargeting our missiles...”

US replies
After this press conference Bush’s spokesman announced that he had taken ill. More likely Mr Bush had to get briefed and fast how to respond to the unexpected Russian offer. Condi Rice even admitted they were caught off guard. The Russian President called their bluff before the world press.
The response didn’t take long. On June 15 General Henry Obering, head of the US Missile Defense Agency declared the Russian proposal wouldn’t help against the “Iran threat” and installing a US radar system in the Czech Republic and a missile base (sic) in Poland was the “best possible decision given studies of possible flight trajectories of long-range ballistic missiles the Islamic Republic was working on…”
A day earlier at a NATO defense ministers’ meet, US Defense Secretary Gates stated the US would go ahead with its plans for a missile defense system in Eastern Europe whether or not any agreement is reached on an alternative Russian proposal. In brief, Washington’s response has been a parody of Admiral Farragut’s famous cry: “Damn the missiles; full speed ahead!”

The US made a formal request in January to place a radar base in a military area near Prague, and interceptor missiles in neighbouring Poland as part of a US-controlled missile defense shield. In doing so, Washington, we should recall, claimed rogue missile attacks from Iran or North Korea as justification.
The world could well look back to Heiligendamm as the last chance the major powers had to avoid thermonuclear destruction. Sound overly dramatic? The day after he made his proposal to Mr Bush, Putin called an open press conference with all invited G8 media.

Why Putin is right
A western reader of mainline press would conclude that Russia has unilaterally reverted to its Cold War stance and threatens world peace. The reality is a little different. As Putin told the G8 press in comments almost completely blocked out in western media, “if this missile system is put in place, it will work automatically with the entire nuclear capability of the United States. It will be an integral part of the US nuclear capability.”

In other words, missile “defense” is not defensive at all. It is offensive. If one of two nuclear opponents has nuclear strike ability and even a modest shield against retaliation from the other, he has what NATO strategists have dreamed of since the mid-1950’s: Nuclear Primacy. You can simply dictate terms of surrender to the other. The first nation with a nuclear missile shield would de facto have ‘first strike ability.’ Quite correctly, Lt. Colonel Robert Bowman, Director of the US Air Force missile defense program, recently called missile defense, “the missing link to a First Strike.”

We can dismiss the argument about Iran missiles. The Azeri offer of Putin for US missile shield would stand on the Iran border. The current US plans for Europe call to mind the September 2000 report which in addition to calling for regime change in Iraq also demanded upgraded priority to missile defense as a tool to “project US power.” That report, ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses,’ by the hawkish Project for the New American Century, where Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld were members, declared, ‘The United States must develop and deploy global missile defenses to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for US power projection around the world.’ (author’s emphasis)

"Depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World."
Henry Kissinger, National Security Memo 200, dated April 24, 1974

The Scramble for Africa's Oil
by Christopher Thompson
The Pentagon is embarked on a massive effort to militarily secure African oil assets for the United States. Under cover of the so-called "war on terror," the U.S. is deepening its military ties to "friendly" African regimes, enhancing their capacity to deal with internal dissidents and external rivals. From the Horn of Africa to the Gulf of Guinea and the Niger Delta, the Americans bolster authoritarian regimes and flaunt U.S. air, naval and "special operations" power. Even the FBI has gotten into the act, performing interrogations of hundreds of "suspects" swept up in Ethiopia's invasion of Somalia and brutal suppression of internal foes.
The Pentagon at present has five geographic Unified Combatant Commands around the world, and responsibility for Africa is awkwardly divided among three of these. Most of Africa - a batch of 43 countries - falls under the European Command (Eucom), with the remainder divided between the Pacific Command and Central Command (which also runs the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan). Now the Pentagon - under the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the defense department - is working on formal proposals for a unified military command for the continent under the name "Africom." This significant shift in US relations with Africa comes in the face of myriad threats: fierce economic competition from Asia; increasing resource nationalism in Russia and South America; and instability in the Middle East that threatens to spill over into Africa.

"The US must reshape its whole military policy if it is to maintain control of Africa."
The Pentagon hopes to finalize Africom's structure, location and budget this year. The expectation is that it can break free from Eucom and become operative by mid-2008. "The break from Europe will occur before 30 September 2008," Professor Peter Pham, a US adviser on Africa to the Pentagon told the New Statesman. "The independent command should be up and running by this time next year."...
n March 2006, speaking before the Senate armed services committee, General James Jones, the then head of Eucom, said: "Africa currently provides over 15 per cent of US oil imports, and recent explorations in the Gulf of Guinea region indicate potential reserves that could account for 25-35 per cent of US imports within the next decade."... These high-quality reserves - West African oil is typically low in sulphur and thus ideal for refining - are easily accessible by sea to western Europe and the US. In 2005, the US imported more oil from the Gulf of Guinea than it did from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait combined. Within the next ten years it will import more oil from Africa than from the entire Middle East. Western oil giants such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, France's Total and Britain's BP and Shell plan to invest tens of billions of dollars in sub-Saharan Africa (far in excess of "aid" inflows to the region).
But though the Gulf of Guinea is one of the few parts of the world where oil production is poised to increase exponentially in the near future, it is also one of the most unstable. In the big three producer countries, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea and Angola, oil wealth has been a curse for many, enriching political elites at the expense of impoverished citizens. Angola is now China's main supplier of crude oil, supplanting Saudi Arabia last year. The Chinese, along with the rest of oil- hungry Asia, are looking covetously at the entire region's reserves.... China is willing to offer billions in soft loans and infrastructure projects - all with no strings attached - to secure lucrative acreage.... According to Nicholas Shaxson, author of Poisoned Wells: the Dirty Politics of African Oil, "[Africom] comes in the context of a growing conflict with China over our oil supplies."
Africom will significantly increase the US military presence on the continent. At present, the US has 1,500 troops stationed in Africa, principally at its military base in Djibouti, in the eastern horn. That could well double, according to Pham. The US is already conducting naval exercises off the Gulf of Guinea, in part with the intention of stopping Delta insurgents reaching offshore oil rigs. It also plans to beef up the military capacity of African governments to handle their dissidents, with additional "rapid-reaction" US forces available if needed. But - echoing charges leveled at US allies elsewhere in the "war on terror" [...]

Will Sudan be Re-Colonized?
By Stephen Gowans
The United States is maneuvering to introduce a UN peacekeeping force into
Darfur, as a first step to securing control of the region’s vast supply of
oil. US control of Darfur’s petroleum resources would deliver highly
profitable investment opportunities to US firms, and scuttle China’s
investment in the region, thereby slowing the rise of a strategic competitor
whose continued industrial growth depends on secure access to foreign oil.
Washington is using highly exaggerated charges of genocide as a
justification for a UN intervention it would dominate, while at the same
time opposing a workable peacekeeping plan acceptable to the Sudanese
government that would see the current African Union mission in Darfur expand
Continued at

Bush uses Sudan, Iran Assets in Iraq; US GIs Killed, Trapped in Bridge Rubble; Al-Mashhadani Dismissed as Speaker; Clashes, Demonstrations in Sadr City
Juan Cole, Informed Comment
Remember all that Bush administration bluster against Sudan? Turns out that the CIA is using Sudanese spies against the Iraqi guerrillas. Bush sees no enemies among the oil states, only opportunities to be exploited. Most Americans don't realize that Bush has also de facto deployed Iran-trained Badr Corps fighters against the Sunni Arabs in Iraq, as well. So Iran and Sudan are the great bogeymen in Bush rhetoric, but the pillars of his Iraq policy in reality...

“I hope they kill each other”
Henry Kissinger at beginning of U.S. supported 8 year long war which killed over a million

"Al-Qaeda" & "Taliban" blamed for genocidal U.S. State Terror
U.S. Kills 100 in 3 Days In Afghanistan
Afghan Officials Say Casualties Include Civilians, Police, Militants, 7 Kids Killed By U.S. Air Strike

New U.S. torture tactics revealed
Philippe Khan,
Instead of scrapping abusive interrogation tactics that are being practiced not only in the CIA’s secret overseas prisons but also in Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan and Iraq, the Bush administration is finalizing new methods that would give even wider latitude for torture techniques. According to an article published on the New York Times last week, the new interrogation tactics are expected to prohibit water-boarding, the most used method by U.S. interrogators despite its cruelty. However, the so-called "enhanced interrogation" methods would allow prolonged stress positions, exposure to harsh elements as well as general mental and physical torture; methods that "go beyond those allowed in the military by the Army Field Manual," according to the Times...

“We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
David Rockefeller in a 1994 Statement to the United Nations Business Council

Soft and Undercover Coups d'État
The Albert Einstein Institution: non-violence according to the CIA
by Thierry Meyssan*
VoltaireNet, 4 January 2005

Non-violence as a political action technique can be used for anything. During the 1980s, NATO drew its attention on its possible use to organize the Resistance in Europe after the invasion of the Red Army. It's been 15 years since CIA began using it to overthrow inflexible governments without provoking international outrage, and its ideological façade is philosopher Gene Sharp's Albert Einstein Institution. Red Voltaire reveals its amazing activity, from Lithuania to Serbia, Venezuela and Ukraine.

Unknown to the public, Gene Sharp formulated a theory on non violence as a political weapon. Also he first helped NATO and then CIA train the leaders of the soft coups of the last 15 years. Since the 50s, Gene Sharp studied Henry D. Thoreau and Mohandas K. Gandhi's theory of civil disobedience. For these authors, obedience and disobedience were religious and moral matters, not political ones. However, to preach had political consequences; what could be considered an aim could be perceived as a mean. Civil disobedience can be considered then as a political, even military, action technique.

In 1983, Sharp designed the Non Violent Sanctions Program in the Center for International Affairs of Harvard University where he did some social sciences studies on the possible use of civil disobedience by Western Europe population in case of a military invasion carried out by the troops of the Warsaw Pact. At the same time, he founded in Boston the Albert Einstein Institution with the double purpose of financing his own researches and applying his own models to specific situations. In 1985, he published a book titled "Making Europe Unconquerable " [1] whose second edition included a preface by George Kennan, the Father of the Cold War. In 1987, the association was funded by the U.S. Institute for Peace and hosted seminars to instruct its allies on defense based on civil disobedience. General Fricaud-Chagnaud, on his part, introduced his "civil deterrence" concept at the Foundation of National Defense Studies. [2]

General Edward B. Atkeson, well-known by CIA director, [3] incorporated the Institute to the American interference stay-behind network in allied States. To focus on the moral issues of an action helped to avoid all doubts on the legitimacy of an action. Therefore, non violence, recognized as good-natured and assimilated to democracy, offered a suitable aspect to antidemocratic secret actions.

In 1989, when the Albert Institution became well known, Gene Sharp began to advice anticommunist movements. He participated in the establishment of Burma's Democratic Alliance - a coalition of notable anticommunists that quickly joined the military government - and Taiwan's Progressive Democratic Party - which favored the independence of the island from communist China, something U.S. officially opposed. He also unified the Tibetan opposition under Dalai Lama and tried to form a dissident group within PLO so that Palestinian nationalists would stop terrorism [4] (he made the necessary arrangements with Colonel Reuven Gal, [5] director of the Psychological Action division of the Israeli armed forces, to train them secretly in the American Embassy in Tel Aviv).

When CIA realized how useful could the Albert Einstein Institution be, it brought Colonel Robert Helvey into play. An expert in clandestine actions and former dean of the Embassies's Military Attachés Training School, "Bob" took Gene Sharp to Burma to educate the opposition on the non violent strategy for criticizing the cruelest military junta of the world without questioning the system. By doing this, Helvey could identify the "good" and the "bad" opponents in a critical moment for Washington: the true opposition, led by Mrs. Suu Kyi, was labeled as a threat to the pro-American regimen.

«Bob's» job was easily done. Since he was military attaché in Rangoon from 1983 to 1985 and helped to structure the dictatorship, he knew everybody. By playing a double game, Colonel Helvey simultaneously directed a classical action of military support to Karen resistance: by providing weapons and controlling a limited guerrilla, Washington wished, indeed, to maintain the military junta under pressure.

Since that moment, Sharp has always been present everywhere American interests are put at risk. In June 1989, he and his assistant, Bruce Jenkins, went to Beijing, two weeks before Tiananmen events. They were both expelled by Chinese authorities. In February 1990, the Albert Einstein Institution hosted a Conference on Non Violent Sanctions that brought together 185 experts of 16 countries under Colonels Robert Helvey and Reuven Gal. This marked the beginning of an international anticommunist crusade to involve peoples in non violent action.

Professor Thomas Schelling, [6] well known economist and CIA consultant, joined the Administrative Council of the Institution whose official budget was still stable though it was also funded by the International Republican Institute (IRI), one of the four branches of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED/CIA). [7]

At the same time, Baltic countries proclaimed their independence but, after a test of endurance with Mijail Gorbatchov, they postponed their decision for 2 or 3 years to negotiate their terms. In October 1990, Gene Sharp and his team traveled to Sweden and trained several Lithuanian politicians in the organization of a popular resistance against the Red Army. Months later, in May 1991, when the crisis broke out and Gorbatchov deployed his special forces; Gene Sharp was the adviser of Sajudis separatist party (Perestroika Initiative Group) and remained close to Vytautas Landsbergis. In June 1992, independent Lithuania Minister of Defense, Audrius Butkevicius, hosted a symposium to thank Albert Einstein Institution's key role during the independence process of the Baltic countries.

When the U.S began its rearmament in 1998, [8] the Albert Einstein Institution became part of an expansionist strategy. It provided ideology and technique to Otpor («Resistance»), a group of Slobodan Milosevic's young opponents. Simultaneously, it intervened in Kosovo province to train Ibrahim Rugova's LDK, but it turned useless for Washington during the Kosovo war. Then, Otpor quickly became a choice to overthrow Milosevic who was very popular for resisting NATO. Colonel Helvey trained Otpor's leaders through seminars hosted at Hilton Hotel in Budapest. Money was not a problem to overthrow Europe's last communist government. The person in charge of commanding the operation was agent Paul B. McCarthy, discreetly settled at Moskva hotel in Belgrade until Milosevic's resignation in October 2000.

In September 2002, Gene Sharp went to The Hague to train the members of the Iraqi National Council who were preparing themselves to return to Iraq, along with the American army.

In September 2003, it was also the Albert Einstein Institution who advised the opposition to question the electoral results and go on demonstrations to force Eduard Shevardnadze's resignation [9] during the «revolution» of the roses in Georgia.

When the CIA-organized-coup against Venezuela failed in April 2002, the State Department counted again on the Albert Einstein Institution which advised the owners of enterprises during the organization of the revocatory referendum against President Hugo Chávez. Gene Sharp and his team led the leaders of Súmate during the demonstrations of August 2004. As done before, the only thing they had to do was questioning the electoral results and demanding the resignation of the president. They managed to get the bourgeoisie out in the street but Chavez's popular government was to strong. All in all, international observers had no other choice but to recognize Hugo Chávez's victory.

Gene Sharp failed in Belarus and Zimbabwe for he could not recruit and train in the proper time the necessary amount of demonstrators. During the orange «revolution» in November 2004, [10] we met again with Colonel Robert Helvey in Kiev. Finally, we must point out that the Albert Einstein Institution has begun to train Iranian agitators

But, why Albert Einstein? It is an unsuspicious name. Gene Sharp's first book on Gandhi's methods began with a preface signed by Albert Einstein, though the book was written in 1960, five years after the genius's death. Therefore, Albert Einstein did not write anything for Sharp's work. All that Sharp did was reproducing an article on non violence written by the scientist.

Thierry Meyssan
Journalist and writer, president of the Voltaire Network.
This author's articles:

[1] Making Europe Unconquerable: The Potential of Civilian-based Deterrence and Defense. Taylor & Francis Publishing House, London, 1985. Its second edition included a preface by George F. Kennan, Ballinger Publishing House, Massachusetts, 1986.
[2] General Georges Fricaud Chagnaud had been military attaché at the Embassy of France in Washington, and some time later he was appointed Chief of NATO's French military mission.
[3] General Edward B. Atkeson is currently a CSIS expert and manager of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO).
[4] Mubarak Awad, one of the agents formed by Sharp, is currently (January 2005) in charge of the American aid sent to Indonesia after the tsunami.
[5] Nowadays, Colonel Reuven Gal is deputy head of the National Security Council of Israel in charge of molding Palestine society.
[6] In March 2004, Thomas Schelling was one of the drafters of the Copenhagen Consensus. Sponsored by The Economist, this document questioned the UN Millenium Program and the Kyoto Protocol. Mr. Schelling formulated a theoretical model which suggested that economic growth is the best way to combat global warming for, in the future, it should guarantee the development of the necessary techniques to solve the problem.
[7] Thierry Meyssan : «The Networks of "Democratic" Interference», Voltaire (text in French), November 21, 2004.
[8] In 1998 and despite the lack of enemy, the Congres forced President Clinton to implement a rearmament policy.
[9] See Paul Labarique : «Les dessous du coup d'État en Géorgie», text in French, Voltaire, January 7, 2004.
[10] See Emilia Nazarenko: «Moscow and Washington confronting each other in Ukraine», Voltaire (Text in French), November 1st, 2004. This article was published by Red Voltaire before the first part of the presidential elections and described the organization of the pretended spontaneous movement of the following weeks.

"Strategic non-violence" runs into resistance again...
U.S. Study Program in Iran Sees Struggle
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- The American Studies program at the University of Tehran is a bold experiment in a nation locked in bitter confrontation with the United States -- at a school where chants of ''Death to America!'' still punctuate Friday prayers...The two-year-old master's program tries to teach American government, culture and society to some of Iran's top students.But the rare academic outreach has been called off amid accusations of espionage, the latest victim of the increasingly poisoned relationship between the U.S. and Iran. The controversy grew hot enough that Iran's Foreign Ministry weighed in, with spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini charging at a news conference that ''Americans, under cover of academic cooperation, are pursuing their own goals'' -- an apparent reference to regime change. The overseas study plan began to fall apart when its sponsor -- a U.S. nonprofit organization partially funded by the State Department [...]

'Strategic nonviolent struggle is all about political power.' And I thought, 'Boy is this guy speaking my language,' that is what armed struggle is about."
Col. Robert Helvey

Washington's New World Order "Democratization" Template:
Ukrainian PostModern Coup completes testing of New Template--Soros--U.S. Non-Violent Strategy
by Jonathan Mowat     9 February 2005
The URL of this article is:
Centre for Research on Globalisation
Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation

Jolie: the Pretty Face for the Global Slave Gulag
Kurt Nimmo, Another Day in the Empire
The "UN Goodwill Ambassador" Angelina Jolie will front for the "prestigious" NWO "think tank," the Council on Foreign Relations. "Angelina Jolie will now be joining former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Diane Sawyer and several other distinguished names as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations," TransWorldNews reports. "The bombshell Oscar winner-turned globe-trotting activist is one of 94 new 'term members’—a category reserved for up-and-coming young policy thinkers in their early 30s, most from the corporate world, government, academia or the media, who after their five-year terms can apply to join the 'life membership’ ranks of Cheney, Soros, Greenspan, Kissinger, etc. What this means for Angelina: a chance to kibitz with top global policy experts. What this means for CFR: more paparazzi," adds the CIA’s favorite newspaper, the Washington Post...

"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."
Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister

"The process [of mass-media deception] has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt.... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary."
George Orwell in the book 1984

"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
--former CIA Director William Colby

Power in the Age of Empire
When language has been butchered and bled of meaning, how do we understand "public power"? When freedom means occupation, when democracy means neoliberal capitalism, when reform means repression, when words like "empowerment" and "peacekeeping" make your blood run cold. Ordinary people in the United States have been manipulated into imagining they are a people under siege whose sole refuge and protector is their government. If it isn't the Communists, it's Al Qaeda. If it isn't Cuba, it's Nicaragua. As a result, this, the most powerful nation in the world - with its unmatchable arsenal of weapons, its history of having waged and sponsored endless wars, and the only nation in history to have actually used nuclear bombs - is peopled by a terrified citizenry, jumping at shadows. A people bonded to the state not by social services, or public health care, or employment guarantees, but by fear. This synthetically manufactured fear is used to gain public sanction for further acts of aggression.
Arundhati Roy ,

Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.
Paulo Freire

Larry Pinkney
In April of 1996, in a published piece entitled, Double Standards I wrote, "The point is simple - America must deal with the root causes of terrorism: racism, injustices, and the suppression of human aspirations throughout the world, including inside the United States itself. Ignoring and accommodating these injustices is in itself an act of terrorism." These words remain accurate and have become even more relevant in the 21st Century, particularly in the case of Black Americans and other people of color.

Terrorism is not limited to hijacked airliners flying into sky scrapers or bombs exploding in civilian areas. Terrorism also includes enslaving millions of Black people on this continent, socially and economically crippling their off spring, and then denying responsibility for the ongoing horrible damage that has been done, while simultaneously refusing to pay reparations and hypocritically perpetuating de facto racial inequality in this "land of the free."

Terrorism also includes committing genocide against millions of Indigenous Red peoples on this continent, stealing their lands, and continuing today to pretend that these actions represented "progress" and/or "civilizing the natives." Terrorism is invading the sovereign nation of Mexico, stealing and annexing its land, and the racist audacity of referring to Mexicans, who enter this land that was a part of Mexico's sovereign territory (until it was stolen by America), as "illegal aliens."

No health care or decent paying jobs, inferior or no educational opportunities, and massive incarceration, represent the very real state- and corporate-sponsored terrorism being systematically perpetrated and perpetuated against Black people and other people of color in America. This economic, social/judicial, and political war being waged against Black people, by the state and federal governmental apparatus of the US, is nothing short of terrorism on a daily basis.

Yes, terrorism must necessarily also include "the suppression of human aspirations throughout the world including inside the United States itself." These realities represent terrorism's hidden meaning for Black Americans in the 21st Century.

The noted Emmy award-winning singer, actor, and activist, Harry Belafonte, was unflinchingly correct when in Venezuela some months ago, he referred to US President George W. Bush as "the greatest terrorist in the world." However, just as importantly, we Black Americans know that it makes little difference as to who occupies the so-called "White" House. The terror against us to one degree or another is, and has been, constant. As Malcolm X succinctly put it, we always "catch hell" from white America. Indeed, the democracy of America toward Black people continues, in one form or another, to be a democracy of terror. Thus, the very real need to first understand and then clearly reject the terrorism that is continually being waged against us, physically and culturally, by white America and its surrogates.

Notwithstanding the horrible economic realities that often coerce young Black men and women to join the US military, the place for Black people is not on the battle fields of Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran or in someone else's nation elsewhere in the world. Our place is here in America, where we must face and struggle against what is probably one of the most insidious 21st century forms of economic and social apartheid anywhere in the world today. To paraphrase the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., "Violence is the voice of the unheard." White America and the US Government know this and have always known this. The injustices of hunger, economic exploitation, and racial and cultural domination are all forms of the systemic terrorism practiced by white America both internally and externally. The response to that terrorism is of course more terrorism, which in turn allegedly provides America and its institutions with the excuse for waging war internally and internationally. As all bullies and/or dictators know, perpetual war means putting into motion and reinforcing the cycle of perpetual terrorism; and in reality, war - waged even by a nation-state - is nothing more than organized terrorism sanctioned by a nation....
BC Columnist Larry Pinkney is a veteran of the Black Panther Party, the former Minister of Interior of the Republic of New Africa, a former political prisoner and the only American to have successfully self-authored his civil/political rights case to the United Nations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Click here to contact Mr. Pinkney.

Freedom Rider: Supreme Injustices
by Bar editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberle
Our worst nightmares are becoming reality as George Bush's U.S. Supreme Court strangles the very concept of due process and nonracial administration of justice. In its latest frothings, the High Court ruled that workers must be clairvoyant in order to win job discrimination cases - requiring they file charges within 180 days of the offense, thus leaving no room to prove a pattern and practice of discrimination. The justices affirmed that potential jurors who oppose the death penalty - disproportionately Black - can be excluded from capital cases, ensuring that "only racist, conviction happy jurors sit in judgment." ... many of the sentencing disparities and draconian drug laws that have now decimated the black community originated with the Clinton administration. Read more...

Army Data Show a Continued Risk for New Orleans
A report shows, in block-by-block detail, that a big stormwould be likely to flood large areas of the city.

Racist Genocide in New Orleans Continues: "Like 911 But Add Water"
by liz burbank
A renaissance of Black resistance and leadership, historically the leading edge of revolution is what the postmodern slavemasters fear most in the racist "homeland".
Katrina was no accident, no surprise, no act of 'mother nature', the 'gods' , or bureaucratic incompetence. The human and environmental and impact on New Orleans of a hurricane of this magnitude had been scientifically calculated. Rescue and recovery were deliberately withheld, working class Black people militarily imprisoned, forcibly dispersed and murdered by the armed state. This intensification of america's historical genocide, a crime of U.S. imperialist state terrorism, is a premeditated physical and psychological attack on the Black Nation to destroy its strength, pride, cultural cohesion and resistance to capitalist white supremacy's fascist global juggernaut.
Central to the U.S. strategy for global domination, Katrina and the brutal aftermath was engineered to serve this fascist agenda in two interrelated ways: uprooting, dispersing and weakening the Black Nation, while simultaneously inflaming racist support for the consolidation of a fascist mode of state capitalism under the guise of "rescue, relief and recovery” from a "major casualty-producing event" the state declared a “natural disaster.” [...]
full article at
also in archives at]

The Slow Slide to Barbarity on the Border
by Laura Carlsen
The basic elements of a horror story are being assembled on the U.S. southern border, which in the next decade or so may become the scene of perpetual low-level warfare. An "American Militarized Security Zone" is slowly taking shape, fueled by racist rhetoric and a fortress mentality that can only lead to transformation of the U.S.-Mexican border into a permanent battleground. In an extrapolation of current realities into the future, the author presents a nightmare scenario of a garrisoned region where "body-counts" and marshal law are the order of the day.

"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy"
Henry Kissinger

U.S. Military Wants To Enlist "Illegal Immigrants"
A senior defense official expressed hope today that a provision in the stalled immigration bill that would have allowed some undocumented aliens to join the military won’t fall off the radar screen.

state terrorist family values
Impounded Fathers
June 17, 2007

MY father died in May 2005, after an agonizing battle with lung disease. This is the third Father’s Day that I will spend without him since we started celebrating together in 1981. That was when I moved to the United States from Haiti, after his own migration here had kept us apart for eight long years.
My father’s absence, then and now, makes all the more poignant for me the predicament of the following fathers who also deserve to be remembered today.

There is the father from Honduras who was imprisoned, then deported, after a routine traffic stop in Miami. He was forced to leave behind his wife, who was also detained by immigration officials, and his 5- and 7-year-old sons, who were placed in foster care. Not understanding what had happened, the boys, when they were taken to visit their mother in jail, asked why their father had abandoned them. Realizing that the only way to reunite his family was to allow his children to be expatriated to Honduras, the father resigned himself to this, only to get caught up in a custody fight with American immigration officials who have threatened to keep the boys permanently in foster care on the premise that their parents abandoned them.

There is also the father from Panama, a cleaning contractor in his 50s, who had lived and worked in the United States for more than 19 years. One morning, he woke to the sound of loud banging on his door. He went to answer it and was greeted by armed immigration agents. His 10-year asylum case had been denied without notice. He was handcuffed and brought to jail.

There is the father from Argentina who moves his wife and children from house to house hoping to remain one step ahead of the immigration raids. And the Guatemalan, Mexican and Chinese fathers who have quietly sought sanctuary from deportation at churches across the United States.

There’s the Haitian father who left for work one morning, was picked up outside his apartment and was deported before he got a chance to say goodbye to his infant daughter and his wife. There’s the other Haitian father, a naturalized American citizen, whose wife was deported three weeks before her residency hearing, forcing him to place his 4-year-old son in the care of neighbors while he works every waking hour to support two households.

These families are all casualties of a Department of Homeland Security immigration crackdown cheekily titled Operation Return to Sender. The goals of the operation, begun last spring, were to increase the enforcement of immigration laws in the workplace and to catch and deport criminals. Many women and men who have no criminal records have found themselves in its cross hairs. More than 18,000 people have been deported since the operation began last year.
So while politicians debate the finer points of immigration reform, the Department of Homeland Security is already carrying out its own. Unfortunately, these actions can not only plunge families into financial decline, but sever them forever. One such case involves a father who was killed soon after he was deported to El Salvador last year.
“Something else could be done,” his 13-year-old son Junior pleaded to the New York-based advocacy group Families for Freedom, “because kids need their fathers.”
Right now the physical, emotional, financial and legal status of American-born minors like Junior can neither delay nor prevent their parents’ detention or deportation. Last year, Representative José E. Serrano, a Democrat from New York, introduced a bill that would allow immigration judges to take into consideration the fates of American-born children while reviewing their parents’ cases. The bill has gone nowhere, while more and more American-citizen children continue to either lose their parents or their country.
Where are our much-touted family values when it comes to these children? Today, as on any other day, they deserve to feel that they have not been abandoned — by either their parents or their country.
Edwidge Danticat is the author of the forthcoming “Brother, I’m Dying,” a memoir.

big surprise!
Microsoft Finds Legal Defender in Justice Dept.
A company the government once tried to break up has been repeatedly defended by the Bush administration against charges of anticompetitive conduct.

Microsoft and the National Security Agency
In January the Washington Post reported that Microsoft had announced that its new operating system, Vista, was being brought to us with the assistance of the National Security Agency.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Lies that Unleash Hell
Jason Miller
Each day untold millions of US Americans unwittingly immerse themselves in an intellectual, social, cultural, economic, political and spiritual cesspool so rancid and toxic that even microbes with the most voracious appetites for human waste, vomit, and inanimate flesh would shun this infinitely repulsive sewer.
Many highly qualified and intelligent researchers, analysts, and authors have written books, essays, and reports documenting the astounding multitude and variety of crimes committed by the United States throughout its history. Since a nation is an entity comprised of numerous elements and dynamics, we can’t simply blame the government, the Republicans, the Religious Right, the Democrats, George Bush, Bill Clinton, or any one particular component. Therefore, nearly all US Americans bear a degree of responsibility. Obviously, some (i.e. Bush and Cheney) are far more culpable than others because they wield such tremendous power and act with a conscienceless, cynical awareness of the suffering they are inflicting on the Earth and its sentient inhabitants.
Since only about 4% of the population shares Bush’s sociopathic inability to experience empathy or guilt, what is this powerful siren call that motivates so many inherently decent human beings to repeatedly lacerate their souls upon the jagged rocks of complicity in acts that inflict unnecessary suffering upon billions of humans and animals?

How did we become a statistical aberration to the extent that we are a nation of resource-rich, technologically-advanced, mean-spirited, intellectually-stunted moral barbarians where a significant percentage of the population behaves as sociopaths by directly supporting or apathetically ignoring the evils in which they are complicit.

Let’s deconstruct but a few examples of the nearly innumerable strands in the tangled web of pernicious lies comprising our false consciousness: ....

Despite the brutal nature and seemingly insurmountable power of this juggernaut of a nation, there is still hope for humanity and the world. While the opulent class, military careerists, fundamentalist Christian leadership, corporatists, AIPAC, "elected" officials, and the prostitutes in the corporate-dominated media propagate a sociopathic agenda through maintaining the simulacrum of the United States as the "leader of the free world," there is abundant evidence of an increasing awareness of their perfidy and malevolence. Simmering beneath the surface for years, moral outrage now threatens to reach full boil thanks to the increased awareness facilitated by the Internet.

Video: George Bush's speechwriter

6/1/7 Terrorism Defined in Action: Africa, Palestine/"Middle East", Latin America, Eurasia, USA

"...Colonial administration always relies on creating dissension between subjugated "native" tribes and populations. The fundamental white-power core of the American ruling class manages the nation in the colonial style. It sees itself as a small elite of elevated race (with a sprinkling of approved and tested tokens) that must control a vast, lower-class population. Setting the natives against each other in petty jealousies helps to fragment any opposition to their true masters.
The "carrot" always offered to subjugated natives is the chance to "sit at the right hand of the master, at his table." This is an avenue of advancement for a select few -- the Clarence Thomases, the Alberto Gonzalezes -- to implement the rule of the elite to the detriment of their own tribes, but for personal gain. Such people have been termed the "comprador" class in the literature of colonial administration. These are the "native bosses" who buy the labor needed for elite projects (e.g., native troops and native police), and keep current on doings in the tribes, to ensure the elite can quell independent thinking should it threaten to arise (e.g., weed out opposition leaders). They also man the facade of "diversity" and "equal opportunity" which all colonial administrations find useful for public relations. See the movie "Burn" by Pontecorvo (1970, starring Marlon Brando).
What can frustrate many natives is that the comprador option is just a cynical ploy, not an indication of real avenues of opportunity. So it is only open to a few, and these must be both highly capable and thoroughly compromised. Thus there can be much frustration among natives who are taken in by the ploy yet unable to actualize the false promises. Many want to "sit at the table" and believe themselves worthy, either on the basis of their own talents and achievements or by association with a reliably exploitable tribe ("we deserve it").
 Manuel Garcia, Jr  --  Immigrant Bashing For Colonial Control


Congo and Darfur: Where Anti-Arab Prejudice and Oil Make the Difference
Wednesday, 30 May 2007
by Roger Howard

Three million to four million Congolese have been killed, compared with the estimated 200,000 civilian deaths in Darfur.”
Some Black bodies are more worthy of attention than others. The three million dead in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where U.S. allies such as Rwanda keep the genocidal pot boiling and multinational corporations field private armies to guard their mineral extraction enterprises, get scant mention in corporate media. But Darfur, where 200,000 Black Sudanese lives have been lost, is cause for crocodile tears among right-wingers and Arab-haters. Genocide sensitivity is, apparently, an acquired, selective taste: it depends on who is doing the killing, and how much oil is in the mix.

“The Democratic Republic of Congo has received a fraction of the media attention devoted to Darfur.”
The key difference between the two situations lies in the racial and ethnic composition of the perceived victims and perpetrators. In Congo, black Africans are killing other black Africans in a way that is difficult for outsiders to identify with. The turmoil there can in that sense be regarded as a narrowly African affair. In Darfur the fighting is portrayed as a war between black Africans, rightly or wrongly regarded as the victims, and "Arabs," widely regarded as the perpetrators of the killings.
In practice these neat racial categories are highly indistinct, but it is through such a prism that the conflict is generally viewed. It is not hard to imagine why some in the west have found this perception so alluring, for there are numerous people who want to portray "the Arabs" in these terms. In the United States and elsewhere those who have spearheaded the case for foreign intervention in Darfur are largely the people who regard the Arabs as the root cause of the Israel-Palestine dispute.
From this viewpoint, the events in Darfur form just one part of a much wider picture of Arab malice and cruelty. Nor is it any coincidence that the moral frenzy about intervention in Sudan has coincided with the growing military debacle in Iraq – for as allied casualties in Iraq have mounted, so has indignation about the situation in Darfur. It is always easier for a losing side to demonize an enemy than to blame itself for a glaring military defeat, and the Darfur situation therefore offers some people a certain sense of catharsis.

“The US backed an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia to topple an Islamic regime that the White House perceived as a possible sponsor of anti-American ‘terrorists.’ ”
Humanitarian concern among policymakers in Washington is ultimately self-interested. The United States is willing to impose new sanctions on the Sudan government if the latter refuses to accept a United Nations peacekeeping force, but it is no coincidence that Sudan, unlike Congo, has oil – lots of it – and strong links with China, a country the US regards as a strategic rival in the struggle for Africa's natural resources; only last week Amnesty International reported that Beijing has illicitly supplied Khartoum with large quantities of arms.
Nor has the bloodshed in Congo ever struck the same powerful chord as recent events in Somalia, where a new round of bitter fighting has recently erupted. At the end of last year the US backed an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia to topple an Islamic regime that the White House perceived as a possible sponsor of anti-American "terrorists." The contrasting perceptions of events in Congo and Sudan are ultimately both cause and effect of particular prejudices.

Those who argue for liberal intervention, to impose "rights, freedom and democracy," ultimately speak only of their own interests. To view their role in such altruistic terms always leaves them open to well-founded accusations of double standards that damage the international standing of the intervening power and play into the hands of its enemies. By seeing foreign conflicts through the prism of their own prejudices, interventionists also convince themselves that others see the world in the same terms. This allows them to obscure uncomfortable truths, such as the nationalist resentment that their interference can provoke. This was the case with the Washington hawks who once assured us that the Iraqi people would be "dancing on the rooftops" to welcome the US invasion force that would be bringing everyone "freedom". Highly seductive though the rhetoric of liberal interventionism may be, it is always towards hubris and disaster that it leads its willing partners.
Roger Howard is the author of What's Wrong with Liberal Interventionism.

President Bush “Hurts” for Darfur
Darfur Is Safer than US Urban Cities
By Ali Baghdadi, Chicago

...What is breaking the heart of our President, the most “powerful” man in the history of mankind, is the Darfur tragedy! He has been hearing that Arabs are massacring black Africans; Arab Janjaweed militia is carrying out “ethnic cleansing”, “genocide”, and “rape” against blacks. To emphasize the gravity of the situation and the degree of concern, the President even went to the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington and threatened the Sudanese government that they must immediately stop the carnage or he will order additional sanctions.
Two years before the Darfur conflict erupted, President Bush expressed his dissatisfaction with the policies and conduct of the Sudanese government. He expressed his desire to see a regime change in Khartoum, similar to the one he brought about in Baghdad. He wants Sudan to become an oasis of freedom and democracy for the entire black continent, Iraqi style. One million Iraqis have lost their lives and four million have become refugees since he stood on top of an aircraft carrier and told the world, “Mission Accomplished”. Iraqi infant mortality, which was lower than the United States prior to the 1991 invasion by his father, is today the highest in the world. Iraqis lack clean water, their sanitation plants are destroyed, they receive no more than 2 to 3 hours of electricity per day, and their lands are polluted by tons upon tons of depleted uranium.

In late April, I joined a delegation of 31 African-American journalists in a fact-finding mission to the Sudan. Included in the entourage were: Akbar Muhammad, the trip organizer, a writer, a historian and the founder of Youth 4 Africa; James Mtume, KISS FM Radio – Talk Show Host; Alesia Powell, TV One – Producer; Kenneth Carr, PFW Radio –Talk Show Host, and others. I had the opportunity to meet with many members of the Sudanese government, on the national, state and local levels, including President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, as well as members of the opposition who had, until recently, carried arms against the central government. Darfur is the size of France, and is comprised of three states. I visited two, the North and the South. I talked to Darfurians in the internally displaced persons (IDP) camps, as well as people in the marketplace, men, women and children.

Members of my family and some of my friends and their friends were too worried about me. They doubted that I would come home alive. They were overwhelmed by the news reports of Sudanese violence that Americans are bombarded with daily. In their perspective houses of worship, some also prayed for my safe return.
First, I must inform my President, who is greatly concerned about the safety and well being of every US citizen, particularly Palestinian Americans, that I am home, safe and sound.
After viewing the facts as they are on the ground, and not according to the US news factories, it is my utmost duty to relate to the President, his cabinet, the Congress, the US corporate media, as well as all who “championed” the Darfur cause, the good and bad news.
The United Nations and Doctors without Borders have been right all along. No genocide! No ethnic cleansing! No rape! Our politicians and media don’t seem to understand geography. They don’t seem to know how to read a world map. Darfur is not in occupied Iraq. It is not in occupied Palestine. I felt safer in Darfur than in US urban cities.
I also discovered the obvious, what I had known all along. The Sudanese citizens of Darfur are all Africans, all blacks, all Sunni Muslims, and all speak Arabic, the language of the Quran, the Muslim holy book. My African-American companions often asked, “Where are the Arabs?” However, I repeatedly asked, “Where are the Africans?”

The Janjaweed are not a militia that the central government arms and equips. They don’t belong to a specific tribe or ethnicity. They are bandits, outlawed, and the army and local police severely prosecute them when caught. The Janjaweed phenomenon has existed for centuries in this vast land, and the tribal chiefs were able to deal with it through the traditional tribal justice system. The situation has worsened due to outside interference and desertification caused by global warming.

It is true that there is a tragedy in Darfur. Approximately 9,000 civilians have lost their lives. There are refugees who escaped the violence. There is a rebellion and there are rebels that are sheltered in neighboring countries. There are also opposition “leaders” who refuse to sign the Abuja Peace Agreement sponsored by the African Union, and are waiting to enter Darfur behind US tanks. Darfurians, young and old, have assured me that Darfur will become a new Iraq; their land will become a graveyard for invaders.

An old man in his eighties that I had met at one of the IDP camps made it clear that his people reject donations collected in their names by US anti-Muslim Jewish organizations. The American Jewish World Service, one of the sponsors of the “Save Darfur” campaign, collected approximately $31 million; $28 million of the relief funds were channeled back into Jewish lobbying efforts. Most of the remaining $3 million earmarked for Darfur was spent on advertisement. The organization has made it clear that its objective is to create Jewish “presence” in world “humanitarianism”...

As far as Darfur is concerned, Mr. Al-Bashir insists that foreign intelligence is behind the rebellion, and that the conflict will cease the moment the West, particularly the US government, stop financing, arming, and supporting the rebels....When I asked him for the real reasons for this enmity towards his country, Mr. Al-Bashir stated that Sudan, the largest country in Africa (2.5 million square kilometer) is rich in oil, uranium, copper, iron and many other minerals. The land is fertile; water is abundant; they have the White and the Blue Nile rivers and underground reservoirs. The land, with the proper infrastructure, can become the bread basket of Africa and the Arab world. This would not only provide the Black continent with food security but will also bolster its political and economic independence, which the US overtly and covertly opposes....
In a May 21 editorial in the Financial Sense titled “Darfur Oil could result in second Cold War”, William Engdahl spells up the Sudanese tragedy in clear terms, “What’s at stake in the battle for Darfur? Control over oil, lots and lots of oil.
“Darfur and Chad are but an extension of the US Iraq policy “with other means”- control of oil “everywhere”… China is challenging that control “everywhere”, especially in Africa. It amounts to a new undeclared Cold War over oil.”

The American people should know that despite internal conflicts created by the West, Al-Bashir’s government made great strides in agriculture, industry, education, health, and other services. National growth, which the previous regime left in the red, is now 11 percent. The country, which ranked number 95 among developing nations in 1989, now occupies number 51. In the past, 80% of the budget depended on foreign aid. The budget today depends on local resources. Agricultural land increased from 16 million to 60 million acres. Exports increased from 480 million to 8 billion dollars. Universities increased from 7 to 37. Although al-Shefa, the major pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, was hit and destroyed by ballistic missiles by former President Bill Clinton to divert attention from the Monica Lewinski scandal, Sudan today has 37 factories that meet 70% of the local needs. The destruction of al-Shefa, whose ruins I inspected, was disastrous to Iraq. Iraqis depended on the vaccine produced by the plant for the treatment of their cattle. Some medicines manufactured in the Sudan are exported to other African countries.

I do understand the reason for Mr. Bush’s wish for a regime change in Khartoum. Unlike the great majority of Arab and Muslim leaders that walk all the way to Washington on their hands and knees and enjoy Bush’s blessing, approval, and support, President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir is quite different. Certainly, he is not Husni Mubarak of Egypt.
The Arab-African leader and the members of his government are known to be uncorrupt. They do not squander the resources of their country. They do not have Swiss banks accounts with money stolen from the poor. They do not accept bribes from foreign governments or multi-national corporations.
Despite the economic sanctions and the enormous pressures imposed on the Sudan, Mr. Al-Bashir refuses to submit to the will and dictate of the United States government. When it comes to the sovereignty and welfare of the Sudan, Mr. Al-Bashir is unwilling to compromise. The Sudanese are solidly behind their President. The Organization of Islamic Conference headed by the Malaysian Prime Minister, representing fifty-five Muslim nations, has just reaffirmed its endorsement.

u.s. "humanitarian" aggression tactics revealed despite NYT cover-up attempt...
Darfur Advocacy Group Undergoes a Shake-Up
Save Darfur has gotten into hot water with aid groups helping the refugees of the conflict....In February it began a high-profile advertising campaign that included full-page newspaper ads, television spots and billboards calling for more aggressive action in Darfur, including the imposition of a no-flight zone over the region.
Aid groups and even some activists say banning flights could do more harm than good, because it could stop aid flights. Many aid groups fly white airplanes and helicopters that may look similar to those used by the Sudanese government, putting their workers at risk in a no-flight zone.Sam Worthington, the president and chief executive of InterAction, a coalition of aid groups, complained to Mr. Rubenstein by e-mail that Save Darfur’s advertising was confusing the public and damaging the relief effort.“I am deeply concerned by the inability of Save Darfur to be informed by the realities on the ground and to understand the consequences of your proposed actions,” Mr. Worthington wrote.He noted that contrary to assertions in its initial ads, Save Darfur did not represent any of the organizations working in Darfur, and he accused it of “misstating facts.” He said its endorsement of plans that included a no-flight zone and the use of multilateral forces “could easily result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of individuals.” Another aid group, Action Against Hunger, said in a statement last week that a forced intervention by United Nations troops without the approval of the Sudanese government “could have disastrous consequences that risk triggering a further escalation of violence while jeopardizing the provision of vital humanitarian assistance to millions of people.” Aid groups also complain that Save Darfur, whose budget last year was $15 million, does not spend that money on aid for the long-suffering citizens of the region....similar tension had flared publicly during the 1998-99 war in Kosovo, when relief groups had staff members in the Balkans at the same time advocacy groups were calling for bombing and more aggressive military action.“Not only were there concerns among relief agencies that their workers would be hit if there were bombing, but they were also fearful that more aggressive action could provoke a counterattack against aid workers, who might be seen as representative of the Western powers doing the bombing,”[...]

Revisiting the "Rwandan Genocide"
Resurrecting Ghosts, or Exorcising Demons?
by Steven da Silva
Global Research, June 1, 2007 is that utterly foreign spirit which has possessed the corpus of Central African history which has come to be known as the ‘Rwandan genocide’ – a hideous beast of a story concocted by imperialism. Hideous not only because of what happened between the months of April and July 1994, but hideous for how the tales told about those few months in Rwanda have served to mask the role imperialism has played in Central Africa at large throughout the 1990s. The tales told about the ‘Rwandan genocide’ are intended to disarm critical reason and deflect attention away from the even larger atrocities and the even greater war criminals that Western imperialism is trying to hide.
The Causes of the Rwandan Civil War

To the extent that Westerners know anything about Rwanda today, it is thanks to the Rwandan genocide entertainment industry which has proliferated in recent years (Hotel Rwanda, Shakes Hands with the Devil, Un Dimanche à Kigali, to name only a few). According to the myth propagated in these and many other films, books, and documentaries, the conflict really only begins in April 1994 with the shooting down of Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana’s plane. As the mainstream discourse goes, ‘extremist’ Hutus shot down their own president’s plane in order to justify the slaughter of the country’s ethnic Tutsi minority. But if the conflict can be so easily periodized at all, one should really begin the story in late 1980s when the current Rwandan President Paul Kagame was head of the Ugandan army’s military intelligence under the American-backed dictatorship of Yoweri Museveni.

In late September 1990, while both the presidents of Rwandan (Habyarimana) and Uganda (Museveni) were away in New York attending a UNICEF meeting, 4000 soldiers and high ranking officers from the Ugandan National Army ‘mutinied’ and invaded Rwanda.1 Immediately after the invasion, Paul Kagame – who was in the United States at the time of the invasion being trained by the U.S. military in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas – returned to Uganda to take up a position as the commander of invading Ugandan forces (soon to be known as the Rwandan Patriotic Forces (RPF)).2

For the next three years, Museveni allowed his former troops to move freely across the Rwanda-Uganda border as the RPF terrorized and dispossessed hundreds of thousands of Hutu peasants in northern Rwanda of the most fertile land in the country. Robin Philpot, who has written a damning exposé on the Western role played in the Rwandan civil war, has written that within “two and a half years after the invasion, only 1800 people lived in an area of northern Rwanda that previously had a population of 800,000.”3 In other circumstances, this act has been called ‘ethnic cleansing’, if not genocide. But such victims are not worthy of mention when Western imperialism has had a hand in such acts. Conspiracies of silence most often shroud their histories.

In a testimony submitted to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, one source recites that from 1989 onwards, America supported joint RPF-Ugandan attacks upon Rwanda... There were at least 56 'situation reports' in (US) State Department files in 1991… As American and British relations with Uganda and the RPF strengthened, so hostilities between Uganda and Rwanda escalated… By August 1990 the RPF had begun preparing an invasion with the full knowledge and approval of British intelligence.4

At a time when the Western presses were expressing harsh indignation at Saddam Hussein for invading Kuwait, the international community was giving little attention to the RPF’s war crimes. Instead, it was the Habyarimana government that was being condemned by the world for its responses to the invasion and occupation (not unlike the way the Iraqi people are being demonized today for fighting back against their own occupation). In response to the October 1990 invasion, the Rwandan government had some 8000 suspected collaborators arrested, holding them for periods ranging from a few days to a few months. And without taking into consideration the state of emergency which gave rise to these arrests, human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch, as Philpot reports, ignorantly claimed that “the arrests provided verifiable proof of serious human rights violations...proof of the genocidal intentions of the Rwandan Government leaders”.5 But no mention of the genocidal intentions of the RPF were made by Human Rights Watch.

Aside from the attacks being lodged by NGOs, Habyarimana was facing a host of other destabilizing forces from without. The ‘international community’ was pressuring Habyarimana to hold multiparty elections (while under occupation); and the IMF was imposing a Structural Adjustment Program that ended up leading to a harsh devaluation of the Rwandan Franc.6

By August 1993, with pressures escalating from all sides, the Habyarimana government buckled, signing the Arusha accords which allowed for a near parity of military and political forces between the Habyarimana government and the RPF forces.

In the same period in neighbouring Burundi, the first democratically elected Hutu president Melchior Ndadaye was assassinated by Tutsi officers in the Burundian army shortly after taking office. As a consequence, 375,000 Hutu refugees fled from Burundi to Rwanda to add to the one million Hutus internally displaced by the RPF.7 One cannot underestimate the level of resentment Hutus would have been experiencing at this point as they were being unilaterally victimized in a conflict, with the world siding with the RPF. Up until 1994, the refugee crisis in Rwanda was one that solely affected Hutus, thus intensifying the ethnic animosities between the 85-90% Hutu majority and Tutsi minority.

The precipitating cause for what came to be known as the Rwandan genocide came on April 6, 1994 when the plane carrying President Habyarimana and the president of Burundi Cyprien Ntaryamira was shot down with a shoulder rocket. But this is not how the world would come to know this event: not as an assassination of two heads of state deeming a global outcry and an appropriate response by the United Nations, but rather a ‘plane crash’, brought down by unknown perpetrators, likely ‘Hutu extremists’ looking for a pretext to execute their genocidal plot. But no evidence has ever been brought against any Hutu extremists for this crime. In fact, all evidence that has been gathered on the case points to the RPF and Paul Kagame. [...]


Richard Hugus Commentary
The upcoming June 10 End the Occupation demonstration in Washington is based on a call stating that Palestinians have been under occupation for 40 years - i.e., since 1967. In fact, Palestine has been militarily occupied since 1948, or 59 years. The call purposely omits the massive stealing of land between 1948 and 1967. This position is characteristic of Zionists who think the state they have set up in Palestine is ultimately legitimate, that at least the land besides the West Bank and Gaza is rightfully "Israeli." This is an idea that should be rejected.

Below is an article detailing some of the political maneuvering done by left liberals in the US on the cause of Palestine. I don't forward it as an endorsement of the demonstration or a call to attend.
Mobilizing for June 10th - March for Liberation and Return!

The Notion of the “Jewish State” as an “Apartheid Regime” is a Liberal-Zionist One
by Gary Zatzman

"Islamic Terrorists" supported by Uncle Sam: "Black Ops" directed against Iran, Lebanon and Syria
by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

The Bush administration has admitted that covert actions of an aggressive nature were applied against Iran and Syria. The stated objective was to wreck the countries' economies and currency systems. The infamous Iran-Syria Policy and Operations Group (ISOG) created in early 2006, integrated by officials from the White House, the State Department, the CIA and the Treasury Department, had a mandate to destabilize Syria and Iran, and bring about "Regime Change" :
"The committee, the Iran-Syria Policy and Operations Group [ISOG], met weekly throughout much of 2006 to coordinate actions such as curtailing Iran's access to credit and banking institutions, organizing the sale of military equipment to Iran's neighbors and supporting forces that oppose the two regimes." (Boston Globe, 25 May 2007)
ISOG had also been providing undercover assistance to Iranian opposition groups and dissidents. The group's propaganda ploy consisted in feeding disinformation into the news chain and "building international outrage toward Iran". (Boston Globe 2, January 2007)

About-Turn in Iran-Syria Policy?
Washington has recently announced an apparent about-turn: no more treacherous covert ops directed against "rogue enemies" in the Middle East. The Iran-Syria Policy and Operations Group (ISOG) has been disbanded on the orders of President Bush. The US will no longer be involved in "[covert] aggressive actions against Iran and Syria", according to State Department officials... A senior State Department official,... said the group [ISOG] was shut down because of a widespread public perception that it was designed to enact regime change. State Department officials have said the focus of the Iran-Syria group was persuading the two regimes to change their behavior, not toppling them." (Ibid)

Believe it or not?
Foreign policy analysts have described Washington's decision as proof of a welcome "softening" of US strategy in the Middle East. The Bush administration is said to have discarded " regime change" in favor of a more flexible approach, consisting of constructive dialogue with Tehran and Damascus. Aggressive covert actions, we are told, have been swapped for bona fide international diplomacy: The [dissolution of ISOG] comes as the Bush administration has embarked on a significant new effort to hold high-level meetings with Iran and Syria...

The decision to dismantle ISOG is largely cosmetic. Most of these intelligence operations remain intact. ISOG was one among several covert initiatives to destabilize Iran and Syria. Regime change and outright war are still part of the Administration's agenda. In fact, destabilizing covert intelligence operations directed against Iran and Syria have been stepped up in the course of the last four years. Moreover, these operations are closely coordinated with Israeli and NATO war plans, which constitute an integral part of the US sponsored military operation directed against Iran, Syria and Lebanon.

The covert ops have been synchronized with the military road map, including the various US war scenarios envisaged since the launching of " Theater Iran Near Term" (TIRANNT) in May 2003, barely a month after the invasion of Iraq. These war-like scenarios explicitly envisage regime change: ... Under TIRANNT, Army and U.S. Central Command planners have been examining both near-term and out-year scenarios for war with Iran, including all aspects of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces through postwar stability operations after regime change." (William Arkin, Washington Post, 16 April 2006)

The US is on a war footing and the various covert operations and Psy-Ops --which routinely feed despicable images of the Iranian head of State into the news chain--, are an integral part of the military-intelligence and propaganda arsenal. In turn, the covert ops are coordinated with US, Israeli and NATO military deployments in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf including the conduct of major war games, which have been carried out almost continuously since Summer 2006.

CIA " Black Ops" directed against Iran
Coinciding with the announcement on the closing down of ISOG, "The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, according to current and former officials in the intelligence community... " (ABC News Report 22 May 2007). This parallel CIA sponsored initiative, which "received approval by White House officials and other officials in the intelligence community", has broadly the same mandate as that of the defunct ISOG: "The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions...The CIA plan was apparently "designed to pressure Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment program and end aid to insurgents in Iraq." The covert operation, according to US officials, was a softer alternative to that of a military strike on Iran, an option which was favored by Vice President Dick Cheney and other hawks within the administration: "Current and former intelligence officials say the approval of the covert action means the Bush administration, for the time being, has decided not to pursue a military option against Iran."Vice President Cheney helped to lead the side favoring a military strike," said former CIA official Riedel, "but I think they have come to the conclusion that a military strike has more downsides than upsides." (Ibid)

The covert intelligence operations directed against Iran and Syria is not an alternative to military action. Quite the opposite. The CIA plan was designed to support Washington's strategy to destabilize Iran and Syria, through both military action and non-military means including covert intelligence operations.

Unleashing The Islamic Brigades Inside Iran
In relation to Iran, US intelligence has been supporting a Pakistani based terrorist group, Jundullah (Soldiers of God), that has conducted terrorist raids inside Iran. The group operates "from bases on the rugged Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan 'tri-border region'." According to a report by ABC News: "A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News.

The group, called Jundullah, is made up of members of the Baluchi tribe and operates out of the Baluchistan province in Pakistan, just across the border from Iran.
It has taken responsibility for the deaths and kidnappings of more than a dozen Iranian soldiers and officials." (ABC News, 2 April 2007)
Abd el Malik Regi, the leader of Jundullah, commands a force of several hundred guerrilla fighters "that stage attacks across the border into Iran on Iranian military officers, Iranian intelligence officers, kidnapping them, executing them on camera, ... Most recently, Jundullah took credit for an attack in February that killed at least 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard riding on a bus in the Iranian city of Zahedan." (Ibid). US government sources have acknowledged that Jundullah's leader "had regular contact with US officials" but denies any "direct funding" of Jundullah by US intelligence.

Inherent in CIA covert operations, the Agency never grants funding "directly". It invariably proceeds through one of its proxy organizations including Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), which historically, since the Soviet-Afghan war, has provided support to Islamic terror groups, including the funding of the training camps and the madrassahs, always acting on behalf of the CIA. In fact this insidious role of Pakistan's ISI (on behalf of the the CIA) is candidly acknowledged by US intelligence:
"American intelligence sources say Jundullah has received money and weapons through the Afghanistan and Pakistan military and Pakistan's intelligence service. Pakistan has officially denied any connection." ( Brian Ross and Christopher Isham, The Secret War Against Iran, April 03, 2007
Other channels used by US intelligence in funding terrorism is through Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, where foundation money is funneled to various militant Islamic groups on behalf of Uncle Sam. "Some former CIA officers say the arrangement [with regard to Jundullah] is reminiscent of how the U.S. government used proxy armies, funded by other countries including Saudi Arabia, to destabilize the government of Nicaragua in the 1980s [reminiscent of the Iran-Contra affair]." (Ibid)

Consistent Pattern: Historical Origins of "Islamic Terrorism"
Ironically, the Islamic groups are portrayed as working hand in glove with Tehran. Iran, a predominantly Shia country, is accused of harboring Sunni Islamic terrorists, when in fact these Islamic terrorists are " intelligence assets" of the United States, supported indirectly by Washington.
This role of US intelligence in support of "Islamic terrorists" is well established. The covert op applied in Iran are part of a consistent pattern. The not so hidden agenda of US intelligence, applied throughout Central Asia and the Middle East, is to trigger political instability and foment ethnic strife by supporting "Islamic terrorist organizations", ultimately with a view to weakening the Nation State and destabilizing sovereign countries.

From the onslaught of the Soviet-Afghan war and throughout the 1990s, a central feature of CIA activities has consisted in providing covert support to " Islamic terrorist organizations":
In 1979 "the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA" was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.(See Fred Halliday, "The Un-great game: the Country that lost the Cold War, Afghanistan, New Republic, 25 March 1996): Ahmed Rashid, The Taliban: Exporting Extremism, Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999. See also Michel Chossudovsky, America's "War on Terrorism", Global Research, 2005, Ch. 2.)

With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence, "some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan's fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad." (See Chossudovsky, op cit)

These covert operations in support of the "Islamic Brigades" continued in the post-Cold war period. The ISI's extensive intelligence military-network was not dismantled in the wake of the Soviet-Afghan war. The CIA continued to support the Islamic "jihad" out of Pakistan. New undercover initiatives were set in motion in Central Asia, the Middle East and the Balkans. Pakistan's military and intelligence apparatus essentially "served as a catalyst for the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the emergence of six new Muslim republics in Central Asia." (Ibid). "Meanwhile, Islamic missionaries of the Wahhabi sect from Saudi Arabia established themselves in the Muslim republics of the Former Soviet Union as well as within the Russian federation encroaching upon the institutions of the secular State." (Ibid)

A similar pattern emerged in the Balkans. Starting in the early 1990s, the Clinton Administration supported the recruitment of Al Qaeda Mujahideen to fight in Bosnia alongside the Bosnian Muslim Army. Ironically, it was the Republican Party in a document published by the Republican Party Committee of the US Senate which accused Clinton not only of a "''hands-on' involvement with the Islamic network's arms pipeline" but also of collaborating with the Third World Relief Agency (TWRA), "a Sudan-based, phony humanitarian organization believed to be connected with such fixtures of the Islamic terror network as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (the convicted mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing) and Osama Bin Laden,... " (The original document can be consulted on the website of the US Senate Republican Party Committee (Senator Larry Craig), at )

Since the launching of the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) in the wake of September 11, 2001, many of the official documents, which single out the insidious relationship of US intelligence to the "Islamic terror network", have been carefully removed from the public eye.

US Sponsored "Islamic Terrorists" inside Lebanon
The recent killings of civilians in Palestinian refugee camps in northern Lebanon, resulted from the confrontation between Fatah Al Islam and the Lebanese armed forces. Fatah al-Islam is a predominantly non-Palestinian Sunni fundamentalist group, operating inside the refugee camps. Fatah Al Islam is also inspired by the Wahabi sects of Saudi Arabia, which were part of the CIA's covert operations since the onslaught of the Soviet-Afghan war.

The Lebanese armed forces have been involved in raids on the camps, leading to the uprooting of the Palestinians refugees. The number of Fatah al Islam militants (made up of Saudi, Syrian, Yemeni and Moroccan fighters), inside the camp was of the order of 150-200 according to press reports. The Lebanese military offensive has been disproportionate, resulting in countless civilian casualties. "Yet, the massively disproportionate assault on the camp has been unconditionally endorsed by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “The Siniora government is fighting against a very tough extremist foe,” Rice said. “But Lebanon is doing the right thing to try to protect its population, to assert its sovereignty and so we are very supportive of the Siniora government and what it is trying to do.”

Lebanon has used the police action against this tiny group to ask the US for $280 million in military assistance to help put down what it grandiosely calls an “uprising.” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the request for funds, $220 million of which would go to the Lebanese Armed Forces and another $60 million to security forces, was being considered by Washington. The US gave $40 million in military aid to Lebanon last year and an additional $5 million so far this year. (Chris Marsden, 27 May 2007)

Fatah Al Islam has been presented in media reports, in an utterly twisted logic, as an organization linked to the Fatah movement in Palestine, a secular organization, founded by Yaser Arafat. From an ideological standpoint, Fatah al Islam, is similar to Al Qaeda, which is known to financed out of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States and supported by Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in liaison with its US counterpart.

According to Seymour Hersh, Saudi Arabia is providing funding as well as covert support to Fatah Al Islam, in close consultation with the Bush administration. Hersh points to a "private agreement" between top NeoCon officials and Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia, who worked closely with CIA Director George Tenet, when he was Saudi Ambassador in Washington. The Lebanese government is also involved in this intelligence operation:
“The key player is the Saudis. What I [Hersh] was writing about was sort of a private agreement that was made between the White House, we’re talking about Richard—Dick—Cheney and Elliott Abrams, one of the key aides in the White House, with Bandar [Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi national security adviser]. And the idea was to get support, covert support from the Saudis, to support various hard-line jihadists, Sunni groups, particularly in Lebanon, who would be seen in case of an actual confrontation with Hezbollah—the Shia group in the southern Lebanon—would be seen as an asset, .as simple as that.. We're in the business now of supporting the Sunnis anywhere we can against the Shia, against the Shia in Iran, against the Shia in Lebanon, that is Nasrullah. Civil war. We're in a business of creating in some places, Lebanon in particular, a sectarian violence..”(CNN Interview with Seymour Hersh, CNN International's Your World Today, 21 May 2007)

The pattern of Saudi support to Fatah Al Islam is part of a US sponsored covert operation similar to those conducted by the CIA in the 1980s in support of Al Qaeda.

Well, the United States was deeply involved. This was a covert operation that Bandar ran with us. Don't forget, if you remember, you know, we got into the war in Afghanistan with supporting Osama bin Laden, the Mujahideen back in the late 1980s with Bandar and with people like Elliott Abrams around, the idea being that the Saudis promised us they could control -- they could control the jihadists so we spent a lot of money and time, ... in the late 1980s using and supporting the jihadists... And we have the same pattern, ... using the Saudis again to support jihadists [Fatah Al Islam], Saudis assuring us they can control these various group, the groups like the one that is in contact right now in Tripoli with the government. (CNN Interview with Seymour Hersh, CNN International's Your World Today, 21 May 2007)

Staged Event in Lebanon? Building a Humanitarian Justification for Military Intervention
Fatah Al Islam is an "intelligence asset" financed by Saudi Arabia. While the Bush administration accuses Damascus of supporting Fatah Al Islam, there are indications that the killings in the Palestinian refugee camps were the result of a carefully staged military intelligence operation..

Since the Summer 2006 following the Israeli bombing of Lebanon, NATO forces are present inside Lebanon as well as off Syrian-Lebanese coastline. The UN Security Council Resolution allowing for the deployment of NATO peace-keeping forces was the first step in this process, which followed the 2005 withdrawal and Syrian forces from Lebanon.
The objective of the military roadmap, is to create sectarian violence inside Lebanon which will provide a pretext "on humanitarian grounds" for a stepped up military intervention by NATO forces under a formal UN mandate. This humanitarian military NATO intervention in liaison with Israel, is envisaged as a sequel to the withdrawal of Syrian troops in 2005 and the Israeli bombings of 2006. If it were to be launched it could lead to a situation of de facto foreign occupation of Lebanon as well as the enforcement of a economic blockade directed against Syria.
The pretext for these stepped up military actions are Syria's alleged support of Fatah Al Islam and Damascus' supposed involvement in the assassination of Rafiq Hariri. The timely "investigation" into Hariri's assassination and the setting up of a kangaroo court are being used by the coalition to foment anti-Syrian sentiment in Lebanon. From a military and strategic standpoint, Lebanon is the gateway into Syria. The destabilization of Lebanon supports the US-NATO-Israeli military agenda directed against Syria and Iran. US intelligence sets loose its Islamic brigades, while also accusing the enemy of sponsoring terrorist groups, which are in fact covertly supported and financed by Uncle Sam.

from The Narco News Bulletin, indispensable resource on Latin America and U.S. Drug War

Venezuela Accuses U.S. DEA of Being a “Drug Cartel”
By: Chris Carlson -
Mérida, May 8, 2007 (— The Venezuelan government responded yesterday to United States Drug Czar John Walters' criticisms that Venezuela is not cooperating with the United States in the fight against drugs by saying that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency is a "drug cartel." The Venezuelan government rejected Walters' statements, saying that the U.S. has the intention of damaging Venezuela's reputation and intervening in its affairs.

John Walters, who is the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy in Washington, made the statement in an interview with the Colombian magazine Semana last week. And today in Brussels, Walters made further statements about Venezuela at a meeting with the European Union and NATO about drug-related issues. Walters warned of an increasing problem with cocaine entering Europe from South America, and in particular from Venezuela.
"Venezuela is gaining importance for drug dealers," said the US Drug Czar. "There are flights from legal airports to Dominican Republic and Haiti. Sea shipments are dispatched from several points on the Venezuelan coast."

But the Venezuelan government rejected the claims made by Walters, saying it was an attempt to discredit anti-drug efforts in Venezuela. Minister of the Interior Pedro Carreño warned that the recent declarations are a new attempt to intervene in Venezuela with the intention of putting military bases in Venezuelan territory.
¨The United States establishes cooperation agreements in the fight against drug trafficking through economic cooperation so that they can later impose the presence of military bases under the pretense of cooperation," said Carreño yesterday.
Carreño dismissed any possibility of permitting the intervention of US authorities in Venezuela to fight drug trafficking and accused the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) of forming its own “drug cartel.” According to the Carreño, when Venezuela ended its cooperation with the DEA two years ago, they observed that the US agency was trafficking drugs through the country.
"They were making a large quantity of drug shipments under the pretense of monitoring them, and they didn't carry out arrests or breakup the cartels," explained Carreño. "We were able to determine the presence of a new drug cartel in which the United States Drug Enforcement Agency was monopolizing the shipment of drugs," he said...
"Venezuela is a free, independent country that has its own National Armed Forces and security forces to provide protection to our country, and we are not going to let some other Armed Forces come to our government and impose on us the presence of military bases," stated Carreño.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez ordered an end to the country's cooperation with the DEA in 2005, alleging that some members of the agency were infiltrating government intelligence and were a threat to the security of the country. Since then, Washington has made repeated accusations about drug trafficking in Venezuela, claiming that their lack of cooperation is allowing drugs to be passed through the country and into the United States.
The Venezuelan government, however, sees these declarations as an attempt to coerce them into allowing US intervention in the country.[...]

in case you missed it...
U.S. Intelligence Hoax on Venezuela?
By: Michael Fox -, 4/19/6
Caracas awoke to the news in the Venezuelan daily paper, 2001, that US intelligence sources reported the existence of a secret agreement between Iran and Venezuela whereby Iran will be sending nuclear weapons to Venezuela and Cuba...A deeper investigation, however, reveals an uncanny similarity between yesterday morning’s 2001 article and the information found in an article by former self-proclaimed criminal and current US law-enforcement collaborator Kenneth Rijock.
[sources included]

Indigenous people explain the cruel realityi of "globalization" on their lives, lands and livelihoods and their determined resistance -- in Spanish with english subtitles
Video: The Path of the Mayos (Part I)
With the Other Campaign in Sonora
By Promedios
Indymedia Chiapas
Video: El camino de los Mayo (Parte I)
May 27, 2007

Video: The Path of the Mayos (Part II)
With the Other Campaign in Sonora
By Promedios
Indymedia Chiapas
Video: El camino de los Mayo (Parte II)
M 27, 2007


‘Less Meeting, More Fighting!’: Lessons Learned by Grassroots Katrina and Tsunami Social Activists
Wednesday, 30 May 2007
by Bill Quigley

American activists were startled to find that Indians could not comprehend the passivity of the U.S. public to the ejection of Katrina survivors from their home city and state, in the wake of the flood. "If this happened in India, there would be a revolution," said one Indian community organizer. The Christmas Tsunami that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives along the coasts of the Indian Ocean did not destroy the people's will to rebuild on land that was their birthright. But "disaster capitalism" has apparently triumphed in the United States, where rights can be washed away with no trace. [...]

Racist Genocide in New Orleans Continues: "Like 911 But Add Water"
by liz burbank
A renaissance of Black resistance and leadership, historically the leading edge of revolution is what the postmodern slavemasters fear most in the racist "homeland".
Katrina was no accident, no surprise, no act of 'mother nature', the 'gods' , or bureaucratic incompetence. The human and environmental and impact on New Orleans of a hurricane of this magnitude had been scientifically calculated. Rescue and recovery were deliberately withheld, working class Black people militarily imprisoned, forcibly dispersed and murdered by the armed state.
This intensification of america's historical genocide, a crime of U.S. imperialist state terrorism, is a premeditated physical and psychological attack on the Black Nation to destroy its strength, pride, cultural cohesion and resistance to capitalist white supremacy's fascist global juggernaut.
Central to the U.S. strategy for global domination, Katrina and the brutal aftermath was engineered to serve this fascist agenda in two interrelated ways: uprooting, dispersing and weakening the Black Nation, while simultaneously inflaming racist support for the consolidation of a fascist mode of state capitalism under the guise of "rescue, relief and recovery” from a "major casualty-producing event" the state declared a “natural disaster.” [...]

full article at and]


FOREIGN DESK Estonia Computers Blitzed, Possibly by the Russians
Estonian officials declared that their country is the first to fall victim to cyberwarfare. “If you have a missile attack against, let’s say, an airport, it is an act of war,” a spokesman for the Estonian Defense Ministry, Madis Mikko, said Friday in a telephone interview. “If the same result is caused by computers, then how else do you describe that kind of attack?”
Officials in Estonia have accused Russia of orchestrating the attacks, officially or unofficially. They raised the issue at a meeting of NATO on Monday, with Defense Minister Jaak Aaviksoo saying that the alliance, which Estonia joined in 2004, needed to urgently debate the question — once seemingly a distant threat — of whether mass computer attacks posed a threat to national security.
“Events of this nature make a lot of people sit up,” a NATO spokesman, Robert Pszczel, said in a telephone interview. “Today Estonia, tomorrow it could be somebody else.”
The Kremlin has repeatedly denied government involvement in the attacks, dismissing Estonia’s complaints as fabrications..

Digital Fears Emerge After Data Siege in Estonia

TALLINN, Estonia, May 24 — When Estonian authorities began removing a bronze statue of a World War II-era Soviet soldier from a park in this bustling Baltic seaport last month, they expected violent street protests by Estonians of Russian descent.
They also knew from experience that “if there are fights on the street, there are going to be fights on the Internet,” said Hillar Aarelaid, the director of Estonia’s Computer Emergency Response Team. After all, for people here the Internet is almost as vital as running water; it is used routinely to vote, file their taxes, and, with their cellphones, to shop or pay for parking.
What followed was what some here describe as the first war in cyberspace, a month long campaign that has forced Estonian authorities to defend their pint-size Baltic nation from a data flood that they say was set off by orders from Russia or ethnic Russian sources in retaliation for the removal of the statue.
The authorities anticipated there would be a backlash to the removal of the statue, which had become a rallying point for Estonia’s large Russian-speaking minority, particularly as it was removed to a less accessible military graveyard.
The Russian government has denied any involvement in the attacks, which came close to shutting down the country’s digital infrastructure, clogging the Web sites of the president, the prime minister, Parliament and other government agencies, staggering Estonia’s biggest bank and overwhelming the sites of several daily newspapers.
“It turned out to be a national security situation,” Estonia’s defense minister, Jaak Aaviksoo, said in an interview. “It can effectively be compared to when your ports are shut to the sea.” Computer security experts from NATO, the European Union, the United States and Israel have since converged on Tallinn to offer help and to learn what they can about cyberwar in the digital age. “This may well turn out to be a watershed in terms of widespread awareness of the vulnerability of modern society,” said Linton Wells II, the principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for networks and information integration at the Pentagon...

The attackers used a giant network of bots — perhaps as many as one million computers in places as far away as the United States and Vietnam — to amplify the impact of their assault. In a sign of their financial resources, there is evidence that they rented time on other so-called botnets.... The 10 largest assaults blasted streams of 90 megabits of data a second at Estonia’s networks, lasting up to 10 hours each. That is a data load equivalent to downloading the entire Windows XP operating system every six seconds for 10 hours. “Hillar and his guys are good,” said Bill Woodcock, an American Internet security expert who was also on hand to observe the response...

Linnar Viik, a computer science professor and leader in Estonia’s high-tech industry... said the episode would serve as a learning experience. The use of botnets, for example, illustrates how a cyberattack on a single country can ensnare many other countries.
In recent years, cyberattacks have been associated with Middle East and Serbian-Croatian conflicts. But computer systems at the Pentagon, NASA, universities and research labs have been compromised in the past.
Scientists and researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences this year heard testimony from military strategy experts indicating that both China and Russia have offensive information-warfare programs. The United States is also said to have begun a cyberwarfare effort.

Though Estonia cannot be sure of the attackers’ identities, their plans were posted on the Internet even before the attack began. On Russian-language forums and chat groups, the investigators found detailed instructions on how to send disruptive messages, and which Estonian Web sites to use as targets.
“We were watching them being set up in real time,” said Mr. Aarelaid, who weeks later could find several examples using Google.

For NATO, the attack may lead to a discussion of whether it needs to modify its commitment to collective defense, enshrined in Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. Mr. Aarelaid said NATO’s Internet security experts said little but took copious notes during their visit.
Because of the murkiness of the Internet — where attackers can mask their identities by using the Internet addresses of others, or remotely program distant computers to send data without their owners even knowing it — several experts said that the attackers would probably never be caught. American government officials said that the nature of the attacks suggested they were initiated by “hacktivists,” technical experts who act independently from governments...“At the present time, we are not able to prove direct state links,” Mr. Aaviksoo, Estonia’s defense minister...

A spokesman for the Kremlin, Dmitri S. Peskov, denied Russian state involvement in the attacks and added, “The Estonia side has to be extremely careful when making accusations.” The police here arrested and then released a 19-year-old Estonian man of Russian descent whom they suspected of helping to organize the attacks. Meanwhile, Estonia’s foreign ministry has circulated a document that lists several Internet addresses inside the Russian government that it said took part in the attacks.

“I don’t think it was Russia, but who can tell?” said Gadi Evron, a computer security expert from Israel who spent four days in Tallinn writing a post-mortem on the response for the Estonians. “The Internet is perfect for plausible deniability.” Mr. Evron, an executive at an Internet security firm called Beyond Security, is a veteran of this kind of warfare. He set up the Computer Emergency Response Team, or CERT, in Israel. Web sites in Israel are regularly subjected to attacks by Palestinians or others sympathetic to their cause. “Whenever there is political tension, there is a cyber aftermath,” Mr. Evron said, noting that sites in Denmark became targets after a newspaper there published satirical cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad...

The last major wave of attacks was on May 18.
Jaan Priisalu, the head of computer security at Hansabank, and other friends from Estonia’s Internet security fraternity... said... somebody orchestrated this thing.”

NYT Editorial
Cyberblockade in Estonia
The small but technologically adept nation of Estonia has raised an alarm that should be heard around the wired world. Last month it weathered what some describe as the first real war in cyberspace when its government and much of its commerce nearly shut down for days because of an orchestrated Internet assault.
The assault on Estonia’s virtual society began in April after authorities moved a real bronze statue of a Soviet soldier from a central park in Tallinn to a military graveyard farther from the center of the city. For many Estonians, the statue was another reminder of Soviet invaders who took over their homes at Stalin’s orders. But Russians and Estonians of Russian descent immediately took to the streets to protest. The statue’s move was, for them, a sign of disrespect for Soviets who battled the Nazis in World War II.
The rioting and looting in Tallinn turned out to be nothing compared to what began happening to Estonia’s computers. Waves of unwanted data quickly clogged the Web sites of the government, businesses and several newspapers, shutting down one branch of their computer network after another. One minister described it as a kind of electronic blockade, like having the nation’s ports all shut to the sea. Estonian authorities charged that the data flood came on orders from the Kremlin. President Vladimir Putin’s government has denied any involvement.
In recent years, governments, businesses and individuals have focused on ways to keep hackers or destructive viruses from stealing or destroying sensitive information. But Estonia should put the computer-dependent world on full notice that there can be many offensive forms of information warfare and figuring out how to stop it — and ultimately who is behind it — is essential to all of our security.


...The attacks began on the day that the Estonian authorities removed a Soviet-era war monument that had been the source of protests and diplomatic tensions with Russia for months. Russia reacted vehemently, accusing Estonia, a former republic of the Soviet Union, of besmirching the memory of Soviet soldiers who fought against Nazi Germany. In the days that followed, Russia suspended rail service, ostensibly for track repairs, while protesters in Moscow staged raucous demonstrations, harassing Estonia’s ambassador in one instance. Senior officials have called for a boycott of Estonian goods, which at least one supermarket chain has observed.

The tensions with Estonia, along with Russian disputes with Poland and Lithuania, overshadowed a meeting in southern Russia near the city of Samara on Friday between Mr. Putin and the European Union’s leaders, including Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, the Union’s rotating president, and José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, the Union’s governing body. Tensions between Russia and Estonia were discussed at the meeting, but the computer attacks were not...

As the attacks have continued, they are now being traced to computers around the world, from Vietnam to the United States, according to Hillar Aarelaid, the head of the country’s newly created Computer Emergency Response Team.
Mr. Aarelaid said attacks involved “botnets,” networks of computers that have been compromised by an unauthorized user, who can then command and control them, surreptitiously and usually nefariously. Instructions in Russian on how to attack Estonian sites have circulated on the Internet, he added, suggesting that the world’s first cyberwar would continue. “We can’t say we have seen the biggest attack yet,” he said, “because each wave is bigger than the one before.”

Support global anti-imperialist resistance!
Iraqi Bombers Thwart Efforts to Shield G.I.'s
Even as the Pentagon has made a major effort to defend against makeshift explosives, the proportion of American deaths caused by them has sharply risen. "The problem will not subside even when there is a stable situation of some kind reached in either Iraq or Afghanistan. This is going to be around. This is too easy for an insurgent."
- GEN. MONTGOMERY C. MEIGS, director of a Pentagon task force on roadside bombs.

"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy"
Henry Kissinger

Just Look What “Your Country” Did To You
By Adam Engel
Have I mentioned the spirits of 30 million slain Native Americans reaching through the TV sets to choke Boobus Americanus on his livingroom sofa? Or the ghosts of 100 million-plus African slaves tearing down the buildings they were forced to erect

Global hegemony is a bipartisan imperialist empire survival game run now mainly by a ‘neocon’ team … with total neoliberal cooperation & complicity
What Dick really means . . . Neocon terrorists have ambitions of empire, says Cheney
By Dr. June Scorza Terpstra, translating the doublespeak from a report from
Sidney, Australia
Online Journal Contributing Writer

The US War of Terror’s ultimate aim is to establish “a stronghold for the New World Order, covering a region from Spain, across North Africa, through the Middle East and South Asia, all the way to Indonesia — and it wouldn’t stop there,” US Vice President Dick Cheney warned yesterday. He said the war of terror ”had ambitions of empire.”

Violence/Non-Violence: Imperialist Marriage of Convenience…and a message to liberal ‘peace’ /’non-violent’ missionaries
Washington’s New World Order “Democratization” Template
by Jonathan Mowat

“Gene Sharp started out the seminar by saying ‘Strategic nonviolent struggleis all about political power.’ And I thought, ‘Boy is this guy speaking my language,’ that is what armed struggle is about.”
Col. Robert Helvey


Terrorism Defined
George Orwell and the power of language
by Stephen Lendman

George Orwell knew about the power of language before the age of television and the internet enhanced it exponentially. He explained how easy "doublethink" and "newspeak" can convince us "war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength." He also wrote "All war propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from (chicken hawk) people who are not fighting (and) Big Brother is watching...." us to be sure we get the message and obey it.

In 1946, Orwell wrote about "Politics and the English Language" saying "In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible" to hide what its user has in mind. So "defenseless villages are bombarded from the air (and) this is called 'pacification'." And the president declares a "war on terrorism" that's, in fact, a "war of terrorism"...

George Bush's [U.S. IMPERIALISM'S] "war on terrorism" began on that fateful September day when his administration [WITH COMPLICIT IMPERIALIST DEMOCRATIC PARTY] didn't miss a beat stoking the flames of fear ... for the long-planned aggressive imperial adventurism...needing "a catastrophic and catalyzing (enough) event - like a new Pearl Harbor" to launch. .. Many writers, past and present, have written on terrorism with their definitions and analyses of it... first an official definition...

How the US Defines Terrorism

(A) "violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;"

(B) are intended to -

(i) "intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii) affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States...."

The US Army Operational Concept for Terrorism (TRADOC Pamphlet No. 525-37, 1984) shortens the above definition to be "the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature....through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear." ...

[Canadian] scholar/author/activist and Global Research web site editor Michel Chossudovsky began writing that 911 evening publishing an article the next day titled "Who Is Osama Bin Laden," perhaps being the first... critic to courageously challenge the official account of what took place that day. He then updated his earlier account September 10, 2006 in an article titled "The Truth behind 9/11: Who is Osama Bin Ladin."...

Here's a summary of what he wrote that was included in his 2005 book: "America's War on Terrorism In the Wake of 9/11" he calls a complete fabrication
"based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden (from a cave in Afghanistan and hospital bed in Pakistan), outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus." He called it instead what it is, in fact - a pretext for permanent "New World Order" wars of conquest serving the interests of Wall Street, the US military-industrial complex, and all other corporate interests profiting hugely from a massive scheme harming the public interest in the near-term and potentially all humanity unless it's stopped in time.

On the morning of 9/11, the Bush administration didn't miss a beat telling the world Al Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center (WTC) and Pentagon meaning Osama bin Laden was the main culprit - case closed without even the benefit of a forensic and intelligence analysis piecing together all potential helpful information. There was no need to because, as Chossudovsky explained, "That same (9/11) evening at 9:30 pm, a 'War Cabinet' was formed integrated by a select number of top intelligence and military advisors. At 11:00PM, at the end of that historic (White House) meeting, the 'War on Terrorism' was officially launched... the decision was announced (straightaway) to wage war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in retribution for the 9/11 attacks" with news headlines the next day asserting, with certainty, "state sponsorship" responsibility for the attacks connected to them. The dominant media, in lockstep, called for military retaliation against Afghanistan even though no evidence proved the Taliban government responsible, because, in fact, it was not and we knew it.

Four weeks later on October 7, a long-planned war of illegal aggression began, Afghanistan was bombed and then invaded by US forces working in partnership with their new allies - the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan or so-called Northern Alliance "warlords." Their earlier repressive rule was so extreme, it gave rise to the Taliban in the first place and has now made them resurgent.

Chossudovsky further explained that the public doesn't "realize that a large scale theater war is never planned and executed in a matter of weeks." This one, like all others, was months in the making needing only what CentCom Commander General Tommy Franks called a "terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event" to arouse enough public anger for the Bush administration to launch it after declaring their "war on terrorism." Chossudovsky, through thorough and exhausting research, exposed it as a fraud.

He's been on top of the story ever since uncovering the "myth of an 'outside enemy' and the threat of 'Islamic terrorists' (that became) the cornerstone (and core justification) of the Bush administration's military doctrine." It allowed Washington to wage permanent aggressive wars beginning with Afghanistan and Iraq, to ignore international law, and to "repeal civil liberties and constitutional government" through repression laws like the Patriot and Military Commissions Acts. A key objective throughout has, and continues to be, Washington's quest to control the world's energy supplies, primarily oil, starting in the Middle East where two-thirds of known reserves are located.

Toward that end, the Bush administration created a fictitious "outside enemy" threat without which no "war on terrorism" could exist, and no foreign wars could be waged. Chossudovsky exposed the linchpin of the whole scheme. He uncovered evidence that Al Queda "was a creation of the CIA going back to the Soviet-Afghan war" era, and that in the 1990s Washington "consciously supported Osama bin Laden, while at the same time placing him on the FBI's 'most wanted list' as the World's foremost terrorist." He explained that the CIA (since the 1980s and earlier) actively supports international terrorism covertly, and that on September 10, 2001 "Enemy Number One" bin Laden was in a Rawalpindi, Pakistan military hospital confirmed on CBS News by Dan Rather. He easily could have been arrested but wasn't because we had a "better purpose" in mind for "America's best known fugitive (to) give a (public) face to the 'war on terrorism' " that meant keeping bin Laden free to do it. If he didn't exist, we'd have had to invent him, but that could have been arranged as well.

...Today's "Enemy Number One" rests on the fiction of bin Laden-led Islamic terrorists threatening the survival of western civilization. In fact, however, Washington uses Islamic organizations like Islamic jihad as a "key instrument of US military-intelligence operations in the Balkans and the former Soviet Union" while, at the same time, blaming them for the 9/11 attacks calling them "a threat to America."

September 11, 2001 was, indeed, a threat to America, but one coming from within from real enemies... to undermine democracy and our pursuit of their own imperial interests for world domination by force through endless foreign wars and establishment of a locked down national "Homeland Security (police) State." They're well along toward it, and if they succeed, America, as we envision it, no longer will exist. Only by exposing the truth and resisting what's planned and already happening will there be any hope...
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

5/25/7 "Final Solution" to Palestinian Liberation: Anti-Imperialism vs. Liberal Imperialism: Where Do You Stand?


Commentary: Where do you stand?
Left liberal ‘Support’ for Palestinian liberation is based on liberal imperialist-zionist positions—(including the ludicrous lie that Israel controls U.S. superpower and is destroying it)— more pervasively that there should be justice for both Palestine AND "Israel", the oppressed & the oppressor, thus legitimizing the fascist settler state and its U.S. master.

What does genuine anti-imperialist-zionist support for Palestine --and all oppressed, occupied nations -- mean? Following are articles expressing genuine support and others demonstrating the liberal apologetics characteristic of most of the u.s. ‘left’, as represented by Noam Chomsky, reputed "anti-imperialist-pro-Palestine" guru. This reputation immunizes him from critical scrutiny and grants his treacherous position wide legitimacy and influence on the ‘left’: (1) to validate the existence of Israel’s racist colonial settler state in the name of a “two state solution” --on the Palestinian nations historic homeland -- criticizing only Israel’s “policies”, not its illegitimate existence
(2) to function as apologist for U.S. imperialist by accusing Israel of “...breaking sharply with U.S. policy”--as if the u.s., contrary to its recalcitrant zionist partner, supports Palestinian liberation, as if the zionist entity could exist without U.S. support and is an independent agent, as if the U.S. doesn’t call the shots for “eretz israel” whose expansionist agenda jibes with and serves the U.S. global domination Pax Americana agenda and its global war of terror. Where do you stand?

U.S. Policy Blueprint for Israel
A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
Following is a report prepared by The U.S. Institute for Advanced Strategic and
Political Studies’ "Study Group for the incoming Benjamin Netanyahu regime on
a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000."
The main ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which
prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles
Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav
Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy
for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports
on strategy.

From one of many U.S. based zionist foundations and think-tanks
Item: The U.S. military is training Abu Mazen’s “Presidential Guard” in the belief or ephemeral hope that this particular group of Palestinians, more than others, meets an American standard for the responsible exercise of lethal force. This would be risible if it were not so dangerous....
The U.S. is training one army of the government against another army of the government but, according to reports from the area, Fatah, including American-trained forces, have been almost entirely ineffectual against Hamas. Fatah is pleading for more weapons... Hamas is fighting Fatah for control in order to freely pursue its terrorist agenda against Israel. And despite American help - or because it only saw our help as a means to an entirely different end - Fatah is in no position to advance its own goals (not that those are so great, either). This suggests that Israel may be forced to consider intervention for its own safety. If it comes, the U.S. will bear heavy responsibility.
JINSA has a Two-Fold Mandate:
1. To educate the American public about the importance of an effective U.S. defense capability so that our vital interests as Americans can be safeguarded; and
2. To inform the American defense and foreign affairs community about the important role Israel can and does play in bolstering democratic interests in the Mediterranean and the Middle East.

Israel prepares Gaza attack to crush Hamas
Uzi Mahnaimi, Tel Aviv
THTT T THREE Israeli divisions comprising 20,000 troops are on standby, ready for a full-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip as Hamas militants continue to fire salvos of rockets into Israel
A cabinet meeting in Jerusalem today will test whether there is the political will for an onslaught that is likely to be costly both in casualties from the Israeli Defence Forces and for the Palestinian civilian population.

Yesterday Israeli aircraft fired missiles towards Gaza City and the towns of Beit Hanoun and Jabalya, killing four people and bringing to 24 the number of Palestinians who have died in airstrikes in the past week. The rival Hamas and Fatah factions reached a ceasefire agreement after a week of internecine fighting. Earlier truces had collapsed within hours and it was not clear if this one would hold.

The Israeli army’s high command is recommending an attack to crush Hamas “before Gaza turns into another southern Lebanon”, said a source. But they are opposed by elements in the security forces who argue that the timing is premature.
The battle plan is to cut Gaza into three parts, seal its borders and crush Hamas by flooding its towns and villages with troops in an operation intended to last no more than a week. Israel would rely on speed, superior technology, better training and intelligence and sheer force of numbers to smash Hamas...

The generals insist that they are ready to invade. Earlier this year in the remote Negev desert, three army divisions completed a dress rehearsal for an incursion into Gaza. A giant Palestinian “refugee camp” was built to help the infantry to train in door-to-door search methods in the tightly packed Palestinian camps. The last time they attempted such an attack was five years ago in the West Bank refugee camp of Jenin. Many houses were demolished and 23 Israeli soldiers and 52 Palestinians were killed....
With Israeli connivance, about 500 well-trained Palestinian Authority soldiers were rushed from Egypt into Gaza last week to help their Fatah comrades who are fighting for their lives against the more powerful Hamas militants.
“We should have no illusions,” said an Israeli defence source. “Once we step in, Fatah will not stand on Gaza’s pavements to cheer us on. They will join Hamas in the fighting and postpone their battles for later.”...The Israelis are expected to go for a lightning strike aimed at killing as many militants as possible in the first few days before pulling out. “We won’t have more than a week for the fighting,” said a military source familiar with the plan.
On Friday Tzipi Livni, the Israeli foreign minister, summoned the diplomatic corps to outline the Hamas threat. “We want peace in the Middle East,” she said. “But sometimes the only way to maintain normal life in Gaza is to put pressure on the militants.”

Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the opposition and the most popular Israeli politician, has no doubt about it. “The attacks on our citizens are horrible,” he said in Sderot last week. “The government should launch an attack to stop the rockets.”...

Principles of Unity
• Palestine is Arab land. We support the struggle of the Palestinian Arab people to liberate themselves from military occupation and colonial settlement in all of historic Palestine. We affirm the right of Palestinians to reclaim their land and resources, to maintain their culture, and to free their land from occupation by soldiers and settlers by any means necessary.

• We oppose the existence of the colonial-settler state of "Israel."

• We are for an end to all US aid to "Israel" – military, economic, and political.

• We oppose all forms of normalization with "Israel." We support boycotts and other popular actions aimed at isolating "Israel" economically and politically.

• We recognize that the struggle of the Palestinian people is part of a regional struggle against US, European, and Zionist imperialism. We support the regional struggle for indigenous sovereignty over land and resources.

Statement by the New England Committee to Defend Palestine on the Anniversary of the Balfour Declaration:
New England Committee to DefendPalestine:
The Balfour Declaration led to the dispossession of land and displacement of the Palestinian people.  The colonization of Palestinian can be seen as the most recent overt manifestation of colonial history lasting for centuries in Asia, Africa, and the Americas. The same European powers that sought to divide up the non-European world in 1917 occupied Turtle Island (the North American continent) in 1492.  As Europeans ethnically cleansed the Americas of their indigenous populations, they claimed that they were bringing "civilization." These same powers forced millions of Africans onto boats and brought them here against their will as slaves in the name of American "freedom."  And  it is these same racist powers today who continue to force their way of life  onto the rest of the world, finding ever-new justifications for doing so, in  complete contempt of decency, humanity, and world opinion. The rhetoric of "manifest destiny" has been replaced by the "war on terror" but the methods and goals are equally racist and genocidal.
On November  2nd, Palestinians all over the world remember that the Nakba ("catastrophe") of 1948 was the direct result of the European colonial project articulated by Balfour in 1917....

Confessions of a human bomb from Palestine
by Hujayra al 'Arabi
"We are a strong people.  We are steadfast.  That is not enough to prevail against the machinery of Death that has been set in motion against us.  The fact that we have survived a century of genocide speaks eloquently of our strength and steadfastness, but how much longer can we endure?  Those .  who robbed us originally of our land die peacefully in their beds of old age, having spawned another two or three generations of robbers and thieves Those offspring convince themselves that they bear no responsibility for the continuing deprivation of our people as they invite more robbers into our homeland, while herding more of our people over the bridge to exile.    They will not listen to the voice of justice.  They speak of 'peace' when they have made the word an obscenity."
Continued at:

“I Don’t Want to Know Their Names” : The Plan for Genocide in Gaza and Judaization in Galilee
by Julie Saad
Julie Saad explains Sharon's "disengagement" plan as a cover for continued genocide and war against Palestine.
In this article, Saad quotes Israeli author and "peace activist"A.B. Yehoshua, who says,  “ …after we remove the settlements and after we stop being an occupation army, all the rules of war will be different. We will exercise our full force. We will not have to run around looking for this terrorist or that instigator – we will make use of force against an entire population. We will use total force. Because from the minute we withdraw I don't want to know their names. I don't want any personal relations with them. I am no longer in a situation of occupation and policing and B'Tselem [the human rights organization]. Instead, I will be standing opposite them in a position of nation versus nation.” 

Repression of Palestinian Activists in the US: Where are the Defenders of Justice?
By Noah Cohen
"Based on the official position of the National Lawyer’s Guild in support of the Palestinian Right of Return and other similar positions, one would expect strong support in NLG chapters across the nation for the rights of Palestinian activists in the US. The NLG has historically helped in the defense of Palestinians; David Cole continues to represent the LA8 in their ongoing appeals.
 In Boston, this support has not been forthcoming from any of the existing organizations. In addition, active members of the civil liberties community who have taken public stands on the Palestinian cause have clearly been on the side of “left Zionism.” Our experience suggests that “left-Zionists” in particular may have an interest in silencing Palestinian activists, since this allows them to dominate what passes for “pro-Palestinian” politics in the US. Palestinians who call for strong positions in support of their full historic rights to land and their right to defend themselves from colonial settlers “by any means necessary” are frequently repudiated and shut out of public venues by these same nominal “pro-Palestinians.” [...]

Sami Al-Arian
Palestinian refugee, father, and professor found not guilty December 6, 2005, but still in jail. "Since 1995, Dr.Al-Arian has been the target of an orchestrated campaign to silence him for his views in support of Palestinian human rights. After nine years of a highly public investigation, the government has yet to provide evidence to support its claims against Al-Arian and his codefendants. Meanwhile, the case has already been intensely politicized by years of misinformation and lobbying by pro-Israel groups. On Feb. 20, 2003, Dr. Al-Arian and three others were arrested at their homes in a pre-dawn raid by federal agents. The arrests were yet another indication that, under the guise of fighting terrorism, the Bush administration, led by Attorney General John Ashcroft, is silencing political speech and expression protected under the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights."Continued at
Attacks / Prisoners: Continued at

NECDP co-founder, Amer Jubran.
Amer Jubran was one of the co-founders of the New England Committee to Defend Palestine... Amer was the subject of a relentless campaign of persecution and harassment by the FBI, the INS, and Homeland Security, which began on November 4 of 2002, barely two days after the first public action of the NECDP on the streets of Boston. Even before that, he had been subject to illegitimate arrest and intrusive surveillance by local and federal police agencies going back to June 2001 when he organized a protest of the "Israel Day Celebration" in Brookline, Massachusetts.
He is now living in Jordan as a result of the government's efforts to silence his speech in defense of the Palestinians' struggle against colonialism, apartheid and genocide, and to sabotage any effort aimed at building a political current in the U.S. that fully supports the creation of a liberated Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine.

breaking it down...
Is the US Anti-War Movement Pro-Resistance?
By Amer Jubran
February 4, 2004

At this point, it is a waste of time to discuss the perfidy of the US government. It is established beyond doubt that Bush, like presidents before him, represents the interests of a prosperous war industry. What is worth researching, though, is the methods by which the US managed to achieve its vast criminal empire. Such research needs not focus on the well-known economic and military machinery and its political consequences, but rather on the unconventional and secret strategies employed by the US to encircle and strangle its prospective targets. These strategies include client regimes, large-scale media propaganda, and co-opting opponents of the system. One such opponent is the United States "antiwar movement."

As one administration after another wages war with impunity, culminating with Bush ignoring 10 million antiwar protesters on February 15, 2003, any hope one might have that this movement could bring change has become wishful thinking. In order to bring the US war machine to a halt, insights are needed into why the antiwar movement has not been effective. This must include an examination of the leadership, culture, theoretical and practical goals, mission, and strategies of the movement as it stands today.

During the Vietnam era, the US government spent a great deal of resources on researching the movement and its impact. It responded to the movement with imprisonment, harassment, and assassination of leaders. An entire system of social rewards was developed to buy people off. The government's most effective strategy, however, was its choosing to contain the opposition rather than attempt to eradicate it. It was by this means that a "loyal opposition" was created - an opposition which the government could manipulate and control, allowing it enough power to reach a large segment of the population, and to disseminate a message of change, but withholding the power necessary for such change to be in any way implemented.

In the Vietnam era many realized the government could not be trusted. The pretense of a democracy in which two parties struggled against each other to keep the USA honest would no longer work. Elite planners understood that non-governmental organizations could do what the Democrats had formerly done. That is, they could push for reform of policies set by Republicans, and their free expression of political frustration could be promoted and used as a sign of a healthy, confident democracy. Such organizations could thus continue work vital to the government's longevity, absorbing the opposition in the name of reform, and the Democrats and Republicans could more openly merge forces.

After thirty years under this system the movement has established its right to freedom of expression, and not much else. The focus has changed from demands for changes in government policy to just having the right to express those demands.

Unlike the 60's, when antiwar protesters were attacked by dogs, sticks, and water hoses, protesters today are accompanied by police motorcades. The government issues rally permits, marching permits, sound permits, and vending permits. Some consider it a victory just to obtain a permit to protest. This reflects how demoralized the antiwar movement has become. Of course, once a protest is permitted, it will then be subjected to massive police supervision, as we have all seen.

For some whites and excluded minorities such as Natives, Blacks, Arabs, Latinos, and others whose political tone was too radical, the US developed more serious measures. The strategy was to hit these groups hard, away from public view. A large number of those who could leave choose to do so, and work within the system. Some whites saw the double standard and this made them sensitive about their privilege but paralyzed in their ability to take initiatives. Naturally, the minorities reacted with contempt toward whites. Part of the antiwar movement was thus divided, and thus conquered

"Give Peace A Chance"
Today in the US, there are many groupings in the movement. The biggest two differ in their political positions and tone, but are comparable in their behavior. One takes the position of reforming the system by appealing to the president, government, Congress, and voters. During the Gulf War of 1991, this group demanded the US "let the sanctions work." Similarly, leading up to the occupation of Iraq in 2003, it said, "let the inspections work." No matter what the outrage, this bloc's song is "Give peace a chance."
The moral base for this bloc is "peace" - an abstract goal that no one disagrees with but which lacks critical definition. It does not seek to address root causes - the fundamental need for justice as a requisite for peace, and the immediate necessity of stopping the US war machine in order to obtain that justice. Instead, it claims to be objective, to see the light at the end of the tunnel, and blames bad leaders on both sides - a US president and a third world tyrant, Bush and Saddam, Sharon and Arafat - as if both sides were equal.

The dominant philosophy in this bloc is pacifism - at any cost. Not only does this ensure zero risk to themselves in confrontations with the authorities, it leads them to condemn the resistance even of those being oppressed. Only if the victims of the US are purely oppressed and do not fight back does this bloc advocate for them. It joins with the US government in labeling resistance movements as "terrorist."

The most troubling area in this bloc's politics is its position on Palestine -- its complete failure to understand the long history of racism, killing, displacement, and torture used against Palestinians, and to understand the Palestinians' commonality with other people around the world who have been invaded and dispossessed. Its position on Palestine is not very far from the official public position of the United States, Israel, and the Arab client regimes. The leadership of this bloc accepts only "good Palestinians" as activists in their movement. A good Palestinian is one who accepts their vision of peace between what it contends are two populations -- Israelis and Palestinians -- competing for equal rights. History is thus erased. The oppressor is put on an equal footing with the oppressed. Worse, the Israeli aggressor is treated as the victim.
This bloc's leadership is composed mainly of white liberals, and is heavily infiltrated by Zionists. It draws its constituencies from left democrats, churches, academics, and some students. Normally, the constituencies are loyal. Members are steady in their numbers and contributions.

"Bring the Troops Home Now"
Criticism of the second bloc is more important than of the first. The first practically announces itself as a loyal opposition. The second does not -- its opposition is more formidable. The second bloc takes a strong stand against US imperialism but does so on the basis of the material self-interest of another abstraction-of--the working class. With this group, the needs of working people at home take priority over support for resistance in countries under US attack. Instead of spending money on war, this group says, money should be spent on providing jobs, education, and health care. Their priority demand, "Bring the troops home now," comes close to the mainstream's "Support the troops," and is a betrayal of those people in other nations whom "the troops" are busy shooting at, bombing, and colonizing.

This group rightly points out the existence of an "economic draft" but does not grapple with the fact that poor and minority people who have been taken in by the economic draft are capable of moral choice, did not have to join, and are just as guilty of the crimes of imperialism as George Bush if they pull the trigger. Also not recognized is that many of the "troops" bring with them the prevalent US diseases of ignorance and racism, and fight because they believe in what they are doing. A significant number are not minorities. Some come from military families. The best reason for wanting these particular soldiers to come "home" is to stop them from killing people. To appeal for their return on the basis of an injustice done to them twists both logic and morality. Yet more ink will be spent on one GI resister in this bloc's newspapers and leaflets than on a thousand Iraqi resisters who gave their lives confronting Uncle Sam. Indeed, more ink will be spent on the need for domestic health care and education and decent jobs in the relatively wealthy US than on the right of Iraqis or Palestinians just to live.

It is important for any movement's leadership to take a position on issues. Constituencies need clear analysis in order to understand world events and mobilize in response to them. However, clear, strong positions are of no use if an organization's main goal is to build numbers. Building numbers means slogans with broad appeal and minimum controversy which generate the largest possible protests. The goal becomes flexing political muscle and self- promotion which, in turn, establish the power of an organization, and give it credibility in negotiations. The negotiations are carried out on two tracks.

The first track is with the US government
When concerns about permits, collecting funds, and event promotion become more important than changing a brutal system, the movement is in trouble. After the dramatic protests of Seattle and Quebec City, the government became more serious about granting permits to protest. It asserted its right to control when, how, and where protesting could take place. Lengthy negotiations with protest organizers became necessary. Concessions were required. The result was a long stream of non-violent, peaceful, and inconsequential protests in several years of some of the most blatant military and economic violence the world has ever seen.

The protest against the World Economic Forum in New York City in the winter of 2002 provides an example. The authorities cleared all protests from twenty city blocks around where the forum was taking place, except for the area of the official protest. Protesters who wanted to get to the designated area were allowed to do so only through numerous and arbitrary police barricades. They were then corralled into narrow pens along the street, block after block, standing for hours in miserable, cold weather. The only action was speeches and chanting. If anyone wished to break away and march to the Waldorf Astoria, where the forum was being held, they had to go through the security marshals

of the protest organizers before getting to the police lines. At the end of the day, the statement came from the stage: "Go home in small groups; we have won today by showing the ruling class that the movement is strong and present." In fact, the ruling class only learned that the movement is willing to sit in pens and police itself all day long, and mount no challenge whatsoever to the fat capitalists assembled in the forum.

The second track of negotiations is with the liberal "peace" bloc of the antiwar movement.
Using slogans to recruit and build numbers is an act of sectarianism. Sectarian attitudes focus on recognition. Milder politics lead to greater numbers and resources. The second bloc wants to tap into these resources, but also wants to be recognized as dominant in the movement. An ideal strategy is building a principled position and allowing people time to discover its consistency and clarity. But overcoming differences in political opinions with the other bloc requires a compromise. At this point, language is made to serve both sides of an issue. For example, demands like "Free Palestine . . Victory to Palestine . . . Long live the Intifada" and "Stop US Imperialism" become "End the Occupation" and "Support the troops--bring them home."

With time, the importance of such issues as Palestinian and Iraqi resistance could be brought to the weaker bloc, but such effort would meet with decisive opposition from Zionists both within and outside the movement who are in a position to dictate the political agenda. To maintain numbers, popularity, power, and financial backing, the anti-imperialist bloc is forced to sacrifice principles and make deals. Sometimes, these deals require dropping an issue or, worse, presenting it diluted. The blood and suffering of victims of US imperialism are thus used to serve the purposes of power politics.

Another critical problem is this bloc's readiness to adjust its agenda to its sources of funding, making such decisions without the knowledge of its wider constituency. For example, funding from the Muslim clergy shifted the focus of the April 2002 demonstration to Palestine, a focus which was certainly correct, but which should not have depended on money. On October 25, 2003, funding from the liberal donors of the Vanguard organization resulted in Palestine being dropped from a large west coast antiwar protest. Because of funds pouring in from Vanguard, key organizers who had once been in support of Palestine attempted to veto a speaker for the Palestinian resistance from addressing the San Francisco audience. However, they did allow the Democrats to speak on the stage that day.

Although this bloc is a coalition, decisions on strategy and events are made by only a few individuals. A central committee selects people it deems appropriate to represent various causes. These people are often limited to describing first hand how the US government made their lives miserable, leaving political analysis to the central leadership. Furthermore, if the representative criticizes a stand, or how an event is handled, regardless if it was right or wrong, this individual will be iced. Instead of healthy debate, critics are condemned.

The second bloc has difficulty maintaining loyal members and allies. That is why it doesn't grow. Unlike the pacifists and reformists of the first bloc, the constituency of the second bloc is made up of radicals angry at injustice. These people possess the best qualities of revolutionaries -- bravery, political sophistication, and a willingness to sacrifice. Sadly, they find themselves sucked in by something that talks revolution, but doesn't deliver. As a result, radicals either lose interest or disperse into smaller groups with smaller resources and try to avoid sectarian conflict with the larger bloc. They are miles ahead of the first bloc in seeking to resist, but they are halted and slowed down.

Both blocs differ in their politics, but have like strategies. During a crisis, they both call for a stand and make plans for a massive protest. Inevitably, that protest falls on a Saturday. A protest in a public park on a Saturday in Washington, D.C. might maximize the numbers of those who attend, but it does nothing to interfere with business as usual. The government is away for the weekend. Why can't a day be chosen when someone is there to listen, or when the White House or Congress is about to decide on a matter important to the movement? When Turkey's Parliament was deciding if it should join the US in invading Iraq, hundreds of thousands opposing the war surrounded the building and threatened violence if the resolution passed. The result was defeat of the resolution and Turkey staying out of the war.

Both blocs of the antiwar movement take protest only so far as political rallies with a stage and speakers, followed by a permitted "march." Would the coalition proceed if a permit were rejected? Anarchists' who protest without permits and who do interrupt business as usual, are denounced by some in the antiwar movement. Instead of being viewed as a wing in the movement that counters the inertia of the pacifists, they are left to deal with police brutality alone. This makes them distrust the rest of the antiwar movement. Is there anyone in the US antiwar movement who resists the US government as fighters in Vietnam, Columbia, Iraq, and Palestine have done? Is there an underground that has recognized the futility of peaceful protest and mobilized to directly stop US war and aggression? In the current movement, anarchists have gone further along these lines than anyone else, but no one has gone far.

Both blocs are reactive to whatever the US government does. They wait for Washington to make the decisions. A clear strategy of taking initiatives and putting the government on the defensive is absent.

Every movement likes to brag about its victories and achievements. Here is a short list of what the US has done since Vietnam:

attacked and started the war in Afghanistan 1980
attacked Iran 1980
pushed Iraq to attack Iran 1980
attacked Central America 1980's
attacked Lebanon 1983
invaded Grenada 1983
attacked Libya 1986
attacked Iran 1986
invaded Panama 1989
attacked Iraq 1991
invaded Somalia 1993
attacked Yugoslavia 1999
attacked Afghanistan 2001
attacked Iraq again 2003
As well, the US continues to maintain Israeli oppression of Palestine, it continues to wage war against Colombia using a phony war on drugs as a pretext, it continues to defy international treaties regarding war crimes, it continues to refuse to submit to an international court of law, it continues to steal oil from the Arab world, and it continues to support the dictatorships of its many client regimes. At home it has created the police- state Department of Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, the Border Security Act, and the world's largest prison population.
Where is the list of achievements and victories of the antiwar movement?

The Reconciliation Game is for Saving the Occupier his Criminal Operatives . Beware of it Beware of those playing the Double side Game
Sheikh Majeed Al-Gaood
...The Reconciliation they want is the one leading to normalization with the Occupation his Project , the acceptance of all his Results . It also means the complete submission to the current situation imposed on Iraq his people . Wich means the ending of the National Resistance the acceptance of the Sectarian Ethnical! Division of Iraq . This Reconciliation is the way to grant success to the American Project his enlargement to include all of the Arab Countries ; which would allow Israel to realize all its goals in the region . The goals representing a part of the American-Zionist Project..

The Notion of the “Jewish State” as an “Apartheid Regime” is a Liberal-Zionist One 
by Gary Zatzman
November 21, 2005

The cause of Palestine consists of the restoration of the national rights of
the Palestinian people and enabling the Palestinians to exercise their right
of self-determination in their own territory. Theirs is the territory
illegally mandated to Great Britain by the League of Nations in 1920-21 and
subsequently "partitioned" by the United Nations in 1947 to establish a
so-called "Jewish state" enclave for the Zionist movement. Enabling the
Palestinians to exercise their right of self-determination in their own
territory means implementing the Palestinians' right to return to their
lands and to be restored in the property/properties that were taken from
them in the course of acts of conquest by the Zionist movement, and in clear
cut violation of international law, during 1947-48 and again in June 1967. 

Many activists in this highly just cause have been drawing comparisons
between the regimen of bantustans and separate laws imposed on the native
population by the tiny apartheid white-racist minority's regime in South
Africa between 1948 and 1991 and the "legal" regime by which the
Zionists' regulatory authorities at all levels -- up to the
Knesset/legislature and the Cabinet/executive, as well as throughout the
armed forces -- have continued to secure their own presence and dominance by
extending their control over every possible aspect of Palestinians' lives. 

Although not identical, the colonialist and racist pedigrees and impacts of
each system of oppression are structurally comparable. However, whereas the
solution in South Africa always turned upon finding some new form of state
in which majority rule would prevail and white-racist privilege be finally
extirpated, the cause of Palestine entails eliminating the Zionist junta's
so-called "Jewish state" of European-American colonialist privilege and
restoring to the Palestinians what the Zionists stole. How does disabling
the racist provisions of the laws and regulations of the State of Israel,
and reforming the "Jewish-only" element to become fully inclusive of the
entire population, bring the Palestinians any closer to restoring what the
Zionists stole?  ...

The line of freelance organization of external "support" for the cause of
Palestine is liberal Zionism at its most diabolical: it is liberal Zionism
at work plotting to seize control of the Palestinian movement for national
liberation on one of its most vital points. Organization of external
"support" for the cause of Palestine is a matter for those actually waging
the struggle for national liberation within Palestine to tackle, to give the
direction and designate organizations and individuals to do it.
Interestingly, the comparison of Zionist oppression with white-racist South
African apartheid no longer passes muster with Archbishop Desmond Tutu or
other prominent leaders of the ANC-led struggle against apartheid. The
archbishop explicitly commented that what he was been able to witness and
learn about daily life under Zionist occupation in the West Bank alone is
already many times worse than anything he experienced during apartheid. If
such a determinedly non-revolutionary activist has already seen through the
falsehood of the analogy, the time would seem to have ripened to set this
analogy aside once and for all and remain clear-eyed about, as well as
vigilant against, the liberal Zionists' aim and presence in the cause of
Gary Zatzman is co-editor of Dossier on Palestine. He can be reached at:  

Slave Sovereignty: Palestinian Elections Under Occupation
Many Palestinians are boasting that they will soon enjoy, again, the most free and democratic elections in the entire Arab World. The only problem is that electing a Palestinian president while still under the boot of the occupier is an oxymoron. Sovereignty and occupation are mutually exclusive. The world, including many well-informed readers, seem to think that the Palestinian people is actually practicing the ultimate form of sovereignty by freely choosing its own president. This is easily extrapolated in the heads of many to mean that Palestinians are in a way free. So what's all this talk about occupation? Notice, for example, how little media attention is given now to the almost daily killings of Palestinian civilians by the Israeli occupation forces. Of course, the only thing that matters is who is running; who is not; what Mahmoud Abbas might have intended to say; or what Marwan Barghouti could have done only if . Bulldozing houses in Rafah, expanding colonies in Hebron and killing innocent children in Beit Lahya is simply a bore, a peripheral story, an ordinary occurrence in the midst of an election extraordinaire.

There are several things wrong in this picture, least of which is the fact that it is false.

First, some facts. This Sunday, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza will be electing the president of the Palestinian Authority (PA), not the president of the Palestinian people. The former is an organ created according to the 1993 Oslo agreements between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the government of Israel, according to which the PA will do little more than run the educational, health, municipal and taxation services. In addition, it will do its very best to provide security for Israel, mainly by clamping down on the armed resistance factions.

Israel and the United States helped create the PA specifically to control the occupied territories, -- while maintaining the foundations of occupation, of course -- and eventually to sign some "peace" treaty that would exonerate Israel from its legal and moral obligations to allow the repatriation and compensation of the Palestinian refugees, to comprehensively withdraw its entire colonial apparatus from the West Bank and Gaza -- not just by removing its army but also its Jewish colonies, illegal under international law -- and to end its system of racial discrimination against its own Palestinian citizens.

Ironically, the PA at best represents a minority of the Palestinian people, those in the occupied West Bank and Gaza strip. The majority of Palestinians, refugees and Palestinian citizens of Israel, are not represented by the PA. Here's where the real paradox lies: how can an entity that represents no more than one third of the people of Palestine be expected to meaningfully and legally sign away the rights of the remaining two thirds? Easy. Redefine the Palestinians to preclude those unwanted two-thirds. Since Oslo, the mainstream media in the west, and puppet Arab media as well, have done just that. They have used the term Palestinian exclusively to mean those resident in the occupied West Bank and Gaza alone. Problem solved!

Well, not quite. Those two-thirds cannot be easily written out of history and out of the identity of Palestine. They are increasingly becoming well-organized, politically active and they have developed their own channels of expression, if not yet their own frames of representation. Plus, many Palestinians in the occupied territories are themselves refugees who yearn to return to Haifa, Jaffa, Lydda, Majdal and Acre, all in what is now Israel. In all semi-accurate public opinion polls, the number one issue of political interest for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza has consistently remained the right of return for the refugees. So it seems that the PA project may not after all yield the expected returns on the Israeli-American investment.

Given this picture, shouldn't any form of sovereignty, albeit limited, help Palestinians declare their independence of Israel? But that's precisely the problem. The Palestinians are not free; they should not be giving the world the impression that they are. They are a nation under a very real and brutal occupation that is committing crimes with utter impunity and passé colonial arrogance. They should remind the world in every occasion that the only just and enduring solution to the conflict in the region can be attained by ending Israel's oppression -- in all three forms mentioned above -- not by changing the Palestinians' perception of it. They should struggle to revive the moribund structures of the PLO, the only organization that ever represented all Palestinians. All three components of the Palestinian people urgently need a single, democratically elected body to represent their interests and to shoulder the responsibility for their fate. This task is well beyond the ability, the job description or the best intentions of the PA.

Ten years after Oslo, the PA's political function seems to have become restricted to acting as an accessory to colonial rule, allowing Israel to maintain its oppression, while appearing to the world as engaged in some peace process. Since Oslo, the formerly closed doors have opened to Israel: in Europe, Africa, Asia and even in the middle of the Arab World. The once formidable Arab boycott of Israel has all but collapsed, allowing Israeli businesses to reap massive profits, boosting the Israeli economy to record growth rates, just before the second intifada broke out. In fact, the only peace that this Oslo process has achieved is the deadly silence of the oppressed while the oppressors go on with their regular business.

A presidential election under these circumstances can only help Israel cover up its speeding colonization of what remains of Palestine, while the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza are busy celebrating their superior "democracy."

When the slaves are distracted with "free" elections of their deputy jailers, the masters can only rejoice.
Omar Barghouti is an independent Palestinian political analyst. He can be reached at:

note: contrast unequivocal support for the just Palestinian struggle for self-determination with sleazy apologetics by Noam Chomsky, so-called Palestine-Israel ‘left’ authority, where he (1) justifies Israel’s racist colonial settler state in the name of a “two state solution”--on the Palestinian nations historic land and (2) acts as apologist for U.S. accusing Israel of “...breaking sharply with U.S. policy”--as though U.S. imperialism doesn’t call the shots and bank-roll “eretz-Israel”’s expansionist agenda to serve its own global rule agenda :

Noam Chomsky perspective on the Palestinian - Israeli issue
Palestine-Israel-USA, Politics, 12/26/2005

... There was no effort to conceal the fact that Gaza disengagement was, in reality, West Bank expansion. The official plan stated that Israel will permanently take over major "population centers, cities, towns and villages, security areas and other places of special interest to Israel." That was endorsed by the US Ambassador, as it had been by the President, breaking sharply with US policy. Along with the disengagement plan, Israel announced investment of tens of millions of dollars in West Bank settlements. Prime Minister Sharon approved new housing units in the town of Ma'aleh Adumim to the East of Jerusalem, the core of the salient that divides the southern from the central Bantustan, along with other expansion plans. Ha'aretz political commentator Aluf Benn added that the timing was "no coincidence." Rather, it underscores Sharon's determination that Gaza disengagement is a component of the plan to expand permanent control over the West Bank...

...consistent with Chief Justice Barak's doctrine that Israeli law supersedes international law, particularly in East Jerusalem, annexed in violation of Security Council orders. Practically speaking, he is correct, as long as the US continues to provide the required economic, military, and diplomatic support, as it has been doing for 30 years, in violation of the international consensus on a two-state settlement...

In 1976, the major Arab states introduced a resolution to the UN Security Council calling for a peace settlement on the international border, based on UN 242, the basic document as all agree, but now adding a call for a Palestinian state in the occupied territories. The US vetoed the resolution, again in 1980. The General Assembly passed similar resolutions year after year, with the US and Israel opposed. The matter reached a head in 1988, when the PLO moved from tacit approval to formal acceptance of the two-state consensus. Israel responded with the declaration that there can be no "additional" Palestinian state between the Jordan and the sea – Jordan already being a Palestinian state -- and that the status of the territories must be settled according to Israeli guidelines. The US endorsed Israel's stand. I can only add what I wrote at the time: it's as if someone were to argue that Jews don't need a "second homeland" in Israel because they already have New York...

High-level informal negotiations continued, leading to the Geneva Accord of December 2002, welcomed by virtually the entire world, rejected by Israel, dismissed by Washington. That could have been the basis for a just peace. It still can be. However, by then, Bush-Sharon bulldozers were demolishing any basis for it.

Every sane Israel hawk understood that it is absurd for Israel to leave 8000 settlers in Gaza, protected by a large part of the army while taking over scarce water resources and arable land. The sane conclusion was to withdraw from Gaza while expanding through the West Bank. That will continue as long as Washington insists on marching "on the road to catastrophe" by rejecting minimal Palestinian rights, to quote the warning of the four former heads of Israel's Shin Bet Security Service. There are clear alternatives, and if that march to catastrophe continues, we will have only ourselves to blame.
note: Newsweek/MSNBC now gives once reviled anarchist Professor Chomsky “The Last Word”

The Last Word: Noam Chomsky
A Tale of Two Quagmires
Newsweek International
Even today I am willing to volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to
kill as many Arabs as necessary, to deport them, to expel and burn them, to
have everyone hate us, to pull the rug from underneath the feet of the
Diaspora Jews, so that they will be forced to run to us crying. Even if it
means blowing up one or two synagogues here and there, I don't care. And I
don't mind if after the job is done you put me in front of a Nuremberg Trial
and then jail me for life. Hang me if you want, as a war criminal..."
From an Interview with Ariel Sharon published in the Israeli daily Davar
Dec. 17, 1982

U.S.-ISRAEL are fomenting "civil war", arming Abbas/ Fatah to destroy Hamas and the Palestinian struggle for national liberation. "Israel" has no right to exist on Palestinian land, or "security" from justified Palestinian resistance to U.S. supported genocidal occupation. Over 50 Palestinians have been killed in past week, Hamas leadership targeted -- no Israeli dead.

...As the top Democratic recipient of pro-Israel funds for the 2006 election cycle thus far, pocketing over $58,000 as of October 31 last year, Senator Clinton now has Iran in her crosshairs.  
 During a Hanukkah dinner speech delivered on December 11, hosted by Yeshiva University, Clinton prattled, “I held a series of meetings with Israeli officials [last summer], including the prime minister and the foreign minister and the head of the [Israeli Defense Force] to discuss such challenges we confront. In each of these meetings, we talked at length about the dire threat posed by the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran, not only to Israel, but also to Europe and Russia. Just this week, the new president of Iran made further outrageous comments that attacked Israel’s right to exist that are simply beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptability. During my meeting with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, I was reminded vividly of the threats that Israel faces every hour of every day ... It became even more clear how important it is for the United States to stand with Israel...”

Lies Of The Israeli Peace Movement
By Richard Hugus
... It is time to respond to the pacifist progressive in particular who collaborates with the oppressor by equating and condemning all violence. The language of resistance must be clearly spoken: It is right for Palestinians to resist the occupation, not just the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, but of all of Palestine, by whatever means possible. It is right for the Iraqi resistance to resist the similar vicious US occupation of Iraq. It was right for the Sioux to resist, it was right for the African slave to resist, it was right for the Vietnamese to resist. In no way can the minor losses of the oppressor be equated with or compensate for the original crime of his aggression. It is time for progressives in the US to openly and clearly support resistance to the monster that the US has become, and the proxies it supports, like Israel, and increasingly this means rejecting the false language of the pacifist. The conflict in Palestine is not morally ambiguous. It is not a battle between two sides who are equally guilty. Zionists attacked, Palestinians defended. There is a right and a wrong.

Bravo Abbas! Bravo Hamas!
by Gabriel Ash; Dissident Voice; January 28, 2006
Elections results in the Occupied Territories show that Fatah has lost its majority in the Palestinian parliament by a stunningly large margin. This is a transformational event with lasting geopolitical importance, for Hamas and Fatah, for Palestinians and Israelis, and for the world.
Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah and head of the make-believe Palestinian “government”, was never an inspiring figure. Palestine today is still at a stage that requires a liberation movement. Yet Abbas, even more than Arafat before him, bought into the Western conceit that he was a head of state in the making. Rather than leading the struggle for liberation, Abbas focused on being a technocrat to satisfy the rhetorical needs of the EU and the US who funded him. In his speeches, he sometimes channeled the words dictated to him by his donors more than the aspirations of his constituents. His handling of his greatest challenge as a politician -- restoring cohesion and a sense of purpose to Fatah -- was mediocre. The necessary takeover of Fatah by the younger generation of leaders is happening, but far from smoothly, and older figures widely perceived as corrupt and ineffectual continue to cling to power. Finally, Abbas has staked his grand strategy on the continuation of Oslo and a negotiated peace with Israel. On that front he has achieved nothing; although, to be fair, it wasn’t his fault.
Nevertheless, Abbas is about to make history, and leave his people and the whole region an inspiring gift. Abbas is overseeing the first grand democratic defeat of an Arab leader in a popular election. If he steps down as he has promised to do, he will have completed an achievement without parallel. Let it be noticed that losing was not as easy as it may seem. Abbas had to overcome and ignore the persistent calls within his own party to postpone the elections. He had to contend with a grand chorus of Israeli, US and EU voices calling on him to undermine the democratic process by excluding Hamas. He had opportunities aplenty to cave in. He did not. Palestinians, not the least because of their poverty and years of stubborn resistance, have a more democratic culture than the rest of the Middle East. Nevertheless, it is to Abbas’ credit that he accepted and expressed this democratic spirit. It is a rare leader anywhere, and rarer still in the Middle East, who doesn’t imagine himself God’s gift to his nation. For defending the integrity of this fragile democratic exercise even as it went against him Abbas deserves an unqualified Bravo.
Hamas is the big winner of the elections. It too deserves a Bravo. (From reading the mainstream Western media, one gets the impression that the only interesting question is when Hamas will recognize Israel and renounce violence. Our “objective” journalists cannot possibly adopt a perspective other than that of the Israeli state. Do send them a nice card; their “profession” is the oldest in the world. I will not bore you with the same question. I hope Hamas does what Palestinians expect them to do and nothing else -- lead the fight for liberty and dignity.)
For many years now Hamas has been at the forefront of the struggle for Palestinian liberation. While far from being alone, Hamas recognized early that Oslo was a cul-de-sac and a fraud. For better or for worse -- and the jury is still out -- Hamas played a crucial role in the decision to meet the militarized Israeli repression of the second intifada with arms. Hamas was early to adopt the tactic of suicide attacks. Thanks to the usual double standard, these are viewed in the West as more reprehensible than the much more lethal weapons routinely used by Israel. Fatefully, Hamas took a hard line on the use of suicide attacks, refusing to accept distinctions others proposed, such as between civilian and military targets, or between targets inside the Occupied Territories and those in pre-67 Israel. While I believe this was Hamas’ biggest mistake and a missed opportunity to drive a wedge between Israel’s bellicose leadership and less bellicose public, Hamas’ position reflected significant segments of Palestinian public opinion and was neither less nor more immoral than Israel’s military practices.
Crucial to its current electoral success is Hamas’ recognition that resistance is more than guns. Since its inception, Hamas has operated mosques, schools, clinics and charities. It has made the survival and maintenance of Palestinian society a major priority, providing vital services in an economic environment that got bleaker by the day. Despite not having access to the larger sums and apparently useless expertise that the PA received from the US and the EU, Hamas is widely recognized to have done a better job than the PA as a provider of services. That is no small success and reflects well on the qualities of Hamas’ leaders and cadres. Beyond that, it demonstrates Hamas ability to maintain a spirit of dedication and personal integrity.
Public rejection of corruption is no doubt a major explanation for the rise of Hamas. But so is religion. Palestinian society has turned increasingly to religion in response to the hardships of daily life under Israeli occupation. At the same time, it is hard not to credit the religious bond and commitment for Hamas’ strength and ability to resist the lure of corruption. It is fashionable in the West, especially at the center and left of the political discourse, to compare “our fundamentalists with theirs.” While there is truth in that comparison, it misses quite a lot. “Our fundamentalists,” from George Bush to Pat Robertson, are fundamentally corrupt. Their religion is a racket. On the Muslim side the opposite seems often to be the case. Far from being a shakedown, religion over there is an antidote to corruption. Karl Marx famously dismissed religion as “Opium for the masses.” In the Middle East it is more like amphetamines. It keeps people going past the end of exhaustion and despair.
While Palestinian society turned more religious, Hamas turned more ecumenical. Palestinian parliamentarian Hanan Ashrawi expressed fear that “militants will now impose their fundamentalist social agenda and lead the Palestinians into international isolation.” That is a distinct and worrying possibility, but it is not set in stone. In these elections the candidates for Hamas’ new political party “Reform and Change” included women, Christians, and moderates. Hamas is now a larger political tent of Palestinian nationalism with a strong religious orientation; it encompasses radicals, moderates and conservatives with a variety of perspectives. Tensions between democratic and religious authority will continue to exist, and narrow fundamentalist tendencies are clearly present. But there is also hope that the current openness will hold and that Hamas will continue to develop toward increased democracy and inclusiveness.
With regards to the national struggle, which understandably casts a large shadow, Hamas has staked two major differences from Fatah. These differences underscore the threat that the victory of Hamas poses to the West’s colonial strategies.
Hamas maintains it will continue to defend armed struggle as a legitimate option. For now, Hamas is abstaining from violence, although the cease-fire agreed in Cairo had officially expired. It is quite possible that Hamas will continue to favor peaceful means. But it refuses to cave in to pressure and maintains the right to evaluate its strategies from a Palestinian rather than Western perspective. American, Israeli and European officials claim they will not talk to Hamas as long as it doesn’t renounce violence. As long as these hypocrites don’t renounce violence themselves, they have zero moral authority. Hamas deserves credit for refusing to take moral guidance from self-righteous bullies.
Hamas is also refusing to recognize Israel and negotiate on the basis of Oslo and the roadmap. Instead Hamas candidates have outlined a strategy of independence, strengthening Palestinian society and resistance and advancing national goals without relying on Israeli and international approval. Hamas calls this option “ignoring Israel.”
In the current international context, such a strategy is dangerous but not without sense. While Israel demands to be recognized, it is clearly unwilling to recognize minimal Palestinian demands. Both the White House and the Democrats -- “progressive” such as Barack Obama and regressive like Clinton and Lieberman -- are parroting Israel like a second grade pupil reading from My Pet Goat. The EU seems mostly interested in helping the US play a “good cop, bad cop” routine. There will be a price to pay, but Hamas seems to think the West has currently little to offer Palestinians beyond money to lubricate the wheels of corruption. There is precious little evidence to prove them wrong.
As Hamas handles the pressure of assuming power, either in a coalition with Fatah or alone, it is possible that these two principles will be watered down significantly. The price for consistency may be too high, especially in lost foreign assistance. Palestinians today survive on foreign charity (or, one could rephrase that as saying that the Israeli occupation is financed by the EU and the US). Unless Hamas can hook up new donors to replace the EU and US, it may be willing to compromise rather than face a popular backlash. I hope that Hamas finds creative ways to subvert this new phase of Western colonialism. But realistically, the challenge is enormous.
As a secular leftist, I would have been more comfortable had Palestinian society coalesced around a leftist resistance movement. I’m sure many readers share that preference. But Palestine is not in Latin America, and our comfort level is not the most pressing issue. Hamas is today an important face of the Palestinian struggle for liberty, equality and justice. It is the face chosen by the majority of the Palestinian public in the Occupied Territories in clear defiance of Western colonialism. With its new power and old habits, Hamas will have plenty of opportunities to go wrong. However, as long as it maintains its commitment to democracy and strives to advance the rights of all Palestinians to full human dignity, Hamas can be a force for good.
Gabriel Ash is an activist and writer who writes because the pen is sometimes mightier than the sword and sometimes not. He welcomes comments at: 

US Holocaust Commission And Holocaust Denial
By Dr Gideon Polya

...This US Resolution [ UN General Assembly] was an act of (a) gross dishonesty and (b) gross hypocrisy. Thus (a) the dishonest IMPLICATION was that Iran (not mentioned in the Resolution but mentioned in the US and Israeli UN speeches) has offended – yet the Iranian delegate made it quite clear that Iran recognized the horror of the Jewish Holocaust and condemned the “Genocide and immense sufferings associated with that horrific crime” (words of the Iranian delegate) (see: ); and (b) the US is actively involved in on-going Holocaust Commission in Occupied Iraq and Occupied Afghanistan and, together with Israel, has been involved in obscene, public promotion of an Iranian Holocaust involving nuclear weapons.

Conspicuously absent from the US Resolution were the ongoing 1990-2007 Iraqi Holocaust ( 2.6 million excess deaths and 3.7 million refugees so far); and the 2001-2007 Afghan Holocaust (2.2 million excess deaths and 3.7 million refugees so far) (see: , , and ) ...

Not content with horrendous Holocaust Commission and Holocaust Denial in relation to the Iraqi Genocide (Iraqi Holocaust) and the Afghan Genocide (Afghan Holocaust), the US and its proxy Israel have both been threatening pre-emptive nuclear attack on peaceful, non-nuclear-armed, non-aggressive Iran (a Google search for the obscene phrase “nuke Iran” and for the phrase “Jewish Holocaust” today yielded about 0.3 million URLs in both cases) – clear, unequivocal and horrifying Holocaust Promotion.

It is not only the US that is involved in Holocaust Promotion, Holocaust Commission, Holocaust Ignoring and Holocaust Denial - the UK, Australia and their Coalition and NATO Allies are also involved in Holocaust Commission and Holocaust Denial in relation to both Afghanistan and Iraq (see: ). Racist White Australia has been involved in all the US post-1950 Asian wars, is currently actively involved in the Iraqi Holocaust and the Afghan Holocaust and is in practical denial over the appalling, ongoing Australian Aboriginal Genocide (the annual death rate of Australian Aborigines, 2.2%, is similar to that of Australian sheep, 2.5%) (see: ). Israel as a key partner in US-Israeli State Terrorism is involved in an ongoing Palestinian Genocide (post-invasion excess deaths 0.3 million; 6 million Palestinian refugees; 3.5 million Occupied Palestinians held in abusive captivity for 40 years) (see: ).

"Killing the Palestinians and then Killing the Story"
Pro-Israeli Editors Seek to Influence Al-Jazeera International English Satellite TV
Khalid Amayreh on Zionist influence at Al-Jazeera International and Al-Jazeera/

State of siege: Israel flourishes amid the bombs
Gabriel Rozenberg: Economics Reporter
May 21, 2007
A bloody and costly war, the constant threat of terror attacks, a string of political scandals and a land almost devoid of natural resources. Only in Israel could this be the backdrop for the most impressive economic success story of the modern Middle East.
Despite the war with Lebanon, 2006 was a golden year for the economy of the region’s only liberal democracy. GDP grew by 5.1 per cent, competitiveness improved sharply and the stock market surged. Israel came fifteenth in the World Economic Forum’s global competitive index, topping the list of Middle East states and up from 23rd place the previous year. Its nearest regional rival, the United Arab Emirates, came 32nd. In recent years, this small state has turned itself into a “world technology powerhouse”, according to Augusto López Claros, the WEF’s chief economist. Much of the credit must go to Binyamin Netanyahu, who as Finance Minister in 2003 cut a deal with the Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, that gave him free rein to push through market reforms[...]

Overthrow, America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq
Stephen Kinzer
The recent of Saddam Hussein may have turned "regime change" into a contemporary buzzword, but it's been a tactic of American foreign policy [always u.s. capitalist 'manifest destiny' strategy for global domination] for more than 110 years. Beginning with the ouster of Hawaii's monarchy in 1893, Kinzer runs through the foreign governments the U.S. has had a hand in toppling. http:/

The people of Palestine must seize power now
By Redress Information & Analysis
21 May 2007
Palestinians must organize from the grassroots upwards to form an all-inclusive, progressive, patriotic liberation movement to seize control from Fatah, Hamas and their like and refocus the struggle on liberation and the right of return....

For the past weeks and months, friends of the Palestinian people throughout the world have been witnessing with growing despair the spectacle of Palestinian killing Palestinian, of parasites – from the Salafi Group, to mafia-style clans to common criminals and collaborators – exploit the resulting lawlessness for their own gain, all the time while the Israeli occupation consolidates and the land grabs continue at a spectacular pace.

Ever since the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) won the Palestinian legislative elections in January 2006, an unholy alliance of Israel, the United States, the European Union and Egypt embarked on a concerted effort to undermine Hamas by making the Palestinian territories ungovernable.

First came the use of starvation as a weapon. The United States, together with the European Union and Israel, colluded to starve the Palestinians into removing the Hamas government and replacing it with compliant politicians. While the US and its European satellites cut off all aid to the Palestinians, Israel expropriated Palestinian tax money, a practice known to the civilized world as robbery. The message to the Palestinian people was clear: you can have democracy only if you elect the people we want you to elect, otherwise you shall starve. The result is there for all to see. According to Professor Sara Roy of Harvard University [...]

The second part of the strategy consisted of finding a Palestinian collaborator to help undermine the rule of Hamas. To its eternal shame, the Palestine Liberation Movement (Fatah) under the leadership of Mahmud Abbas put itself forward as a willing proxy to implement the Euro-American-Israeli plot against the people of Palestine....

Enter Egypt, which since the Camp David agreements of the late 1970s had become the main instrument of Israel and US... in the Arab world. According to several sources*, from January 2007 Egypt... began to send large quantities of weapons to Fatah, with the aim of triggering a civil war in the Palestinian territories....
The irony... of this situation is that neither Mahmud Abbas, nor Fatah, nor Hamas have any power or authority over anything, not over the Palestinian people or even over their own gunmen. The “Palestinian National Authority” (PNA) itself is a misnomer: it never had, was never intended to have by the Oslo agreements that created it and never will have any power or authority over anything...
The stark fact is that the fratricidal blood letting which is devastating Palestinian society and losing the Palestinians their hard-won international support is the logical consequence of the Oslo agreements of 1993 which set up the PNA. The sole purpose of these agreements was to establish disconnected enclaves, or bantustans, into which the Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza can be squeezed, leaving the remainder of the post-1967 occupied territories populated by Jewish settlers – in fact, squatters and misfits brought over from the United States, Europe and the former Soviet Union. The intention was that these bantustans be controlled by a quisling Palestinian regime, a role which Fatah was happy to perform in return for a little power.

Mumia Abu-Jamal
Democracy is a word used as a mask We don't really believe in democracy in America, nor have we ever done so. America stands for domination. Period...domination exported to the Middle East, just as it was exported 100 years ago to Indian Country; to Oklahoma, and to Mexican territories.

The second coming of Saladin (excerpt)
By Pepe Escobar , THE ROVING EYE

Divide and rejoice
Conditions are more than ripe for the advent of a new Saladin - after the Nakhba, the 1967 lightning Israeli victory against the Arabs, the failures of pan-Arabism, the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, the Israeli attack on Lebanon, the limited appeal of Salafi-jihadism, the non-stop stifling of nationalist movements by Western-backed brutal dictatorships/client monarchies.

When the future Saladin looks at the troubled and dejected Middle East, the first thing he sees is US Vice President Dick Cheney shopping for yet another war - skipping the "axis of evil" (Iran, unofficial member Syria) and ordering support from the "axis of fear" (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, the Emirates) in his relentless demonizing of Iran. After inflating sectarianism in Iraq, this time the imperial "divide and rule" weapon of choice is Arabs vs Persians.

The administration of US President George W Bush may have taken a leaf from former colonial power France - which invented Greater Lebanon as a confessional state, thus prone to perennial turbulence - to apply it in Iraq. But plunging Iraq into civil war to control better it is not enough (and there's still the matter of securing the oilfields).
Forcing a practically de facto partition of Iraq into three warring crypto-states - a Kurdistan, a southern "Shi'iteistan" and a small central, oil-deprived Sunnistan - mired in a sea of blood in the heart of the Middle East is not enough. For Cheney, the industrial-military complex and assorted Ziocon (Zionist/neo-conservative) warriors, the big prize is the subjugation of Iran. Because Iran, apart from its natural wealth, is the only power capable - at least potentially - of challenging regional US hegemony.
Yet the trademark Cheney threats - with the standard high-tech aircraft-carrier background - are not cutting much ice. Al-Jazeera has been rhetorically bombarded by everybody and his neighbor - from retired Egyptian generals to Emirati political analysts - stressing that the Middle East will not support another US war. Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, in a swift move, has just been to the United Arab Emirates - the first visit by any Iranian leader since the Emirates became independent in 1971, and all the more crucial because of a still-running dispute over a bunch of Persian Gulf islands.

The House of Saud - for which the only thing that matters is its own survival - desperately wants a solution as soon as possible for the Palestinian tragedy, before they may be buried six feet under by the terrible sandstorms blowing from Mesopotamia (think of hordes of battle-hardened Salafi-jihadis coming home after fighting the US in Iraq).

King Abdullah is not bent on antagonizing Iran. On the contrary: the most important guest at the recent Riyadh conference was Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki. Saudis and Iranians want to prevent US-provoked sectarianism in Iraq from spreading regionally. And King Abdullah wants a better deal for Sunni Arab Iraqis (hence his identification of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki as an Iranian puppet).

While Cheney wants to pit Saudi Arabia against Iran, a discreet, behind-the-scenes Saudi-Iranian pact of no aggression may be all but inevitable, diplomats tell Asia Times Online. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said as much on the record: "Stop any attempt aimed at spreading sectarian strife in the region."

Iran of course can be very persuasive, holding some tasty cards up its sleeve - such as hard-earned intelligence directly implicating the Saudis in training the Sunni Arab muqawama (resistance) in Iraq on explosive form penetrators (EFPs), which the Pentagon foolishly insists come from Iran. Everyone in Iraq knows it is operatives from "axis of fear" allies Saudi Arabia and Egypt - and also Pakistan - who have provided the Sunni Arab guerrillas in Iraq with technology and training on improvised explosive devices and EFPs.

Thus we have another Bush administration foreign-policy special: Cheney coddling guerrilla-arming Sunni Arabs - who are facilitating the killing of American soldiers in Iraq - to support an attack on Shi'ite Persians (allied with the Iraqi Shi'ites supported by the Americans ...).

Anyway, Iraqi Shi'ites are more than winning the US surge game. The surging US soldiers are fighting various strands of the Sunni Arab resistance and al-Qaeda in Iraq. Meanwhile, the officially ensconced Badr Organization and its shady death-squad spinoffs are free to apply a lot of deadly pressure on the Sunni Arab civilian population. The Mehdi Army, on Muqtada al-Sadr's orders, is just lying low - not taking the bait of fighting the Americans. Nothing will change the reality of this surge picture in the next few months.

About that clash
A possible Saudi-Iranian entente would be a classic case of local powers taking the destiny of the region in their own hands. In a parallel register, in southern Beirut - prime Hezbollah territory - there are plenty of banners in front of buildings destroyed by Israel last summer. They read: "The Zionist enemy destroys, the Islamic Republic of Iran builds."

Unity in the Muslim world is not a chimera: crypto-scientific Western babble of the "Arabs are extinct" variety is plain silly, as are nonagenarian Bernard Lewis' pontifications on the "clash of civilizations" - the "perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage". The new Saladin would tell Lewis to get a grip on reality and admit that the unabated political repression, tremendous social inequality and prevailing economic disaster all over the Middle East are direct consequences of decades of "divide and rule" Western imperialism plus some extra decades of non-stop meddling coupled with rapacious, arrogant and ignorant local elites.

The new Saladin knows how the US and Britain initially supported the Muslim Brotherhood - and then the Brotherhood supported the birth of Hamas. He knows how the US and Britain initially supported Iranian clerics - especially the late ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini - against the shah. He knows how the US and Britain initially supported the Taliban. The aim was always to stifle any form of progressive, secular movement by socialists, communists or Arab nationalists.

A possible Saudi-Iran entente is still a dream. There is the parallel emergence of a coalition of top members of the "axis of fear" - Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan - with Turkey and, of all players, Israel. Common objective: the containment of Iran. And not only Iran, but also Hezbollah and Hamas. King Abdullah was persuaded of this strategy by notorious Prince Bandar bin Sultan, aka "Bandar Bush", former Saudi ambassador in the US for 22 years, a close friend of both Bush and Cheney, and now the head of the Saudi National Security Council.

The strategy was in fact masterminded by a pedestrian version of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: Cheney; Bandar; US deputy national security adviser Elliott Abrams; and former US ambassador in Iraq and Afghan jack-of-all-trades Zalmay Khalilzad. What the popular masses in the Middle East think about this is of course irrelevant. In majority-Sunni Egypt, for instance, the most popular politicians are by far Hezbollah's Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, Khalid Meshal from Hamas, and Ahmadinejad. Two Shi'ites and a Sunni amply supported by Shi'ites.

About that 'war on terror'
The Bush administration is cunningly trying to spin the theme of "Sunni solidarity" to push the dagger of fitna (dissent) even further into the heart of Islam, always focusing on the same target: total, unchallenged domination of the Middle East.
Cheney could not but have also enlisted Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf (who facilitates US intelligence on countless covert ops inside southeastern Iran organized from Balochistan in Pakistan). Some players are getting itchy, though. Turkey had to announce on the record that it would not join any "anti-Shi'ite alliance". Turkey cannot afford to antagonize Iran - not with the coming November referendum on the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan.

The new Saladin also sees that the "war on terror" is far from over - metastasized into more subtle forms of Islamophobia, and still directly related to the attempted oil grab in the "big prizes" of Iraq and Iran. The privileged strategy to conquer fabulous natural wealth in the lands of Islam has been predictable from the start; building a case against the "barbarian", "uncivilized" and "pre-modern" Muslim world; vilifying Islam as a religion and Muslim culture and mores; promoting de facto discrimination and in may cases outright racism against Muslims in the wealthy north; equating Islam with terrorism.

The new Saladin knows it as much as virtually the whole 1.5-billion-strong ummah knows it.

And then there's the Shi'ite world. As long as US so-called elites fail to understand the phenomenal power of Shi'ism, any brilliant armchair strategy they cook up is destined to fail miserably.

Shi'ites in Iraq will never be co-opted by any US agenda - no matter the Himalayas of wishful thinking involved. They will never sacrifice their collective consciousness - forged by oppression and exclusion - nor their profound sense of historic victimization to the benefit of a made-in-America "liberal" utopia. Shi'ites will continue to stress their tremendous hostility to Zionism; to their society being corrupted by Western - especially US - popular and trash culture; and most of all to imperial designs on Muslim lands and natural wealth. It's in the DNA of Shi'ites to see themselves as the guardians of true Islam.

The hour of the wolf
So where will the new Saladin come from?

He could be Nasrallah - who forced the formerly mighty Israeli army to back off, and who will inevitably prevail in a majority government in Lebanon through democratic elections.
He could be a young Sadrist who has never entered the Green Zone, and who before that was a member of the "sanctions generation", growing up in absolute marginalization. Now he goes to al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, he will get his diploma, and he will be better equipped to fight for the true liberation of Iraq. He could be Muqtada al-Sadr himself - the legitimate popular leader of a national-liberation movement.

He could be the son of a Palestinian refugee who grew up in Damascus or Beirut, got an education, emigrated to Canada to perfect his skills, learn from the best the West has to offer, and then one day come back and enter politics with a vengeance.
He could be a Muslim Brotherhood intellectual in Syria. He would fully back the Sunni Arab resistance in Iraq. He would fully back deposing the Hashemite monarchy in Jordan. He would fully back Hamas. As a Muslim Brotherhood Saladin, he would fight for a Sunni Arab Greater Syria capable of talking some sense into Israel.
He could be a Saudi-trained Sunni Arab sniper in Baghdad who posts his killing videos as manifestos on the Internet. Or he could even not be an Arab, but a Persian - a resistance hero in case of a tactical nuclear US strike.
The soul of Saladin may be impatient for an heir. So are hundreds of millions in the ummah. What rough warrior, its hour come out at last, slouches toward Jerusalem, Damascus or Baghdad to be born?
Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007). He may be reached at

Do not confuse governments with the people & remember that the enemies of our enemies are not necessarily our friends...

Report: Gulf states give Israel ok to use airspace for strikes against Iran :
The newspaper also quoted a Pentagon official said saying that Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan would assist Israeli raids on Iran.

Israel seeks Pentagon permission for Iran air strike
Con Coughlin, The Telegraph
Israel is negotiating with the United States for permission to fly over Iraq as part of a plan to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, The Daily Telegraph can reveal. To conduct surgical air strikes against Iran's nuclear programme, Israeli war planes would need to fly across Iraq. But to do so the Israeli military authorities in Tel Aviv need permission from the Pentagon. A senior Israeli defence official said negotiations were now underway between the two countries for the US-led coalition in Iraq to provide an "air corridor" in the event of the Israeli government deciding on unilateral military action to prevent Teheran developing nuclear weapons...

Iran's President Did Not Say "Israel must be wiped off the map"
By Arash Norouzi
Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus of political oppression... the "Zionist regime" was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world's struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.

Iran offered 'to make peace with Israel'
By Gareth Porter
WASHINGTON - Iran offered in 2003 to accept peace with Israel and cut off material assistance to Palestinian armed groups and to pressure them to halt terrorist attacks within Israel's 1967 borders, according to a secret Iranian proposal to the United States.
The two-page proposal for a broad Iran-US agreement covering all the issues separating the two countries, a copy of which was obtained by Inter Press Service (IPS), was conveyed to the US in late April or early May 2003.
Trita Parsi, a specialist on Iranian foreign policy at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies who provided the document to IPS, says he got it from an Iranian official this year but is not at liberty to reveal the source.
The two-page document contradicts the official line of the Bush administration that Iran is committed to the destruction of Israel and the sponsorship of terrorism in the region.
Parsi says the document is a summary of an even more detailed Iranian negotiating proposal that he learned about in 2003 from the US intermediary who carried it to the State Department on behalf of the Swiss Embassy in late April or early May that year. The intermediary has not yet agreed to be identified, Parsi said.
The negotiating proposal indicated clearly that Iran was prepared to give up its role as a supporter of armed groups in the region in return for a larger bargain with the United States. What the Iranians wanted in return, as suggested by the document itself as well as expert observers of Iranian policy, was an end to US hostility and recognition of Iran as a legitimate power in the region.

Before the 2003 proposal, Iran had criticized Arab governments that had supported the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The negotiating document, however, offered "acceptance of the Arab League Beirut Declaration", which it also referred to as the "Saudi initiative, two-states approach".

The March 2002 Beirut Declaration represented the Arab League's first official acceptance of the land-for-peace principle as well as a comprehensive peace with Israel in return for Israel's withdrawal to the territory it had controlled before the 1967 war. Iran's proposed concession on the issue would have aligned its policy with that of Egypt and Saudi Arabia, among others with which the United States enjoyed intimate relations.

Another concession in the document was a "stop of any material support to Palestinian opposition groups (Hamas, Jihad, etc) from Iranian territory" along with "pressure on these organizations to stop violent actions against civilians within borders of 1967".
Even more surprising, given the extremely close relationship between Iran and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah Shi'ite organization, the proposal offered to take "action on Hezbollah to become a mere political organization within Lebanon".

The Iranian proposal also offered to accept much tighter controls by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in exchange for "full access to peaceful nuclear technology". It offered "full cooperation with IAEA based on Iranian adoption of all relevant instruments (93+2 and all further IAEA protocols)".
That was a reference to protocols that would require Iran to provide IAEA monitors with access to any facility they might request, whether it had been declared by Iran or not. That would have made it much more difficult for Iran to carry out any secret nuclear activities without being detected.
In return for these concessions, which contradicted Iran's public rhetoric about Israel and anti-Israeli forces, the secret Iranian proposal sought US agreement to a list of Iranian aims. The list included a "halt in US hostile behavior and rectification of status of Iran in the US", as well as the "abolishment of all sanctions".

Also among Iran's aims was "recognition of Iran's legitimate security interests in the region with according defense capacity". According to a number of Iran specialists, the aim of security and an official acknowledgment of Iran's status as a regional power were central to the Iranian interest in a broad agreement with the United States.
Negotiation of a deal with the US that would advance Iran's security and fundamental geopolitical political interests in the Persian Gulf region in return for accepting the existence of Israel and other Iranian concessions has long been discussed among senior Iranian national-security officials, according to Parsi and other analysts of Iranian national security policy.

An Iranian threat to destroy Israel [SIC] has been a major propaganda theme of the Bush administration for months. On March 10, President George W Bush said, "The Iranian president has stated his desire to destroy our ally, Israel. So when you start listening to what he has said to their desire to develop a nuclear weapon, then you begin to see an issue of grave national-security concern."

But in 2003, Bush refused to allow any response to the Iranian offer to negotiate an agreement that would have accepted the existence of Israel. Flynt Leverett, then the senior specialist on the Middle East on the National Security Council staff, recalled in an interview that it was "literally a few days" between the receipt of the Iranian proposal and the dispatch of a message to the Swiss ambassador expressing displeasure that he had forwarded it to Washington.
Interest in such a deal is still very much alive in Tehran, despite the US refusal to respond to the 2003 proposal. Turkish international-relations professor Mustafa Kibaroglu of Bilkent University writes in the latest issue of Middle East Journal that "senior analysts" from Iran told him last July that "the formal recognition of Israel by Iran may also be possible if essentially a 'grand bargain' can be achieved between the US and Iran".

The proposal's offer to dismantle the main thrust of Iran's Islamic and anti-Israel policy would be strongly opposed by some of the extreme conservatives among the mullahs who engineered the repression of the reformist movement in 2004 and who backed President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in last year's election.

However, many conservative opponents of the reform movement in Iran have also supported a negotiated deal with the United States that would benefit Iran, according to Paul Pillar, the former national intelligence officer on Iran. "Even some of the hardliners accepted the idea that if you could strike a deal with the devil, you would do it," he said in an interview last month.
The conservatives were unhappy not with the idea of a deal with the United States but with the fact that it was a supporter of the reform movement of former president Mohammad Khatami who would get the credit for the breakthrough, Pillar said.
Parsi says the ultimate authority on Iran's foreign policy, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was "directly involved" in the Iranian proposal, according to the senior Iranian national-security officials he interviewed in 2004. Khamenei has aligned himself with the conservatives in opposing the pro-democratic movement.
Gareth Porter is a historian and national security policy analyst. His latest book, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam, was published in June 2005.

Digest note: following is an important analysis, no longer available to Stratfor non-members, that reveals what may be US strategy behind its very public warmongering pressure/threats.
Public disinformation: one source of the US monopoly mainstream media 'news'/propaganda /'spin' presented by its agents:
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media"
former CIA Director William Colby (died suddenly after freak canoe accident) Bernstein's 1977 Oct. Rolling stone article.

The U.S and Iran: an unlikely, powerful alliance

Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran
a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions... "I think everybody in the region knows that there is a proxy war already afoot with the United States supporting anti-Iranian elements in the region as well as opposition groups within Iran," said Vali Nasr, adjunct senior fellow for Mideast studies at the Council on Foreign Relations...and this covert action is now being escalated by the new U.S. directive, and that can very quickly lead to Iranian retaliation and a cycle of escalation.... the United States has supported and encouraged an Iranian militant group, Jundullah, that has conducted deadly raids inside Iran from bases on the rugged Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan "tri-border region." U.S. officials deny any "direct funding" of Jundullah groups but say the leader of Jundullah was in regular contact with U.S. officials.
American intelligence sources say Jundullah has received money and weapons through the Afghanistan and Pakistan military and Pakistan's intelligence service. Pakistan has officially denied any connection. A report broadcast on Iranian TV last Sunday said Iranian authorities had captured 10 men crossing the border with $500,000 in cash along with "maps of sensitive areas" and "modern spy equipment." A senior Pakistani official told the 10 men were members of Jundullah. The leader of the Jundullah group, according to the Pakistani official, has been recruiting and training "hundreds of men" for "unspecified missions" across the border in Iran.

New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power
National Security & Homeland Security Presidential Directive establishes "National Continuity Policy"
by Larry Chin
The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive signed on May 9, 2007 declares that in the event of a “catastrophic event”, George W. Bush can become what is best described as "a dictator":
This directive, completely unnoticed by the media, and given no scrutiny by Congress, literally gives the White House unprecedented dictatorial power over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and obliterating the separation of powers. The directive also placed the Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of domestic “security”. This is another step towards official martial law (see “US government fans homeland security fears”), which suggests that a new "catastrophic event" 9/11-type pretext could be in the pipeline. The directive defines a “Catastrophic Emergency” as the following."Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions[...] The full text is below.

U.S. Real ID Act: Emergence of Real Big Brother
Jason Hahn

The Real ID Act was tacked onto a 2005 bill titled "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005." The emergency bill was primarily meant to approve $82 billion for the war in Iraq and Asian tsunami financial aid, and was signed by President Bush on May 11, 2005. The Republican-driven House attached the Real ID Act to this bill, which landed on the president's desk without a Senate debate.

The act was meant to prevent terrorism [SIC] by creating stricter and uniform standards for states to follow concerning state-issued IDs. It calls for states to revamp their state-issued drivers licenses and non-drivers identification cards in order to implement uniform security features across all states. States can choose to turn their backs on the act, but their citizens would not be able to board an airplane or enter federal buildings. This penalty would take effect on May 11, 2008.

Though Congress denies that, this act would signal the dawn of national identity cards...

This stems from the security aspects that will be required for these state-issued driver's license cards. These Real ID cards will feature a two-dimensional, non-encrypted barcode that will contain personal information such as the citizen's home address. Since the cards will not be encrypted (due to "operational complexity"), everyday businesses like bars and banks would be able to scan and store a customer's home address, among other pieces of personal information...
States would be required to scan all documentary evidence into a database shared with other states. Documentary evidence would include proofs of birthdates, legal status, and social security numbers. Having all of this sensitive information merged together would create a hodgepodge of information, not to mention a headache waiting to happen, according to Bruce Schneier, a security technologist. "The security risks of this database are enormous. It would be a kludge of existing databases that are incompatible, full of erroneous data and unreliable," he said.

Rumsfeld admits "Flight 93" was shot down
VIDEO Footage and transcripts
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Rumsfeld stated in speech to US troops in Iraq 12/24/ 2004 that United Airlines Flight 93 was "shot down" on 9/11:
Donald Rumsfeld's surprise visits to US troops in Iraq
All Things Considered 8:00 PM EST NPR
December 24, 2004 Friday
Sec. RUMSFELD: The people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul are the people who did the bombing in Spain or the people who attacked the United States in New York and shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon.
While the words of the former Secretary of Defense (12/24/2004) contradict the official story as contained in the 9/11 Commission report, they are consistent with the statements by President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice (who at the time was National Security adviser) to the effect that orders had indeed been given by the President and Commander in Chief to shoot down a civilian aircraft over Pennsylvania. Below are excerpts of the 9/11 statements of Bush, Cheney and Rice recorded by CBS News:

PELLEY: (Voiceover) Down in the bunker, Mr. Cheney was trying to figure out how many planes were hijacked. At the time they feared there could be as many as 11.
As the planes are tracking toward Washington, a discussion begins about whether we should shoot them down. How did that happen?
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Well, I discussed it with the president. Are we prepared to order our aircraft to shoot down these airliners that have been hijacked? He said yes.
PELLEY: That was your advice to the president?
Vice Pres. CHENEY: I--it was my advice. It was his decision.
Pres. BUSH: That's a sobering moment, to order your own combat aircraft to shoot down your own civilian aircraft. But it was an easy decision to make, given the--given the fact that we had learned that a commercial aircraft was being used as a weapon. I say easy decision. It was--I didn't hesitate; let me put it to you that way. I knew what had to be done.
(Footage of Pennsylvania crash site)
PELLEY: (Voiceover) And the passengers on United Flight 93 also knew what had to be done. They fought for control, and sacrificed themselves in a Pennsylvania meadow. The flight was 15 minutes from Washington.
Dr. RICE: There was that horrible time when we wondered if Flight 93 had, indeed, been shot down by an American pilot.
PELLEY: On the orders of the president.
Dr. RICE: Yes.

Web Sites Listing Informants Concern Justice Dept.
There are three “rats of the week” on the home page of, a Web site devoted to exposing the identities of witnesses cooperating with the government. The site posts their names and mug shots, along with court documents detailing what they have agreed to do in exchange for lenient sentences.
Last week, for instance, the site featured a Florida man who agreed in September to plead guilty to cocaine possession but not gun charges in exchange for his commitment to work “in an undercover role to contact and negotiate with sources of controlled substances.” The site says it has identified 4,300 informers and 400 undercover agents, many of them from documents obtained from court files available on the Internet.

“The reality is this,” said a spokesman for the site... “Everybody has a choice in life about what they want to do for a living. Nobody likes a tattletale.”

Federal prosecutors are furious, and the Justice Department has begun urging the federal courts to make fundamental changes in public access to electronic court files by removing all plea agreements from them — whether involving cooperating witnesses or not....

The site itself says it is “designed to assist attorneys and criminal defendants with few resources.” Defense lawyers are, in fact, hungry for any information about the nature of the case against their clients. “The more information out there, the easier it is for the truth to come out at trial,” said David O. Markus, a criminal defense lawyer in Miami. Eliminating electronic access to plea agreements and related documents would represent a real hardship, Mr. Markus said.
“It doesn’t advance any of the stated safety goals, and it just serves as a roadblock to the public’s constitutional right to access to their court,” Mr. Markus said. “If there is an issue in a particular case, then let’s address it, but to sweep everything under the rug isn’t right.”

Repeat after me class: only "terrorists"/ al-Qaeda /Islamic extremists resist U.S. liberation
"If you are not with us [U.S.] you're with the terrorists", GWB

Hersh: Bush administration arranged support for militants attacking Lebanon agreement among Vice President Dick Cheney, Deputy National Security Advisor Elliot Abrams, and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi national security adviser, whereby the Saudis would covertly fund the Sunni Farah al-Islam in Lebanon as a counterweight to the Shia Hezbollah. Hersh points out that the current situation is much like that during the conflict in Afghanistan in the 1980's – which gave rise to al Qaeda – with the same people involved in both the US and Saudi Arabia and the "same pattern" of the US using jihadists that the Saudis assure US they can control.
May 22, '07

Source: RawStory - David Edwards and Muriel Kane
In an interview on CNN International's Your World Today, veteran journalist Seymour Hersh explains that the current violence in Lebanon is the result of an attempt by the Lebanese government to crack down on a militant Sunni group, Fatah al-Islam, that it formerly supported.
Last March, Hersh reported that American policy in the Middle East had shifted to opposing Iran, Syria, and their Shia allies at any cost, even if it meant backing hardline Sunni jihadists.

A key element of this policy shift was an agreement among Vice President Dick Cheney, Deputy National Security Advisor Elliot Abrams, and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi national security adviser, whereby the Saudis would covertly fund the Sunni Farah al-Islam in Lebanon as a counterweight to the Shia Hezbollah.

Hersh points out that the current situation is much like that during the conflict in Afghanistan in the 1980's – which gave rise to al Qaeda – with the same people involved in both the US and Saudi Arabia and the "same pattern" of the US using jihadists that the Saudis assure us they can control.

When asked why the administration would be acting in a way that appears to run counter to US interests, Hirsh says that, since the Israelis lost to them last summer, "the fear of Hezbollah in Washington, particularly in the White House, is acute."
As a result, Hersh implies, the Bush administration is no longer acting rationally in its policy. "We're in the business of supporting the Sunnis anywhere we can against the Shia. ... "We're in the business of creating ... sectarian violence." And he describes the scheme of funding Fatah al-Islam as "a covert program we joined in with the Saudis as part of a bigger, broader program of doing everything we could to stop the spread of the Shia world, and it just simply -- it bit us in the rear."

U.S. quietly, dramatically increasing Iraq troop levels
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

Bush may double force by Christmas House Democrats to send Bush war-spending bill without timetable.

Pentagon considers staying in Iraq for 'decades'
One scenario includes a "series of military installations [that] could be maintained around Iraq, with a total of total of 30,000 to 40,000 U.S. troops, for a long period of time — maybe a few decades."Under that plan, US forces would not be on patrol in Iraq, as they are now, says NPR, but they could continue to train Iraqi forces. The Iraq installations would be part of the so-called "lilly pad" strategy that the US military has been developing since 2004. Gen. Pace, along with former Under Secretary for Policy at the Pentagon, Douglas Feith, and former Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, was an architect of the strategy.
Bases in Iraq would be used to protect US interests in the area and keep Iran and Syria from interfering...

Blaming it on your quisling government and manufactured lies
Iran is secretly forging ties with al-Qaeda elements and Sunni Arab militias in Iraq in preparation for a northern summer showdown with coalition forces intended to tip a wavering US Congress into voting for full military withdrawal, US officials say.

Iraq planning for sudden U.S. pullout
BAGHDAD -- Iraq's military is drawing up plans to cope with any quick U.S. military pullout, the defense minister said Monday, as a senior American official warned that the Bush administration may reconsider its support if Iraqi leaders don't make major reforms by fall.

Stepped-up war urged on Afghan poppy fields
KABUL, Afghanistan -- Profits from Afghanistan's thriving poppy fields are increasingly flowing to Taliban fighters, leading U.S. and NATO officials to conclude that the counterinsurgency mission must now include stepped-up anti-drug efforts.

Dialectics of Terror
by M. Shahid Alam
“If you kill one person, it is murder. If you kill a hundred thousand, it is foreign policy.” Anonymous I doubt if I have come across a more pithy statement exposing the hypocrisy of America’s war against terrorism; but this is what I read, well before September 11, 2001, on a car-sticker in the commuter parking lot in Attleboro, Massachusetts, USA.

States are founded on a monopoly over violence, which has always included the right to kill. In fact, that is the very essence of the state. States seek to enforce this monopoly by amassing instruments of violence; but that is scarcely enough. They also use religion, ideology and laws to delegitimize and root out violence stemming from non-state agents....Unchallenged, the state can turn the instruments of violence against its own population. This leads to state tyranny. The state can also wage wars to enrich one or more sectional interests. This defines the dual challenge before all organized societies: restraining state tyranny and limiting its war-making powers.

Often, there has existed a tradeoff between tyranny and wars. Arguably, such a tradeoff was at work during the period of European expansion since the sixteenth century, when Europeans slowly secured political rights even as they engaged in growing, even genocidal, violence, especially against non-Europeans. As Western states gradually conceded rights to their own populations, they intensified the murder and enslavement of Americans and Africans, founding white colonies on lands stolen from them. Few Westerners were troubled by this inverse connection: this was the essence of racism.

The United States is only the most successful of the colonial creations, a fact that has left its indelible mark on American thinking. It is a country that was founded on violence against its native inhabitants; this led, over three centuries of expansion, to the near extermination of Indians, with the few survivors relocated to inhospitable reservations. Its history also includes the violence – on a nearly equal scale – perpetrated against the Africans who were torn from their continent to create wealth for the new Republic. Such a genesis, steeped in violence against others races, convinced most Americans that they had the divine right – like the ancient Israelites – to build their prosperity on the ruin of other, ‘inferior’ races.

In addition to the manipulations of a corporate media, this ethos explains why so many Americans support the actions of their government abroad – in Cuba, Nicaragua, Chile, Vietnam, Iran, Palestine or Iraq, to name only a few. It is unnecessary to look too closely into these interventions since they are undertaken to secure ‘our’ interests. Even if they result in deaths – the deaths of more than three-quarters of a million children, as in Iraq – to borrow a felicitous phrase from Madeline Albright, “the price is worth it.”

Of course, few Americans understand that their country has long stood at the apex – and, therefore, is the chief beneficiary – of a global system that produces poverty for the greater part of humanity, including within the United States itself; that this system subordinates all social, cultural, environmental and human values to the imperatives of corporate capital; a system that now kills people by the millions merely by setting the rules that devastate their economies, deprive them of their livelihood, their dignity and, eventually, their lives. The corporate media, the school curricula, and the Congress ensure that most Americans never see past the web of deceit – about a free, just, tolerant and caring United States – that covers up the human carnage and environmental wreckage this system produces.

The wretched of the earth are not so easily duped. They can see – and quite clearly, through the lens of their dark days – how corporate capital, with United States in the lead, produces their home-based tyrannies; how their economies have been devastated to enrich transnational corporations and their local collaborators; how the two stifle indigenous movements for human rights, women’s rights, and worker’s rights; how they devalue indigenous traditions and languages; how corporate capital uses their countries as markets, as sources of cheap labor, as fields for testing new, deadlier weapons, and as sites for dumping toxic wastes; how their men and women sell body parts because the markets place little value on their labor.

The world – outside the dominant West – has watched how the Zionists, with the support of Britain and the United States, imposed a historical anachronism, a colonial-settler state in Palestine, a throw-back to a sanguinary past, when indigenous populations in the Americas could be cleansed with impunity to make room for Europe’s superior races. In horror, they watch daily how a racist Israel destroys the lives of millions of Palestinians through US-financed weaponry and fresh-contrived acts of malice; how it attacks its neighbors at will; how it has destabilized, distorted and derailed the historical process in an entire region; and how, in a final but foreordained twist, American men and women have now been drawn into this conflict, to make the Middle East safe for Israeli hegemony.

In Iraq, over the past thirteen years, the world has watched the United States showcase the methods it will use to crush challenges to the New World Order – that was launched after the end of the Cold War. This new imperialism commands more capital and more lethal weapons than the old imperialisms of Britain, France or Germany. It is imperialism without rivals and, therefore, it dares to pursue its schemes, its wars, and its genocidal campaigns, under the cover of international legitimacy: through the United Nations, the World Bank, IMF, and World Trade Organization. In brief, it is a deadlier, more pernicious imperialism.

Under the cover of the Security Council, the United States has waged a total war against Iraq ...The aerial bombing of Iraq, in the months preceding the ground action in January 1991, sought the destruction of the country’s civilian infrastructure, a genocidal act under international law; it destroyed power plants, water-purification plants, sewage facilities, bridges and bomb shelters. It was the official (though unstated) aim of these bombings to sting the Iraqis into overthrowing their rulers. Worse, the war was followed by a never-relenting campaign of aerial bombings and the most complete sanctions in recorded history. According to a UN study, the sanctions had killed half a million Iraqi children by 1995; the deaths were the result of a five-fold increase in child mortality rates. It would have taken five Hiroshima bombs to produce this grisly toll...

The terrorist attacks of 9-11 shocked, perhaps traumatized, a whole nation. Yet the same Americans expressed little concern – in fact, most could profess total ignorance – about the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians caused by daily bombings and crippling sanctions over a period of thirteen years. Of course, the dollar and the dinar are not the same. American deaths could not be equated on a one-to-one basis with Iraqi deaths. If indeed so many Iraqis had been killed by the United States, those were deaths they deserved for harboring ill-will towards this country. They were after all evil. And evil people should never be given a chance to repent or change their evil-doing propensities. Senator John McCain said it succinctly: “We’re coming after you. God may have mercy on you, but we won’t.” ...

An act of terror is nearly always attributed to a failure of intelligence, security, or both. In a country that, annually, spends tens of billions of dollars on intelligence gathering and trillions more on its military, the attacks of 9-11 amounted to massive failures on two fronts: intelligence and security. This should have led immediately to a Congressional inquiry to identify and remedy these failures. However, due to obstructions from the Bush administration, the Congress could not start an official inquiry into these failures until more than a year after 9-11. Instead, the Bush administration claimed falsely, as it turns out – with hardly a murmur from the Congress or the US corporate media – that 9-11 was unforeseen, it could not have been imagined, and there had been no advance warnings. Instantly, President Bush declared that 9-11 was an act of war (making it the first act of war perpetrated by nineteen civilians), and proceeded to declare unlimited war against terrorists (also the first time that war had been declared against elusive non-state actors). In the name of a bogus war against terrorism, the United States claimed for itself the right to wage preemptive wars against any country suspected of harboring terrorists or possessing weapons of mass destruction (what are weapons for if not mass destruction?) with an intent (US would be the judge of that) to use them against the United States....

Although the onslaughts of the Crusaders against the Muslims in the Levant, starting in the 1090s, lasted for nearly two centuries; and although their conquests at their peak embraced much of old Syria, it is quite remarkable that this did not alarm the Islamic world into waging Jihad against the ‘Infidels.’ On several occasion, one Muslim prince allied himself with the Crusaders to contain the ambitions of another Muslim prince. It was only in 1187, after Salahuddin united Syria and Egypt, that the Muslims took back Jerusalem. But they did not pursue this war to its bitter end; the Crusaders retained control of parts of coastal Syria for another hundred years. In fact, several years later, Salahuddin’s successors even returned Jerusalem to the Cruaders provided they would not fortify it. In other words, the Crusades which loom so large in European imagination were not regarded by the Muslims as a civilizational war.

Of course that was then, when Islamic societies were cultured, refined, tolerant, self-confident and strong, and though the Crusades threw the combined might of Western Europe – that region’s first united enterprise – to regain the Christian holy lands, the Muslims took the invasions in their stride. Eventually, the resources of a relatively small part of the Muslim world were sufficient to end this European adventure, which left few lasting effects on the region. In the more recent past, Islamic societies have been divided, fragmented, backward, outstripped by their European adversaries, their states embedded in the periphery of global capitalism, and their rulers allied with Western powers against their own people. These divisions are not a natural state in the historical consciousness of Muslims.

More ominously, since 1917 the Arabs have faced settler-colonialism in their very heartland, an open-ended imperialist project successively supported by Britain and the United States. This Zionist insertion in the Middle East, self-consciously promoted as the outpost of the West in the Islamic world, produced its own twisted dialectics. An exclusive Jewish state founded on fundamentalist claims (and nothing gets more fundamentalist than a twentieth-century imperialism founded on ‘divine’ promises about real estate made three thousand years back) was bound to evoke its alter ego in the Islamic world. When Israel inflicted a humiliating defeat on Egypt and Syria in 1967 – two countries that were the leading embodiments of Arab nationalism – this opened up a political space in the Arab world for the insertion of Islamists into the region’s political landscape. One fundamentalism would now be pitted against another.

This contest may now be reaching its climax – with United States entering the war directly. It is an end that could have been foretold – this did not require prophetic insight. In part at least, it is the unfolding of the logic of the Zionist insertion in the Arab world. On the one hand, this has provoked and facilitated the growth of a broad spectrum of Islamist movements in the Islamic world, some of which were forced by US-supported repression in their home countries to target the United States directly. On the other hand, the Zionist occupation of one-time Biblical lands has given encouragement to Christian Zionism in the United States, the belief that Israel prepares the ground for the second coming of Christ. At the same time, several Zionist propagandists – based in America’s think tanks, media and academia – have worked tirelessly to arouse old Western fears about Islam, giving it new forms. They paint Islam as a violent religion, perennially at war against infidels, opposed to democracy, fearful of women’s rights, unable to modernize, and raging at the West for its freedoms and prosperity. They never tire of repeating that the Arabs ‘hate’ Israel because it is the only ‘democracy’ in the Middle East. ...

What can be the outcome of all this? During their long rampage through history, starting in 1492, the Western powers have shown little respect for the peoples they encountered in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Australia. Many of them are not around to recount the gory history of their extermination through imported diseases, warfare, and forced labor in mines and plantations. Others, their numbers diminished, were forced into peonage, or consigned to mutilated lives on reservations. Many tens of millions were bought and sold into slavery. Proud empires were dismembered. Great civilizations were denigrated. All this had happened before, but not on this scale. In part, perhaps, the extraordinary scale of these depredations might be attributed to what William McNeill calls the “bloody-mindedness” of Europeans. Much of this, however, is due to historical accidents which elevated West Europeans – and not the Chinese, Turks, or Indians – to great power based on their exploitation of inorganic sources of energy. If we are to apportion blame, we might as well award the prize to Britain’s rich coal deposits.

In the period since the Second World War, some of the massive historical disequilibria created by Western powers have been corrected. China and India are on their feet; so are Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia. These countries are on their feet and advancing. But the wounds of imperialism in Africa run deeper. The colonial legacies of fragmented societies, deskilled populations, arbitrary boundaries, and economies tied to failing primary production continue to produce wars, civil wars, corruption, massacres, and diseases. But Africa can be ignored; the deaths of a million Africans in the Congo do not merit the attention given to one suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. Africa can be ignored because its troubles do not affect vital Western interests; at least not yet.

Then there is the failure of the Islamic world to reconstitute itself. As late as 1700, the Muslims commanded three major empires – the Mughal, Ottoman and Safavid – that together controlled the greater part of the Islamic world, stretching in a continuous line from the borders of Morocco to the eastern borders of India. After a period of rivalry among indigenous successor states and European interlopers, all of India was firmly in British control by the 1860s. The Ottoman Empire disintegrated more slowly, losing its European territories in the nineteenth century and its Arab territories during the First World War, when they were divvied up amongst the British, French, Zionists, Maronites and a clutch of oil-rich protectorates. Only the Iranians held on to most of the territories acquired by the Safavids. As a result, when the Islamic world emerged out of the colonial era, it had been politically fragmented, divided into some forty states, none with the potential to serve as a core state; this fragmentation was most striking in Islam’s Arab heartland. In addition, significant Muslim populations now lived in states with non-Muslim majorities.

Why did the Muslims fail to reconstitute their power? Most importantly, this was because Muslim power lacked a demographic base. The Mughal and Ottoman Empires – the Ottoman Empire in Europe – were not sustainable because they ruled over non-Muslim majorities. More recently, the Muslims have been the victims of geological ‘luck,’ containing the richest deposits of the fuel that drives the global economy. The great powers could not let the Muslims control ‘their lifeblood.’ They suffered a third setback from a historical accident: the impetus that Hitler gave to the Zionist movement. Now there had emerged a powerful new interest – a specifically Jewish interest – in keeping the Arabs divided and dispossessed.

It does not appear, however, that the Islamic societies have accepted their fragmentation, or their subjugation by neocolonial/comprador regimes who work for the United States, Britain and France. We have watched the resilience of the Muslims, their determination to fight for their dignity, in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Palestine, Chechnya and Mindanao – among other places. In the meanwhile, their demographic weakness is being reversed. At the beginning of the twentieth century the Muslims constituted barely a tenth of the world’s population; today that share exceeds one fifth, and continues to rise. Moreover, unlike the Chinese or Hindus, the Muslims occupy a broad swathe of territory from Nigeria, Senegal and Morocco in the west to Sinjiang and the Indonesian Archipelago in the east. It would be hard to corral a population of this size that spans half the globe. More likely the US-British-Israeli siege of the Islamic world, now underway in the name of the war against terrorism, will lead to a broadening conflict with unforeseen consequences that could easily turn very costly for either or both parties.

Can the situation yet be saved? In the weeks preceding the launch of the war against Iraq, when tens of millions of people – mostly in Western cities – were marching in protest against the war, it appeared that there was hope; that the ideologies of hatred and the tactics of fear-mongering would be defeated; that these massive movements would result in civil disobedience if the carnage in Iraq were launched despite these protests. But once the war began, the protesters melted away like picnicking crowds when a sunny day is marred by rains. In retrospect, the protests lacked the depth to graduate into a political movement, to work for lasting changes. America does not easily stomach anti-war protestors once it starts a war. War is serious business: and it must have the undivided support of the whole country once the killing begins.

The anti-war protests may yet regroup, but that will not be before many more body bags arrive in the continental United States, before many more young Americans are mutilated for life, before many tens of thousands of Iraqis are dispatched to early deaths. Attempts are already underway to invent new lies to keep Americans deluded about the war; to tighten the noose around Iran; to hide the growing casualties of war; to lure poor Mexicans and Guatemalans to die for America; to substitute Indian and Pakistani body bags for American ones. This war-mongering by the United States cannot be stopped unless more Americans can be taught to separate their government from their country, their leaders from their national interests, their tribal affiliations from their common humanity. But that means getting past the media, the political establishment, the social scientists, the schools, and native prejudices....

M. Shahid Alam is professor of economics at Northeastern University. His last book, Poverty from the Wealth of Nations, was published by Palgrave in 2000. He may be reached at Visit his webpage at

Divide and Conquer: The Politics of Palestinian Human Rights
by Lana Habash

I recently had occasion to talk with a professor at a well-known human rights center on the subject of Palestine. Although the center claims to derive its mandate from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights — a declaration whose very title insists on universal application — I quickly found that the professor’s commitment to universality grew less firm when the rights in question belong to Palestinians. Although the Declaration is unequivocal in affirming the right of refugees to return to their homes and reclaim their property, the professor stated that she didn’t support this particular right in all cases, specifically NOT in the case of Palestine. When I asked her about the validity of a Jewish state that practiced Apartheid, she told me that she saw the establishment of a Jewish state on Palestinian land as past history, and she didn’t see the significance of debating it now. When I asked her what she thought of the ongoing practice of ethnically cleansing Palestinian communities within the Green Line (in what is now called Israel) in areas like the Naqab (Negev) through land confiscation and poisoning crops, she admitted that she knew nothing about it.

This conversation with a human rights professor at an academic institution wouldn’t be a cause of great concern if it weren’t also fairly typical of the human rights discourse on Palestine in American activist circles. This discourse is generally governed by two rules:

(1) The discussion of Palestinian human rights must be strictly limited to the rights of Palestinians after 1967. The human rights of Palestinians before this period must consistently be ignored, denied, or deemed negotiable; and

(2) The “Green Line” defines the players, their privileges, their rights, and the legitimacy or illegitimacy of their claims to protection under international human rights law.

These two rules have helped to ensure that the discourse on “human rights” does not serve Palestinians in a struggle to obtain their rights, but rather facilitates the ongoing colonization of their land.

• On human rights discourse and the rights of Palestinians before 1967
Imagine for a moment a discussion of the human rights of indigenous South Africans absent a discussion of the racism and colonialist ideology that laid the foundation for the oppressive policies of white South Africa. Those advocating for the human rights of South African native people would decry the prison conditions of jailed indigenous South Africans, denounce the horrifying exploitation of their labor, and would oppose the most repressive policies of white South African violence against popular resistance to Apartheid, but would say nothing about Apartheid itself. In such a case, one of the fundamental human rights violations “necessary” to maintain the privileges of a minority white population on South African land would be deemed acceptable (the system of segregation and racist laws called Apartheid) because the security of white South African “rights” (read dominance) would otherwise be threatened. Such a human rights framework would not only have been flawed because it failed to address the fundamental crime of Apartheid, but also because in doing so it would have failed to change in any way the human rights violations built on that foundation. It would rather have helped support the lie propagated by the Apartheid regime: the notion that Apartheid and human rights were compatible. Such a discourse would neither question nor oppose racism but only the most repressive manifestations of it and even this “opposition” would have been meaningless, since repression was a necessary consequence of the system of Apartheid.

In Palestinian human rights advocacy in America, this framework is the norm. The human rights of Palestinian people prior to 1967 are neither part of the discussion nor part of the aim of advocacy. In 1948, over 780, 000 Palestinians (over 82% of the indigenous population of Palestine at that time) were forcibly transferred from their land, in some cases at gunpoint, in other cases through threats of massacres like the massacre of over 250 Palestinians in Deir Yassin. 530 of an estimated 550 total villages were depopulated. Over 78% of Palestinian land was confiscated for the establishment of a state for Jewish people. The establishment of the Law of Return and the Absentee Property Law in the 1950’s — racist laws which defined the boundaries of inclusion (Jewish people) and exclusion (indigenous Palestinians) — were cornerstones in the establishment of an Israeli Apartheid state that continues to this day. None of these facts are part of the predominant American human rights perspective on Palestine. All of the human rights abuses noted above are rooted in and justified through Zionism.

Zionism is a European colonialist ideology and political process of creating and maintaining a Jewish majority in Palestine, granting rights and privileges to Jewish people that supersede any rights of the indigenous people of Palestine. In Zionism, the process of “Judaizing” or “redeeming” the land (expropriating the land of indigenous Palestinians and using it for exclusively Jewish use) is used as justification for all policies, no matter how repressive, both preceding and following 1967.

This demographic war waged on the Palestinian people meets the definitions of both the crime of Apartheid and the crime of genocide as defined in international law. Recognition of these crimes is startlingly absent from most mainstream discussions of Palestinian human rights in America. Utilizing the framework of Zionism, “Palestine/Israel” peace groups maintain that Israeli rights to Palestinian land and resources (justified through racism and taken by military force) and Palestinian rights to their own resources and land (defined as specifically the West Bank and Gaza and not the rest of historic Palestine) are somehow equal.

In this framework, rights for Palestinians, like the right of return and the right to resist occupation, become debatable and negotiable because they threaten the existence of the Jewish state. This resembles the argument by the slave owner that freeing slaves might cause the economic collapse of the plantation. In both cases, a fundamental injustice becomes the justification for further injustice.

In the human rights framework, racism and genocide should neither be morally acceptable nor morally defensible in any context. This is true in South Africa, it is true in the Americas, and it is true in Palestine.

• On Palestinian human rights and geography
The Green Line is the name given to the lines established in 1949 that constituted the de facto borders of what is called pre-1967 Israel, the part of historic Palestine militarily occupied by Zionists in 1948. It should be stressed at the outset that the Green Line has not been observed as any kind of “border” by the Israelis as demonstrated by continued expansion of settlements, Israeli bypass roads, water theft, and the Annexation/Apartheid Wall. In spite of Israeli attempts at disruption, contiguous Palestinian communities on both sides of the Green Line have remained deeply tied to one another through culture, family, and economy. The Green Line does not describe a real boundary in the world, not even a recognized political boundary. It exists almost entirely within “discourse.”

Palestinians are denied and Israeli settlers granted privileges, rights, and legitimacy based on where they exist geographically in relation to this line. This involves definitions of who is a Palestinian, an “Arab Israeli”, an Israeli “civilian”, or an Israeli “settler.”

To clarify, Palestinians currently living in the West Bank and Gaza are the most commonly understood definition of “Palestinian.” There is a general acceptance in America that these Palestinians inhabit what is to be a future Palestinian state, that this land is under military occupation, and that the occupation of this land should eventually end. We will, for the moment, ignore the fact that the material circumstances that would make such a state possible are being eliminated daily by the occupier. The human rights abuses perpetrated against these Palestinians are well known, though they continue unabated despite extensive reporting and documentation. Collective punishment, home demolition, torture, illegal detention, illegal settlement, destruction of infrastructure and farm land, water and land theft are justified by proponents of Israel as necessary to preserve the “security” of the Jewish state.

The Palestinians currently living within the boundaries of the so-called Green Line are subdivided into “Arab Israelis” and the Palestinian Bedouin of the Naqab. These Palestinians also live under military occupation (in their case since 1948). Racist laws and policies prevent these Palestinians from equal citizenship on their own land. Their villages within the Green Line are unrecognized on Israeli maps, making the process of “Judaizing the land” nearly impossible to oppose, as there is no acknowledgement by Israel that they exist in the first place. Palestinians in unrecognized villages within the Green Line pay taxes as citizens but are often denied water, electricity, and education. They are subject to the same type of severe military repression experienced by West Bank and Gazan Palestinians when they resist confiscation and settlement of their land. The history of Land Day illustrates this well: on March 30th, 1976 the Israeli government killed six Palestinians and injured hundreds to suppress a general strike protesting further theft of Palestinian land in the Nazareth area. Another example is the case of the thirteen Palestinian “Israelis” killed within the Green Line at the start of the Al Aqsa Intifada in September 2000. This second Intifada has represented a serious threat to the Israeli colonization project. It is the manifestation of Palestinian resistance to colonial occupation on both sides of the Green Line.

In the case of the Palestinian Bedouin, an ongoing program of land expropriation and dispossession has continued since 1948, when the vast majority of Palestinian Bedouin were dispossessed of their land. The remaining Bedouin, like the rest of the Palestinian population, were placed under military rule from 1948 through 1966. Many were relocated to urban townships through a process of land confiscation, home demolition, and other coercive methods. The Israeli government has rendered Bedouin cultivation of their own land illegal and has poisoned their food crops with toxic chemicals to destroy their way of life.

In the case of both the “Arab Israelis” and the Bedouin, human rights violations perpetrated against Palestinians within the Green Line are not commonly discussed or known within the American human rights community. In fact, the “rights” of Palestinians within Israel are often paraded as part of the mythology of Israel’s singular “democracy” in the region. On those rare occasions when the question is discussed, it is discussed as the problem of “a minority” struggling for equal rights within the state of Israel. This is another lie propagated by the discourse on Palestine by means of the Green Line: although the total population of Palestinians living within the boundaries of historic Palestine is now greater than or equal to the number of Jewish-Israelis, and Palestinian communities have maintained strong interdependent relationships throughout their historic land, the imaginary Green Line creates a false impression of separate communities so that one becomes a “minority” struggling for inclusion, and the other a “foreign people” struggling for independence.

The Palestinian refugee population living in Jordan numbers approximately 80% of the current Jordanian population. These Palestinians have historically engaged in resistance struggles to return to their land in historic Palestine and as a result have been repressed in horrific ways. In the case of Black September (September, 1970) over 3,000 Palestinians in Jordan were massacred by the Jordanian government as part of a regional attack on Palestinian resistance to colonial occupation of historic Palestine.

There is another significant Palestinian refugee population in Lebanon. This population has also suffered severe human rights violations. At Sabra and Shatilla in September, 1982 the now twice-elected Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon presided over the massacre of over 2,750 Palestinian refugees by Lebanese Christian Phalangists.

Finally, there is the wider Palestinian diaspora in areas outside of Jordan and Lebanon who have an internationally recognized right to return to their homes in historic Palestine. These Palestinians also suffer political repression when they attempt to advocate for the rights guaranteed to them. When members of the Palestinian diaspora living in the United States, for example, support anti-racist, anti-colonialist politics and support the right of return and the right of Palestinians to resist colonial occupation, they are typically deported, detained without trial, and in some cases tortured — all in the name of American and Israeli security. They are often marginalized as “fanatic” or “extremist” by the very human rights groups that claim to be in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The Green Line functions in other ways to obscure the process of colonization. Israeli settlers so often mentioned in the news are defined as those Israelis who are in settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. These settlers are armed and protected by the full force of the Israeli military. They engage in routine and unprovoked attacks on the Palestinian population, sometimes attacking children with knives, guns, and rocks in an effort to intimidate Palestinian families into relinquishing their property. When the Palestinian community attempts to defend itself against these attacks, the Israeli occupation forces march in to “restore order.” The human rights community at best asserts that these settlers should be relocated to areas within the Green Line. As the Israeli government claims “disengagement” from Gaza and claims this as a concession for “peace”, it promises to relocate these Gaza settlers to other areas now occupied by indigenous Palestinians (the Naqab within the Green Line, for example, and ironically, other areas of new and expanding settlements within the West Bank and Al Quds (East Jerusalem)). These individuals who have defied international law are being compensated by the international community for the “trouble” of resettlement to the tune of $227,000/settler.

“Israeli civilians” within the Green Line are portrayed quite differently from Israeli settlers of the West Bank and Gaza, despite the similarities in their material relationship to the indigenous people of Palestine. These people are often portrayed in American media as innocent individuals who “want to live in peace” with their neighbors. These “civilians” are also settlers on Palestinian land occupied through military force. They live in houses and on property that belongs to Palestinian refugees. They claim rights to land and resources that have been taken by force and over which they maintain exclusive control under a system of laws based on racist ideology. The vast majority of these Israeli civilians advocate for separation and segregation. Even the Israeli Peace movement continues to maintain that Israeli injustice in Palestine does not include the forced displacement of Palestinians in 1948, but rather only the occupation of Palestinian land since 1967. These civilians fight for the preservation of their privileges as Jews within Israel that allow them to buy land (Palestinians cannot), travel freely (Palestinians cannot), settle in historic Palestine permanently (Palestinians born and raised in historic Palestine cannot return despite international laws guaranteeing their right to do so), express their political opinions freely without fear of detention or torture (Palestinians who are considered Israeli citizens do not enjoy this freedom), enjoy education, electricity, and free use of the water of historic Palestine (Palestinian “Israelis” often have none of these freedoms in the unrecognized villages).

Israeli civilians are often armed and their privileges are protected by Israeli soldiers. In places like Nazareth, a Palestinian community within the Green Line, these Israeli civilians also engage in violent rampages against Palestinians. And, as in the West Bank and Gaza, if Palestinians within the Green Line resist, the Israeli military again marches in to “restore order.” We who work for Palestinian human rights are not supposed to speak of how these Israeli civilians came to be in Palestine. We are not supposed to speak about how it is that these Israeli civilians own and continue to live on property previously inhabited by a majority indigenous Palestinian population, or how it is that they maintain racist privilege over indigenous Palestinians in historic Palestine. We are not supposed to talk about mass forced transfer of over 82% of the population, the thirty-five massacres, “present absenteeism”, the 530 depopulated Palestinian villages, Apartheid laws and other laws preventing Palestinians from owning land or even earning wages for their labor, during the birth of the much celebrated “oasis of democracy.”

If we turn away from the purely imaginary lines that have been drawn for the purpose of maintaining a discourse on Palestine, and turn instead to the historical and material realities of life in Palestine, much false "complexity" dissolves. Israeli settlers are settlers whether they settled in 1936, 1948, 1967, 1980, or 2005, and whether they settled in Jaffa (Tel Aviv), the Naqab (Negev), Khalil (Hebron), or Gaza. The “rights” of these settlers in all instances are based on land theft and racism against the indigenous population. The "rights" of these settlers in all instances are preserved through military force. The material relationship of these settlers to Palestinians will continue to be genocidal as long as they continue to live on stolen Palestinian land, utilize stolen Palestinian resources, and advocate for their privileges as Jews to do all of the above.

The indigenous people of historic Palestine are Palestinian whether they are refugees of 1948, 1967, or 2005, and whether they are the “internally displaced” Palestinians living within the Green Line called “Israeli Arabs”, or Bedouin, or the “externally displaced” Palestinians of the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, and Lebanon, or the larger Palestinian diaspora. All of these Palestinians have the right to live freely in their homes in Palestine.

We are left, then, with only one essential human rights question to be answered. This question is capable of reframing the discussion in such a way that actually advances the cause of Palestinian human rights: Do the rights and protections of international humanitarian law apply to all Palestinians?

The bulk of human rights discourse has focused on applying humanitarian law to Israeli government policy in the West Bank and Gaza and has focused human rights advocacy on Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza. Historically it has been shown over and over again that genocide begins with separation of the indigenous people. Once the work of separation has been accomplished, the work of the colonial power — whether it be in the Americas, South Africa, or Israel — is to split the indigenous population into subgroups to further the project of colonization. This is done through a variety of different methods, including all of the following: empowering a minority sector of the indigenous population to police its own people (as in the case of the Palestinian Druze); establishing racist Jim Crow laws which grant some “rights” to Palestinians within the Green Line while simultaneously assuring that these rights never challenge the fundamental racist privilege of Jews over non-Jews; negotiating “peace” treaties at gunpoint where chosen Palestinian representatives on the other side of the Green Line sign away rights and land while seemingly assuring (but not really) a limitation on the genocidal conditions imposed by the colonial power; and imposing collective punishment to isolate Palestinians who resist colonial occupation from larger communities of Palestinian support.

In accepting these divisions, the American human rights framework as it has been applied to Palestinians has not only failed to stop human rights violations, but has facilitated the colonization and genocide of Palestinian people. It has done this by accepting the validity of the Jewish state and by giving only limited and conditional support to certain human rights for certain Palestinians living in certain areas at certain times.

The American human rights framework as it currently functions in Palestine has become a tool used by Israel and its proponents to legitimize colonial land theft and genocide rather than oppose it. True human rights advocacy that supports the rights of the indigenous people of Palestine must start by acknowledging the rights of all Palestinians, whether they are from 1948 Jaffa, 1967 Nablus, or the Naqab or Jayyus of 2005. It means necessarily that we must discuss Zionism from its origins in Europe in the 1880’s to its present manifestations in Palestine. We must reject the idea that colonialism, genocide, Apartheid, or any form of racism is ever justifiable or defensible. We must also reject the idea that colonial governments like the US or Israel will ever negotiate against their own interests. These are the first steps in creating true international solidarity that supports the Palestinian people’s legitimate resistance against ongoing colonization, occupation, Apartheid, and genocide in all of historic Palestine.

Secrets of CIA: Video:
This documentary reveals how CIA pioneered, developed,manipulated prisoner abuse, sold drugs, changed regimes and killed people world wide.

5/19/7 "War: a continuation of politics by other means" : Capitalist Democracy in "Peace" & War; The Two sides of War

"War is nothing but a continuation of politics by other means."
von Clausewitz

Historically, all reactionary forces on the verge of extinction invariably conduct a last desperate struggle against the revolutionary forces, and some revolutionaries are apt to be deluded for a time by this phenomenon of outward strength but inner weakness failing to grasp the essential fact that the enemy is nearing extinction while they themselves are approaching victory.
Mao TseTung, October 12, 1942, Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 103.

We should rid our ranks of impotent thinking...views that overestimate the strength of the enemy and underestimate the strength of the people are wrong. Mao, December 25, 1947, Selected Works, Vol. IV, p. 173

Digest Commentary:
This double issue of the digest is aimed at tearing the wraps off some of the hidden forms, faces, functions and most importantly, the two sides of war: reactionary and revolutionary.

The U.S. capitalist dictatorship dominates the entire world and soon the planet -- through "peace" as well as war. The capitalist state has a monopoly on violence but only resistance to the state's violence is called "violence", aka "terrorism". All who resist, waging just anti-capitalist-imperialist wars for liberation... wage our wars for the future and for the planet.

Capitalist war, declared or not, is always against us and is constant in one form or another. Big global WARS that we are rallied around as patriotic 'muricans-- WW1 & 11, and now the global war of terror. But there is also daily ongoing wars against the people: all are a function of capitalism. All are billed for our own good, against "our enemies", our "freedom", "defense", "security", all are crimes against humanity, against our allies, committed in our names: wars "on fascism", "on poverty", "on drugs", "on terrorism"... the very conditions produced by capitalism and intensified by its terror and wars. We have too long been willingly seduced, or terrified, into supporting US wars against ourselves, the people, everywhere.

imperialism is capitalism, capitalism gone global. Its drive to war is not a function of negotiable partisan "policies"/ politicians but a function of the basic nature of a the system with a bipartisan ruling class based on exploitation and oppression. Capitalist crises require further global expansion for capital accumulation and the elimination, control or defeat of everything in the way of its hegemony -- military aggression supplements and complements routine exploitation and other "non-violent" ruling strategies. After Saudi Arabia and Iran, Iraq owns most of the M.E. oil. Call it liberation and freedom. Control of resources, particularly oil (and water) is essential for U.S. "full-spectrum" global political-economic domination (aka "leadership")-- as leverage over friends as well as enemies.

Capitalism's declared enemies and friends come and go depending on current historical conditions and configurations ("if you aren't with US you're with the terrorists", GWB). Since the working class is international and has no national boundaries, produces global capitalist wealth and power, it has no objective interest in preserving its rule. It does however have the potential power and necessity to end capital's reign and for this reason we are strategically capitalism's actual and most feared potential enemy.

Supporting our oppressor's imperialist wars is betraying 'our' real interests, selling ourselves as mercenaries to the enemy who is killing 'us' everywhere, one way or the other. The irony is beyond ugly: Killing and dying to strengthen and protect the system that lives off our blood, expanding the rulers' terror and tyranny over us while clinging to the white supremacist lie that america is #1, the most "advanced", desirable country and culture in the world! America, is #1, beyond Hitler's wildest dreams, destroyer of nations, murderer of untold millions, producer of the unspeakable devastation, poverty and illness of millions more and architect of plans to use nuclear weapons if needs be to fulfill its fascist "manifest destiny" fantasy of world rule.

Capitalist WARS & "non-violent" wars work in tandem as you'll see below. "Peaceful" and "strategic non-violence" strategies, including ownership and control of the major media worldwide spewing 24/7 pro-U.S. propaganda. P20G & other "terrorist" creating "intel" anti-resistance/revolution projects like COINTELPRO. NGOs, "foreign aid", "humanitarian assistance", "peacekeeping forces", "think-tank experts" devising concrete analyses and policies, too many academics teaching propaganda that serves the U.S. agenda, global institutions like the WB, IMF and UN implementing the policies, liberal "multicultural diversity" and other tricks to take the heat off racist national oppression, the 'official left' that criticizes 'policies' while serving as apologists for the capitalist system and politicians they serve, control over public education, science and culture--plus religious superstition-- and many more threads constituting a fabric that produces social-psychological dehumanizing ignorance as well as military terror and destruction.

Selling ourselves for capital's meaningless cheap seductions is selling ourselves out, betraying our real interests, fighting against 'us' everywhere. Accumulating junk, killing and dying to provide life-support to the system that lives off our blood, expanding its terror and tyranny over our diminished, dehumanized, worthless selves is suicidal.

There is another way. To learn and take inspiration from the integrity, the wisdom and the courage of our sisters and brothers on every continent, in every country, fighting their own battles against U.S. savagery -- and, shamefully, ours too. Peoples' anti-imperialist wars against aggression and domination, our revolutionary wars for national liberation and socialist revolution, are just wars in our own interests, in the interests of our future, the world and the planet.

We have a choice. As the old labor song says, "Which side are you on"?

Do not worry over the charge of treason to your masters, but be concerned about the treason that involves yourselves. Be true to yourself and you cannot be a traitor to any good cause on Earth.
Eugene V. Debs June 16, 1918

"...The U.S. is... seen around the world as a rogue imperial superpower...a gross violator of human rights, an agent of global inequality, and the greatest threat to peace on earth.
Hoping that resistance forces in U.S.-targeted states might educate the U.S. on the limits of empire is hardly a sign of madness or even of anti-Americanism. The carnage inflicted by the insufficiently checked U.S. empire includes the dead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (criminally butchered by “Give’Em Hell Harry” Truman in atomic assaults that occurred after Japan had been defeated and were meant mainly to preemptively discipline Soviet foreign policy in the emerging post-WWII world order), 2-3 million dead Indochinese, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed by Desert Storm (conducted in accord with Powell’s doctrine of “overwhelming force”) and perhaps close to 2 million Iraqis (with “economic sanctions” fatalities included) from Bush I to Bush II..." Paul Street
The Empire and Inequality Report, No. 18,

When Peace Activism Becomes Collusion With Colonial Occupation
By Marta Rodríguez,
The recent abductions in Iraq of four Christian Peace Team activists produced two reactions within the American antiwar movement. Some forces, exemplified by the ISM/ International Solidarity Movement, assumed the Iraqi Resistance was behind the abduction, and condemned the action. Others... speculated that the abduction could have only been the result of occupation black ops.
A reading of the CPT web site suggests that there very well could be legitimate reasons for Iraqis engaged in armed struggle to find fault with that organization's role in their country. The CPT not only engages in nonviolent protest, but promotes it to the Iraqis. They do this, not for the purpose of adding to the arsenal of tactics which should be at the disposal of any resistance movement, but for the purpose of replacing that armed resistance altogether. They have stated that their role in Iraq is to "take the initiative from those who would do violence." That would include the legitimate defensive violence employed by Iraqis against the war criminals and thieves who slaughter and torture them, in order to plunder their country without hindrance.
In addition, the manner in which the CPT report [] goes about seeking relief for Iraqis abused by the American military, takes them from the line of nonviolence and human rights advocacy, directly into the realm of collusion with the occupation....
Any support work which requires that colonized people wait till their aggressors are good and ready to stop their violence, or that they settle for anything less than full restitution of the lands and resources that have been stolen from them, is no support work at all. It's betrayal and collusion with colonial aggression, which is no less harmful than the bullets and bombs employed to force the subjugation of the colonized.

Capitalist Democracy at Work Around the World through War & "Peace" for Unrivaled World Rule

“We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
David Rockefeller 1994 Statement to UN Business Council

"depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World."
Henry Kissinger

“I hope they kill each other”
Henry Kissinger, start of U.S. provoked Iran-Iraq war in which over a million died

" National Security was invented, almost, in 1947, now it has become the prime mover of everything we do as measured against something we invented in 1947."
U.S. Navy Admiral Gene La Rocque in PBS Documentary "The Secret Government"

An ideology with roots in 'Old Europe' ... and Old America: WAR AND WHAT IT'S GOOD FOR
by lenin (excerpt)

To the extent that American culture sentimentalises The Troops, and to the extent that martial honour and the warrior ethic is celebrated, that is precisely the extent to which such modes of cognition and behaviour are absent from daily life (even if business ideology has it that the workplace is a battlefield in itself). The ideal expressed by Zembiec (heavy stress on ideal) is that one can be fused into "something bigger than oneself" at precisely the same time that one achieves perfect individuality, "maturity" and "resolve". In the fantasy of intimate combat, hand-to-hand trial of strength with an enemy, the divide between individuality and collective humanity is supposedly overthrown.

This is as American as apple pie, with roots in Theodore Roosevelt's reforming, militaristic 'anti-capitalism'. In an 1899 speech (one year after the Spanish-American War), he had already outlined his ideal of The Strenuous Life, in which he chastised the notion of a slothful life of unchallenged ease as a despicable prospect, and gloried in a life of strife, challenge, combat. "As it is with the individual, so it is with the nation." "Thank God for the iron in the blood of our fathers," he says, for by fighting and risking all, they proved equal to the mighty days. America should not "be content to rot by inches in ignoble ease within our borders, taking no interest in what goes on beyond them, sunk in a scrambling commercialism". Rather, "If we are to be a really great people, we must strive in good faith to play a great part in the world." Had the US not fought and defeated Spain, "we would have shown ourselves weaklings, unable to carry to successful completion the labors that great and high-spirited nations are eager to undertake". Then take his 1910 speech to the Grand Army advocating a New Nationalism, advocating "proper sense of proportion in his relative estimates of capital and labor", a square deal for the working man, but no "sordid and selfish materialism" and certainly no hand-outs for any lazy bums. There are sustained parallels made with the condition of the army, which is a model for how society ought to be in its administration, loyalty, zeal and so on. The frontier wars, the civil war, the American revolution - all instances in which Americans, he said, had fought for the general interest and not some narrow section of society. The New Nationalism would therefore be one in which the executive is the steward of popular interest, not a chair to be purchased by the propertied interests; though there will remain classes, and dividends and property, there will be a moral revival in which human character means more than these things, and in which politics will not be divided by class warfare. Both of these aspects, military aggression and social reform, are of course integrated in the ideology of the 'new frontier', in which a "community of heroes" would be created, and communist revolution averted...

The essential coordinates of Kriegsideologie are therefore community, death, danger and destiny. Nazism would inherit this ideology, its exponents celebrating the (mythical) "wonderful communal experience of 1914". At the first Nazi book-burning, when the works of communist authors were put into the fire, the following slogan was shouted: "Against class struggle and materialism, and in favour of community and of an idealistic conception of life, I give the writings of Marx and Kautsky to the flames."... by introducing the topic of Nazism, I have piled such a weight of barbaric connotations on Kriegsideologie that someone might suspect that I am casting aspersions on dear old Bush, and those repositories of national affection, The Troops. Yet we are speaking of an ideology of war, which can manifest itself in various situations, and whose themes are certainly resonant today....

Further, despite the fact that those guys clearly got a kick out of that sortie, it is unlikely that the overall effect of their experience is going to dispose them toward civic virtue and pride in the national community. If they don't come back in bodybags, or with limbs and ears missing, or with brain damage, or DU sickness, they might well come back hating the government for some other reason. Suffice to say, generations of Ron Kovacs and, dare I add, Timothy McVeighs, are probably being moulded in the wonderful communal experience of war as we speak. Yet the feverish hold of this ideology in many quarters should alert us to what has been aroused in American culture, especially since That Day (you know the one), at least because no one - not even the residents of a fading ex-empire desperate to avoid historical oblivion - is immune.

SPIN: The Art of Selling War
 Directed by Josh Rushing, a veteran Marine Corps media spokesman, "SPIN: The Art of Selling War" is an investigative documentary that looks at the standard justification for going to war by the American administrations of past and present.

U.S. Lays out Israel's role in...
America's Geopolitical Nightmare and Eurasian Strategic Energy Arrangements
By F. William Engdahl
...Richard Perle and Douglas Feith put their names to a 1996 policy blueprint for Benjamin Netanyahu's then incoming government in Israel, titled, ‘A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm [Israel].’
In that document, Perle and Feith 'advised' Netanyahu that the rebuilding of Zionism must abandon any thought of trading land for peace with the Palestinians, i.e., repeal the Oslo accords.... For all this to succeed, Perle and Feith wrote, ‘Israel would have to win broad American support.’ To ensure this support, they advised the Israeli prime minister to use ‘language familiar to Americans by tapping into themes of past US administrations during the Cold War, which apply as well to Israel.’...
A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
Following is a report prepared by The U.S. Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

[The U.S.] "supplied arms in the fifties to Christians in Lebanon in the framework of the use of religious and ethnic minorities in the fight against communism."
CIA director William Colby, testimony to Senate Subcommittee on Refugees, July, 1976

Israel's Sacred Terrorism
A study based on Moshe Sharett's Personal Diary, and other documents
written by Livia Rokach
The personal diary of Moshe Sharett sheds light by amply documenting the rationale and mechanics of lsrael's "Arab policy" in the late 1940s and the 1950s. The policy one of deliberate Israeli acts of provocation, intended to generate Arab hostility and thus to create pretexts for armed action and territorial expansion. Sharett's records document this policy of "sacred terrorism" and expose the myths of Israel's "security needs" and the "Arab threat" that have been treated like self-evident truths from the creation of Israel to the present... It is becoming increasingly evident that the exceptional demographic and geographic alterations in Israeli society... have been brought about... by a drive for lebensraum....
Pinning the anti-Semitic label on critics his become the standard and easiest tactic to preempt rational discussion of public policy regarding Israel and to intimidate would-be critics.... Menachem Begin's famous remark after the Sabra and Shatila massacres, which defined criticism of Israel as "blood libel against the Jewish people," is a stark example of the trend to equate open criticism with anti-Semitism...
Western journalists, scholars sand analysts may find themselves greatly embarrassed by the following document. These commentators still insist on upholding the presumed moral commitment of the West to what they obstinately continue to mystify as Israel's security. In this sense Sharett's Diary, is potentially devastating to Zionist propaganda as the Pentagon Papers were in regard to U.S. aggression in Vietnam.[...]

Murder In Gaza
 Al Jazeera English airs exclusive footage of a series of deadly Israeli air attacks in the Gaza Strip, one of which struck as Gaza correspondent Nour Odeh was live on air.

 Document details 'US' plan to sink Hamas:
 On April 30, the Jordanian weekly newspaper Al-Majd published a story about a 16-page secret document, an "Action Plan for the Palestinian Presidency" that called for undermining and replacing the Palestinian national-unity government.

U.S. and Israel stoke civil war:
 Fatah Troops Enter Gaza With Israeli Assent: Hundreds Were Trained in Egypt Under U.S.-Backed Program to Counter Hamas

in case you missed this 'smoking gun'...
Uncivil war
Conflicts Forum, 7 January 2007
 Deputy National Security Advisor, Elliott Abrams — who Newsweek recently described as “the last neocon standing” — has had it about for some months now that the U.S. is not only not interested in dealing with Hamas, it is working to ensure its failure. In the immediate aftermath of the Hamas elections, last January, Abrams greeted a group of Palestinian businessmen in his White House office with talk of a “hard coup” against the newly-elected Hamas government — the violent overthrow of their leadership with arms supplied by the United States. While the businessmen were shocked, Abrams was adamant — the U.S. had to support Fatah with guns, ammunition and training, so that they could fight Hamas for control of the Palestinian government.

While those closest to him now concede the Abrams’ words were issued in a moment of frustration, the “hard coup” talk was hardly just talk. Over the last twelve months, the United States has supplied guns, ammunition and training to Palestinian Fatah activists to take on Hamas in the streets of Gaza and the West Bank. A large number of Fatah activists have been trained and “graduated” from two camps — one in Ramallah and one in Jericho. The supplies of rifles and ammunition, which started as a mere trickle, has now become a torrent (Haaretz reports the U.S. has designated an astounding $86.4 million for Abu Mazen’s security detail), and while the program has gone largely without notice in the American press, it is openly talked about and commented on in the Arab media — and in Israel. Thousands of rifles and bullets have been poring into Gaza and the West Bank from Egypt and Jordan, the administration’s designated allies in the program.

At first, it was thought, the resupply effort (initiated under the guise of “assist[ing] the Palestinian Authority presidency in fulfilling PA commitments under the road map to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism and establish law and order in the West Bank and Gaza,” according to a U.S. government document) would strengthen the security forces under the command of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Officials thought that the additional weapons would easily cow Hamas operatives, who would meekly surrender the offices they had only recently so dearly won. That has not only not happened, but the program is under attack throughout the Arab world — particularly among America’s closest allies.

While both Egypt and Jordan have shipped arms to Abu Mazen under the Abrams program (Egypt recently sent 1,900 rifles into Gaza and the West Bank, nearly matching the 3000 rifles sent by the Jordanians), neither Jordan’s King Abdullah nor Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak believe the program will work — and both are now maneuvering to find a way out of it. “Who can blame them?” an administration official told us recently. “While Mubarak has no love for Hamas, they do not want to be seen as bringing them down. The same can be said for Jordan.” A Pentagon official was even more adamant, cataloguing official Washington’s nearly open disdain for Abrams’ program. “This is not going to work and everyone knows it won’t work. It is too clever. We’re just not very good at this. This is typical Abrams stuff.” This official went on to note that “it is unlikely that either Jordan or Egypt will place their future in the hands of the White House. Who the hell outside of Washington wants to see a civil war among Palestinians? Do we really think that the Jordanians think that’s a good idea. The minute it gets underway, Abdullah is finished. Hell, fifty percent of his country is Palestinian.”

Senior U.S. Army officers and high level civilian Pentagon officials have been the most outspoken internal administration critics of the program, which was unknown to them until mid-August, near the end of Israel’s war against Hezbollah. When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld learned about it he was enraged, and scheduled a meeting with President Bush in an attempt to convince him the program would backfire. Rumsfeld was concerned that the anti-Hamas program would radicalise Muslim groups among American allies and eventually endanger U.S. troops fighting Sunni extremists in Iraq. According to our reports, Rumsfeld was told by Bush that he should keep his focus on Iraq, and that “the Palestinian brief” was in the hands of the Secretary of State. After this confrontation, Rumsfeld decided there was not much he could do.

The Abrams program was initially conceived in February of 2006 by a group of White House officials who wanted to shape a coherent and tough response to the Hamas electoral victory of January. These officials, we are told, were led by Abrams, but included national security advisors working in the Office of the Vice President, including prominent neo-conservatives David Wurmser and John Hannah. The policy was approved by Condoleezza Rice. The President then, we are told, signed off on the program in a CIA “finding” and designated that its implementation be put under the control of Langley. But the program ran into problems almost from the beginning. “The CIA didn’t like it and didn’t think it would work,” we were told in October. “The Pentagon hated it, the US embassy in Israel hated it, and even the Israelis hated it.” A prominent American military official serving in Israel called the program “stupid” and “counter-productive.” The program went forward despite these criticisms, however, though responsibility for its implementation was slowly put in the hands of anti-terrorism officials working closely with the State Department. The CIA “wriggled out of” retaining responsibility for implementing the Abrams plan, we have been told. Since at least August, Rice, Abrams and U.S. envoy David Welch have been its primary advocates and the program has been subsumed as a “part of the State Department’s Middle East initiative.” U.S. government officials refused to comment on a report that the program is now a part of the State Department’s “Middle East Partnership Initiative,” established to promote democracy in the region. If it is, diverting appropriated funds from the program for the purchase of weapons may be a violation of Congressional intent — and U.S. law.

The recipients of U.S. largesse have been Palestinian President Abu Mazen and Mohammad Dahlan, a controversial and charismatic Palestinian political leader from Gaza. The U.S. has also relied on advice from Mohammad Rashid, a well-known Kurdish/Palestinian financier with offices in Cairo. Even in Israel, the alliance of the U.S. with these two figures is greeted with almost open derision. While Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has hesitantly supported the program, many of his key advisors have made it clear that they want to have nothing to do with starting a Palestinian civil war. They also doubt whether Hamas can be weakened. These officials point out that, since the beginning of the program, Hamas has actually gained in strength, in part because its leaders are considered competent, transparent, uncorrupt and unwilling to compromise their ideals — just the kinds of democratically elected leaders that the Bush Administration would want to support anywhere else in the Middle East.

Of course, in public, Secretary Rice appears contrite and concerned with “the growing lawlessness” among Palestinians, while failing to mention that such lawlessness is exactly what the Abrams plan was designed to create. “You can’t build security forces overnight to deal with the kind of lawlessness that is there in Gaza which largely derives from an inability to govern,” she said during a recent trip to Israel. “Their [the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority] inability to govern, of course, comes from their unwillingness to meet international standards.” Even Middle East experts and State Department officials close to Rice consider her comments about Palestinian violence dangerous, and have warned her that if the details of the U.S. program become public her reputation could be stained. In fact, Pentagon officials concede, Hamas’s inability to provide security to its own people and the clashes that have recently erupted have been seeded by the Abrams plan. Israeli officials know this, and have begun to rebel. In Israel, at least, Rice’s view that Hamas can be unseated is now regularly, and sometimes publicly, dismissed.

According to a December 25 article in the Israeli daily Haaretz, senior Israeli intelligence officials have told Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that not only can Hamas not be replaced, but that its rival, Fatah, is disintegrating. Any hope for the success of an American program aimed at replacing Hamas, these officials argued, will fail. These Israeli intelligence officials also dismissed Palestinian President Abu Mazen’s call for elections to replace Hamas — saying that such elections would all but destroy Fatah. As Haaretz reported: “Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin told the cabinet Sunday [December 24] that should elections be held in the Palestinian Authority, Fatah’s chances of winning would be close to zero. Diskin said during Sunday’s weekly cabinet meeting that the Fatah faction is in bad shape, and therefore Israel should expect Hamas to register a sweeping victory.”

Apparently Jordan’s King Abdullah agrees. On the day this article appeared, December 25, Abdullah kept Palestinian President Abu Mazen waiting for six hours to see him in Amman. Eventually, Abdullah told Abu Mazen that he should go home — and only come to see him again when accompanied by Hamas leader and Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh. Most recently, Saudi officials have welcomed Haniyeh to Saudi Arabia for talks, having apparently made public their own views on the American program to replace Hamas. And so it is: one year after the election of Hamas, and one year after Elliot Abrams determined that sowing the seeds of civil war among a people already under occupation would somehow advance America’s program for democracy in the Middle East, respect for America’s democratic ideals has all but collapsed — and not just in Iraq.

Israel attacks in Gaza amid [SIC] factional violence
GAZA, May 16 (Reuters) - At least 25 Palestinians were killed on Wednesday as President Mahmoud Abbas's secular Fatah faction and Hamas battled for control of Gaza and Israel launched a deadly round of air strikes against the Islamists.
Palestinian officials said the widening hostilities could bring down a two-month-old unity government formed between Hamas and Fatah. Some Palestinians see this leading to all-out civil war and the end of the Palestinian Authority.
Israel's biggest air strike razed a building used by Hamas's Executive Force in the south Gaza town of Rafah, killing four militants. Israel said the attack was not connected to internal clashes that have killed at least 44 people since Friday.
A later air strike in northern Gaza killed another Hamas militant and wounded two other Palestinians, residents said.
Israel... wants Fatah to deal a blow to Hamas, the party of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh; it agreed to let 450 Fatah troops into Gaza from Egypt on Tuesday.But overt Israeli assistance for Fatah could backfire if Hamas is able to paint Abbas as an ally of the Jewish state, which many Palestinians see as their real enemy. Pro-Hamas media have already begun accusing Abbas of lining up with Israel.

Israel is ready to help Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas as his Fatah faction battles Hamas in Gaza, Vice Premier Shimon Peres said on Wednesday.

U.S. lauds Israeli restraint:
 The United States praised Israel on Thursday for showing "great restraint" in the face of new rocket attacks from the Palestinian group Hamas but added that Israel also has a right to defend itself.
Israeli Occupation Force vows to operate till Hamas surrenders:
 "We'll shoot till they say 'stop'!" a defense establishment source told Ynet on Thursday after IOF activity in the Gaza Strip was expanded.,7340,L-3401605,00.html

Israeli Poll: U.S. Should Strike Iran:
 The survey commissioned by Bar-Ilan University's BESA Center and the Anti-Defamation League, also found that 59 percent of Israelis still believe war in Iraq was justified, 36 percent think it was not.

Ask Pope Benedict: When Does Genocide Purify?
Adam Jones
This time around, Ratzinger/Benedict's bile was directed not at liberation theology, but squarely at the historical memory of the serial genocides -- probably the most destructive in human history -- inflicted upon the indigenous peoples of the Americas. On the last day of his visit, in the city of Aparecida, the Pope "touch[ed] on a sensitive historical episode," in the blandly understated language of an Associated Press dispatch (May 13). In other words, he ripped the bandages off a still-suppurating wound. According to the official text of Benedict's comments on the Vatican website, the Pope declared that "the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean" were "silently longing" to receive Christ as their savior. He was "the unknown God whom their ancestors were seeking, without realizing it ..." Colonization by Spain and Portugal was not a conquest, but rather an "adoption" of the Indians through baptism, making their cultures "fruitful" and "purifying" them. Accordingly, "the proclamation of Jesus and of his Gospel did not at any point involve an alienation of the pre-Columbian cultures, nor was it the imposition of a foreign culture."

So there we have it. The invasion and conquest of the Americas, which caused the deaths of upwards of 90 percent of the indigenous population, was something the Indians had been pining for all along. They weren't just "asking for it," as sexist cranks depict women as complicit in their own rapes. They were actually "longing" for it, since salvation and "purification" came with it. Actually, genocide came with it...

Tribal Indians condemn pope :
 Indian leaders in Brazil have reacted angrily to comments by Pope Benedict that they had been purified by the Roman Catholic church since Columbus landed in the Americas in 1492.

Venezuela: Think Guatemala 1954
 The parallels between Guatemala in 1954 and present day Venezuela are uncomfortably close, which is cause enough for concern that the U.S. government and its compliant media have predictably taken sides.

Washington's New Imperial Strategy In Venezuela
 By Chris Carlson
 Washington has now perfected a new imperial strategy to maintain their supremacy around the globe. Whereas military invasions and installing dictatorships have traditionally been the way to control foreign populations and keep them out of the way of business, the U.S. government has now developed a new strategy that is not so messy or brutal, and much more sleek; so sleek, in fact, that it's almost invisible.

US firms 'pay Colombia militias':
 A paramilitary commander has accused US companies which buy Colombia's bananas of financing illegal right-wing militias that have killed thousands of people in more than a decade.

The Godfather of Colombia Uribe and the Para Scandal
Dr. W. John Green much longer will the United States continue to play enabler to Colombia's paramilitary habits? Let's speak plain: Uribe is no to-the-core democrat; rather, he is a cynical pragmatist who says he is bending plow but somehow ends up with more swords. But that's good enough to feed the eagerness of the State Department ...
Uribe inherited 'Plan Colombia,' the multi-billion dollar U.S. aid package conceptualized by Pastrana during the final years of the Clinton administration that have been expanded and heavily militarized under President Bush. Though initially sold as an anti-narcotics strategy, much of the training and hardware it provides actually has gone largely to the Colombian army's struggle with the FARC, and its economic base which is found in the coca producing regions. While the army's close ties to the paramilitary units are universally recognized and even condemned, in practice this has somewhat declined (it is believed that more than half of the army's brigades still have paramilitary ties). Over the last two decades, most of the untoward aspects of Colombia's dirty war have been outsourced to the paras.... Now called 'civilian auxiliaries,' they may wear new uniforms, but they are still armed and unified as well as control territory, especially in Chocó, where they have set themselves up as the effective local authority. They continue to expropriate communally held land from centuries-old Afro-Colombian communities. Para land clearing and population displacement are also connected to the drug trade, the mass commercialization of African palm cultivation, cattle ranching, and to new and proposed mega-economic projects....
In late March, news broke of payments made by senior executives of Chiquita Brands International to paramilitary groups who had fielded death squads. Finally, in April, opposition Senator Gustavo Petro came out with the explosive allegation that paramilitary death squads had used President Uribe's own ranch as a staging area for their activities in the late 1980s, when Uribe was a Senator....
This is the man and cause who Bush and Uribe's supporters in the Senate hope to dispatch hundreds of millions of dollars in additional funds to, and who his detractors, hope to reveal as a fraud and a mountebank when it comes to upholding democratic values.[...]

imperialist proxies and "civil war" in Africa
Darfur: The Hourglass of Blood
 By Ramzy Baroud
 When regional control, political interests and economic booty are all at stake, human lives, especially those of these least importance - peasants, nomads and defenceless innocents with little clout - become a pawn in the hands of those who wish for conflict to perpetuate.

Chad Now Awash in Blood, Alongside Darfur: U.S. Maestro of Chaos
by BAR Executive Editor Glen Ford> .

"The escalating reverse flow of refugees from Chad to Darfur shows the U.S. is a maestro of chaos."

Thousands of refugees are doing the unthinkable: fleeing into the cauldron of death that is Darfur, Western Sudan, from neighboring Chad. The scenario seems so counterintuitive as to make the head swim - unless one understands the continent-wide scope of U.S. military penetration of the region and, most importantly, that the bedrock America strategy in Africa is the creation of chaos...

Chad's government is a virtual military appendage of the United States, a proud "success story" in the wholesale American penetration of the armed forces of nations across Africa's northern Sahel region. A March 22 report from the IRIN news service, an organ of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, reveals another side of the story:

"An estimated 20,000 Chadians have sought refuge in West Darfur since 2005."

"Thousands of people fleeing conflict in Chad have sought refuge in Sudan's western region of Darfur despite the humanitarian crisis there, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said on Thursday [March 22]," said the IRIN dispatch. It continued:

"An estimated 20,000 Chadians have sought refuge in West Darfur since 2005, while 16,000 had opted to remain close to the border to access their land. ‘These people are fleeing the conflict in their country to camps in West Darfur where there is food and security,' said Annette Rehrl, UNHCR spokeswoman in Sudan....

"Civilians in Chad have suffered from persistent attacks by armed militias in the east of the country, along the volatile border with Darfur, since 2005. Last year, fighting between government and rebel forces escalated after high-ranking military officers joined rebel forces following President Idriss Deby's decision to amend the Chadian constitution to run for a third term. The unrest has displaced about 120,000 people inside Chad."

The power-play by Chad President Deby, whose minority ethnic-based government in N'Djamena was favored by Washington and American commanders on the ground, plunged the nation into chaos - precisely as intended. With much of his officer corps in rebellion, President Deby is now even more dependent for political and physical survival on the American military, which is embedded at every level of the Chadian armed forces. Such was the desired result of the American military's "general-to-general," "colonel-to-colonel" relationship to militaries all along the swath of Africa that stretches from Djibouti and Somalia on the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, to Mauritania on the Atlantic Ocean coast.

It is significant that the destabilization of Chad is dated to have begun in 2005. On July 26, 2005, the Washington Post reported:

"The Pentagon plans to train thousands of African troops in battalions equipped for extended desert and border operations and to link the militaries of different countries with secure satellite communications. The initiative, with proposed funding of $500 million over seven years, covers Algeria, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Nigeria, Morocco and Tunisia - with the U.S. military eager to add Libya if relations improve."

Remember that refugee flight in Chad began in 2005, at the onset of the U.S.-Chad military relationship, and the acute Chad refugee crisis has come about since the U.S.-backed Deby regime cut the other generals out of the power continuum.... it was the U.S intention, once its "general-to-general," "colonel-to-colonel" and "wallet-to-wallet" military tentacles had sunk deeply enough, to destabilize the Chadian state. By creating the circumstances for chaos on Chad's eastern border with Darfur, the U.S. seeks to declare an international crisis that will enable it to intervene directly in Sudanese and Chadian territory under the guise of a transnational "humanitarian" mission.


The U.S. creates chaos in order to pose as "liberator" and savior. In the process, it creates "failed states" in order to erase restrictions on its own field of operations. This subversive strategy has advanced to the point that the continent now rates its own Africa Command, AFRICOM (See Bruce Dixon, BAR, February 28, 2007, "Africa - Where the Next US Oil Wars Will Be.")

But first, many thousands must die as an excuse for extra-territorial action: thus, the necessity for a refugee crisis in Chad. The now wholly U.S.-dependent government in N'Djamena has predictably come under intense pressure to endorse a U.S. dominated transborder "solution" to the Darfur cataclysm - as no less than the Voice of America reported on March 20:

"A U.S. State Department official says the United States is pressing Chad to accept a U.N. peacekeeping force to help secure regional stability. The official told Congress the violence in the neighboring Darfur region of Sudan has spread across the border into Chad," said the VOA, an organ of the U.S. government.

The "State Department official" is Deputy Assistant Secretary of State For African Affairs James Swann, who told a Senate committee:
"Our primary focus at this point is in supporting a robust U.N. peacekeeping operation for Chad and Central African Republic...

An African ‘Coalition of the Willing'

The Central African Republic (CAR) is the the French neo-colony bordering Chad and Sudan that served as a temporary prison for Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide after his overthrow and kidnapping by the Americans, in 2004 - a perfect African satrap for Amer-Euro imperialism. Naturally, the CAR is eager to please, but Chad's president is a problem, apparently not yet aware that he is hopelessly ensnared in the spider's web, since he owes his very limited powers to the U.S. Africa Command.

"We were disappointed by the Chadian government's recent indications of concern over the military component of the proposed mission, and, specifically, the deployment of an advanced mission," said Swann, the State Department's man on Africa. "We are continuing to engage President [Idriss] Deby to convince him to accept a military force as part of this package."

"The U.S. demands that Chad relinquich what is left of its national sovereignty to de-facto U.S. military rule under the guise of a United Nations mission."

In other words, the U.S. demands that Chad relinquish what is left of its national sovereignty to accept de-facto U.S. military rule under the guise of a United Nations mission. Cleverly, with full understanding that neither the UN nor the European Union can field a significant force in Africa without the logistical resources of the U.S. Africa Command, the Americans volunteer the "heavy equipment" that they have for years refused to provide to African Union peacekeepers in Darfur. The Voice of America report, continues:
"Swan said, if the international community finds it difficult to contribute large numbers of troops to such a mission, the United States would support a smaller force, backed by heavy equipment. ‘We recognize that, with already 100,000 international peacekeeping troops currently deployed worldwide, that force generation for the Chad-CAR mission is going to be a challenge,' said Swan."

It is a challenge that the U.S. Africa Command will meet with billions of dollars of imperial military investment - and the collateral loss of countless African lives - in the years to come.

Having infiltrated and subverted the national government of Chad through its "general-to-general" military missions, the United States now treats the country as a "failed state" whose national boundaries and sovereignty must be sacrificed - for Chad's own and the region's greater good. Once-imperial France has donated its military-ruled puppet, the Central African Republic (CAR) as a frontline state in the U.S.-led African "Coalition of the Willing."

Ethiopia is already on board, a lowly proxy that deludes itself into thinking its invasion of Somalia enhances its regional power and domestic stability, when in fact the dictator in Addis Ababa is caught as snugly as Chad president Deby in the U.S. spider's imperial web. Kenya, with its large Muslim population, risks setting itself on fire through an alliance with the Americans' bogus "war on terror" on the continent - which is in reality a war on all semblance of national sovereignty in Africa and on the planet.

"Kenya, with its large Muslim population, risks setting itself on fire through an alliance with the Americans' bogus 'war on terror' on the continent."

Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni, a charter member of the U.S. imperial club, volunteers troops for whatever inter-African venture the U.S. proposes - most recently for helping the Ethiopians occupy Somalia - despite the fact that he was not even able to defeat the rag-tag, deluded children-troops of the Lord's Resistance Army on his own territory. The warlord Museveni only makes war for profit. He committed the bulk of his army to looting the Democratic Republic of Congo (DAR) as part of the U.S.-engineered "African chaos" strategy that led to the death of four million people. His ally in Congo plunder, the Tutsi Rwandan regime, has pledged allegiance to any and all U.S. ventures, as long as the money flows.

Africa no longer requires white mercenaries for the success of imperial conquest. There are plenty of Black generals (and colonels and sergeants) standing in line, hoping for a payday and an offshore bank account. What IS required, from Washington's standpoint, is that the rapid spread of "war on terror" imperialism be viewed by Americans - especially Black Americans - as a benign intervention to save Africans from themselves. The reality is that premeditated chaos is central to U.S. strategy. That's why tens of thousands are running away from Chad, a now-non-state hopelessly entrapped in the American madhouse - a theater of mass carnage in which we are demanded to cheer for the cowboy who set the stage for holocaust.

BAR Executive Editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford (@)

oppressed and exploited peoples, and all who resist the U.S. juggernaut, are considered enemies of the state
The history of amerika is the history of the dehumanization, terror, genocide and enslavement of the Black nation and all other oppressed and exploited peoples who created the wealth on which this predatory white supremacist empire has been built and created cultures that it fears, despised and destroys.

"The Negro youth and moderate[s] must be made to understand that if they succumb to revolutionary teachings, they will be dead
J. Edgar Hoover,FBI Chief, re: COINTELPRO against the Black Panther Party

APRIL 23 (under authority of the order of April 14), 1976

Walter Fields, publisher The Northstar Network
Anyone who feels sickened by the behaviour of the mob in Falluja should pay a visit to the Martin Luther King Jr centre in Atlanta and see some of the thousands of photos taken of good ol' boys standing, smiling and, sometimes, picnicking with their wives and families, alongside corpses of black men and women they had lynched.
Jonathan Fanning, London

To Be Black In America: An Unflinching Necessity
“Beyond mere color, being Black is first and foremost a conscious political, social, and economic commitment to the struggle for the collective betterment of the descendants of the Black slavery holocaust in what has now become the United States of America, in conjunction with other people of color and humanity as a whole.”
—Larry Pinkney

We are well into the 21st century and it continues to be absolutely essential to be Black in America. Beyond mere color, being Black is first and foremost a conscious political, social, and economic commitment to the struggle for the collective betterment of the descendants of the Black slavery holocaust, in what has now become the United States of America, in conjunction with other people of color and humanity as a whole.

Indeed, to be Black is not only to be physically of a certain hue, but just as importantly--to be consciously of a certain mental hue--from what some have called 'high yellow' to deep, dark, rich blue-Black. Blackness is, in fact, not only a rainbow of color but also a rainbow of active consciousness and commitment. To be Black is to be socially and politically conscious, as the late and incomparable artist-activist, lyricist, and singer Curtis Mayfield poignantly stated it in his powerful song entitled, "We People Who Are Darker Than Blue"..."Now I know we have great respect./For the sister and mother it's even better yet./But there's the joker in the street/loving one brother and killing the other./When the time comes and we are really free/there'll be no brothers left you see..." In other words, Blackness in its truest sense means consciousness, and more to the point, an active consciousness. Thus the term 'Black consciousness.'

In 21st century America, other than perception, very little of real substance has changed for the better in the daily lives of the vast majority of Black people and other people of color. In fact, Black people are incarcerated at a higher rate than ever before in US history, and far too many of the hard-won gains of the so-called "civil rights movement" have been eroded, outright reversed, or otherwise nullified, for the majority of Black men, women, and children in America. Moreover, Black youth in particular are under sustained intense social, economic, and cultural assault on virtually every level of American society. The reality of Black life in America--has been insidiously and deliberately replaced in the US media and institutions--by illusion, which in fact has little or nothing to do with the increasingly deplorable conditions in, of, and under which the masses of Black people really exist today in America. To paraphrase the words of Malcolm X, "Wrong has become right and bad has become good..." Today, it is illusion that is touted as if it is reality, while reality itself is expeditiously discarded.

To be Black means a conscious recognition of reality for what it really is, so that it can forthrightly be addressed, not dooming ourselves and our posterity to ultimate oblivion and historical ignominy by playing go-along-to-get-along ostriches. Being consciously Black means choosing reality over illusion. One of the most potent mainstays of racist oppression in America, is deluding ourselves to succumb to illusion. For example, as in the case of the US Presidential aspirations of Barack Obama...

Black, Red, and Brown peoples--both young and old alike--in America, perhaps more than any other group of people in this nation, collectively know the utter horror and enormous pain of having violence constantly thrust upon us and our loved ones; and so it is that we sense the recent tragic and terrible events on the campus of Virginia Tech. Not surprisingly, however, conscious Black people are also painfully aware of the almost total absence on the part the US so-called news media in drawing the connections between the horrific tragedy at Virginia Tech, the proliferation and increasing accessibility to guns inside the US, and America's own role in perpetrating and perpetuating the daily violent horrors experienced by the people of Iraq, Haiti, Palestine, and so many other places on this planet.

To be Black in this context is to be conscious, and conscious people, regardless of color, know that the only effective way to address the terrible ruthlessness acted-out, within the borders of this nation, is simultaneously to address and stop the bloody carnage being inflicted by America upon the rest of the world. Again it must be said:

To be Black demands active consciousness and rejects lethargy.

To be Black in America is not a burden; it is a wondrous and unflinching necessity.

Larry Pinkney is a veteran of the Black Panther Party, the former Minister of Interior of the Republic of New Africa, a former political prisoner and the only American to have successfully self-authored his civil/political rights case to the United Nations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Click here to contact Mr. Pinkney. Reprinted with permission from The Black Commentator.

Mumia Abu-Jamal's Radio Broadcasts
Mumia Abu-Jamal is an award-winning journalist who chronicles the human condition. He has been a resident of Pennsylvania’s death row for twenty-five years. Writing from his solitary confinement cell his essays have reached a worldwide audience. His books "Live From Death Row", "Death Blossoms", "All Things Censored", “Faith of Our Fathers” and the recently released “We Want Freedom” have sold over 150,000 copies and been translated into nine languages.

U.S. Racist Genocide Intensifies in New Orleans: "Like 911 But Add Water"
by liz burbank
A renaissance of Black resistance and leadership, historically the leading edge of revolution is what the postmodern slavemasters fear most in the racist "homeland".

Katrina was no accident, no surprise, no act of 'mother nature', the 'gods' , or bureaucratic incompetence. The human and environmental and impact on New Orleans of a hurricane of this magnitude had been scientifically calculated. Rescue and recovery were deliberately withheld, working class Black people militarily imprisoned, forcibly dispersed and murdered by the armed state.

This intensification of America's historical genocide, a crime of U.S. imperialist state terrorism, is a premeditated physical and psychological attack on the Black Nation to destroy its strength, pride, cultural cohesion and resistance to capitalist white supremacy's fascist global juggernaut.

Central to the U.S. strategy for global domination, Katrina and the brutal aftermath was engineered to serve this fascist agenda in two interrelated ways: uprooting, dispersing and weakening the Black Nation, while simultaneously inflaming racist support for the consolidation of a fascist mode of state capitalism under the guise of "rescue, relief and recovery” from a "major casualty-producing event" the state declared a “natural disaster.” [...]
full article at also at]

Corrections Population Hits 6.6M Nearly Half are Black

DNA in Murders Frees Inmate After 19 Years
ELIZABETH, N.J., May 15 — A man who served 19 years in prison for the sadistic murders of his companion’s two children walked out of the Union County Courthouse flanked by his family members after a judge vacated his convictions on Tuesday. Mr. Halsey, who was handcuffed, sat crying silently during the brief proceeding in Union County Superior Court before Judge Stuart L. Peim. Asked about his emotional state, he smiled and said, “I don’t want to get in more trouble.” He added, What was done to me was criminal at best.”
Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project, the Manhattan legal clinic [note: that has saved the lives of hundreds of wrongly convicted innocent people] revived the case.

The American Empire: Conquest Through NAFTA
by XicanoPwr
Between 1918 and 1939 - the US had developed and approved as official national policy three major war plans: a War Plan ORANGE against Japan, War Plan GREEN against Mexico, and a War Plan RED against Canada.
The plan for invading Mexico shows the US attitude towards Mexico with a focus on their oil. The plan states:
"The oil fields of Tampico and Tuxpan are important not only to the commerce of the United States and of the world, but to that of Mexico... The fields are largely owned by American and British interests and are susceptible to great damage by the Mexicans. It is therefore important to seize these fields at once..."...

Mexico has entered into a trade agreement, but a conquest does not have to be accomplished through conventional warfare. Three years before NAFTA took effect, José Luis Calva of the National University of Mexico, predicted:
"If the governments and legislatures of the three countries agree to liberalize trade in agricultural goods, U.S. citizens should be prepared to receive some 15 million Mexican migrants. The Border Patrol will be unable to detain them, and even a new iron curtain, rising on the border at a moment when the Cold War has given way to economic warfare among nations, will buckle under the weight of millions of Mexicans thrown off their lands by free trade."

The essence of the American empire is not territorial control but wresting of economic control from another country and dominating that nation economically. How long will this "peaceful conquest" of Mexico continue to go unnoticed?

Immigration: A Nation of Colonists and Race Laws
by Juan Santos
The original Europeans in what is now the US were not immigrants, but colonists. And the US is not a nation of immigrants -- it is a white colonial settler state, like South Africa under Apartheid, the former Rhodesia, Australia and Israel. Like those states the US has always operated on a sometimes hidden, sometimes overt system of Apartheid....We understand “illegal” perfectly well. Conquest of territory in wars of aggression is illegal under international law. The US occupation of most Native land and all of the occupied sections of Mexico is illegal. The presence of the conquering people, the usurpation of the land itself is illegal. The colonists themselves are illegal aliens. ... It’s about race law and white privilege.

Deal may legalize millions of immigrants
Sealed after months of secretive bargaining, the deal mandates bolstered border security and a high-tech employment verification system to prevent illegal workers from getting jobs... The proposal constitutes a far-reaching change in the immigration system that would admit future arrivals seeking to put down roots in the U.S. based on their skills, education levels and job experience, limiting the importance of family ties.... the proposed plan would shift from an immigration system primarily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for people with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. A new class of guest workers would be allowed in temporarily, but only after the new security measures were in place - expected to take 18 months.
The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and - after paying fees and a $5,000 fine - ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of households would have to return to their home countries first.
They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.
A new crop of low-skilled guest workers would have to return home after stints of two years. They could renew their visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time. If they wanted to stay in the U.S. permanently, they would have to apply under the point system for a limited pool of green cards.
The compromise brought together an unlikely [SIC] alliance of liberal Democrats such as Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and conservative Republicans such as Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona on an issue that carries heavy potential risks and rewards for all involved.
"This is a bill where people who live here in our country will be treated without amnesty but without animosity," Bush said. Kennedy hailed it as "the best possible chance we will have in years to secure our borders and bring millions of people out of the shadows and into the sunshine of America." [...]

Halliburton Press Release January 24, 2006
ARLINGTON, Virginia – KBR announced today that its Government and Infrastructure division has been awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency. KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton (NYSE:HAL).... The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs. The contingency support contract provides for planning and, if required, initiation of specific engineering, construction and logistics support tasks to establish, operate and maintain one or more expansion facilities.
The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other U.S. Government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster.

"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy"
Henry Kissinger

[SARIN] Gas May [SIC] Have Harmed Troops, Scientists Say
More than 100,000 American troops in the Persian Gulf war
of 1991 were exposed to low levels of sarin nerve gas.

Vet Prosecuted for Opposing Recruitment in Library:
 "My husband is a Gulf War Veteran. He can tell you the TRUTH." "To the military, you are cannon fodder."

White House opposes military pay raise:
 The White House has come out in opposition to a proposal by Congress to raise military pay by 3.5 percent, according to a report by Army Times.
U.S. Military Personnel Use Of Food Stamps Increase:
 Across the commissary system, food-stamp redemptions were up by about $2.3 million, to $26.2 million in fiscal 2006 compared to 2005.

Dems drop Iraq timetable, but White House rejects deal :
 They pledged to give Bush authority to waive compliance with a timetable to pull combat troops out of Iraq. But no agreement emerged.

Clinton Won't Commit on Iraq Deadline:
 Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton voted Wednesday to advance legislation cutting off money for the Iraq war, then refused to pledge to support the measure if it came to a vote, then said she would.

The Kennedy myth rises again
By John Pilger
In his latest column for the New Statesman, John Pilger recalls the night Robert Kennedy was shot in his presence and the myths that followed his untimely death. Having elevated Kennedy to be one of his heroes, Prime Minister-in-waiting Gordon Brown describes him as the pinnacle of "morality" - when this myth really tells us about Brown himself and his political twin, Tony Blair.
The same missionary testament, of "faith" in America's myths and power, has been spoken by every presidential candidate in memory, more so by Democrats, who start more wars than Republicans. The assassinated Kennedys exemplified this. John F Kennedy referred incessantly to "America's mission in the world" even while affirming it with a secret invasion of Vietnam that caused the deaths of more than two million people. Robert Kennedy had made his name as a ruthless counsel for Senator Joe McCarthy on his witch-hunting committee investigating "un-American activities". The younger Kennedy so admired the infamous McCarthy that he went out of his way to attend his funeral. As attorney general, he backed his brother's atrocious war and when John F Kennedy was assassinated, he used his name to win election as a junior senator for New York.

Democrats Agree on a $2.9 Trillion Budget
The agreement between House and Senate Democratic leaders
envisions a return to budget surpluses by 2012 and assumes
that some tax cuts will be allowed to expire.

Democrat Controlled House Passes Joint U.S -Israel BMDS
 The Democratic-controlled House passed its version of the fiscal 2008 defense authorization legislation May 17, including a last-minute provision pushed by conservative Republicans to further integrate the U.S. ballistic missile defense system (BMDS) with Israel.

Legislators reject bills about Iran : Democrats sought approval over war.
The House rejected two measures yesterday that would have required President George W. Bush to seek congressional approval before attacking Iran....
The votes were primarily symbolic; Bush has not said he is planning to invade Iran. But because of missteps made in assessing pre-war intelligence on Iraq, many Democrats said the legislation was necessary. "If it were any president, I don’t think we’d have to worry about this," said Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I.
A similar proposal on Iran initially was included in this year’s war spending bill drafted by the House. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., agreed to remove the requirement after several Democrats said they were worried about Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
Those concerns were expressed again yesterday by both Republicans and some Democrats who said the proposals would tie the president’s hands and leave Israel and the United States vulnerable....

 U.S. Christians trained in Israel advocacy:
 On college campuses across the United States, Christian students are asking to join efforts to "make the case for Israel" alongside their Jewish counterparts, and this week their requests will begin to materialize.

U.S. oil financier pardoned by Clinton
By Ben Winograd
JERUSALEM – An Israeli university awarded an honorary doctorate Tuesday to billionaire Marc Rich, who left the U.S. for Switzerland after he was charged with tax evasion and illegal oil trading with Iran.... was pardoned of all criminal charges on his last day in office in 2001 by President Clinton... Bar-Ilan University, located outside Tel Aviv, conferred the degree in recognition of the financier's contributions to Israel and the university's research programs, it said in a statement.
The university also cited Rich's financial aid in helping Israel resettle immigrants from Yemen, Ethiopia and the former Soviet Union. Rich, 72, made his fortune as a commodities trader and is widely credited with developing the crude oil “spot market.” In February, Forbes magazine listed his worth at $1.5 billion.

U.S. crisis deepened with challenge to its domination WB, key organ of U.S. global hegemony
Wolfowitz crisis challenges U.S. leadership [i.e. DOMINATION]
 The likely ouster of Paul Wolfowitz as World Bank president, in another rift between the United States and its European allies, poses an unprecedented challenge to U.S leadership of the global financial system
terms not yet divulged...
Paul Wolfowitz to Resign as President of the World Bank as of June 30, Bank Official Says
May 17, 2007
Angry Wolfowitz Threats in four-letter tirade:
 An angry and bitter Paul Wolfowitz poured abuse and threatened retaliations on senior World Bank staff if his orders for pay rises and promotions for his partner were revealed, according to new details published last night.

War Pimp Perle Declares Bush/State Dept. Impotent
The Bush administration is beginning to appease rather than confront America's enemies, a former chairman of the Defense Policy Board and leading neoconservative thinker said yesterday, describing the president as "a failure" who is proving powerless to impose his views on his administration.
Richard Perle offered a withering assessment of the president's impotence at a meeting of the Hudson Institute in New York, saying American foreign policy is being applied by an out-of-control State Department.
The State Department is "institutionally disposed to settle problems through compromise, to settle rather than to fight," Mr. Perle said. This is dangerous because many enemies of America remain who are prepared to continue fighting when offered a settlement.
Mr. Perle's assessment is recognized by an expert on defense policy at the American Enterprise Institute, Thomas Donnelly, who said Mr. Bush is routinely frustrated by "establishment" thinking within Washington and that the failure to respond to the president's more radical thinking has harmed American policy in Iraq....
But the characterization of a divided administration frustrating the president's wishes is inaccurate, according the director of the foreign policy program at the New America Foundation, Steven Clemons, who said he thinks Mr. Bush is allowing Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Rice to play good cop, bad cop with the Iranians....

'Bush may strike Iran near end of term':
 While arguing that economic sanctions against Teheran still have a chance of bearing fruit, a top strategic expert predicted on Tuesday that the Bush administration could conduct a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities toward the end of its term in office.

Cheney Sabotages Talks with Tehran:
 Remember, it was Cheney who did everything in his power to hype the Iraq War and scuttle any possibility of a diplomatic solution prior to that conflict. Now he's doing the same with Iran.

Harvard's Kangaroo Law School: The School for Torturers
 By Francis A. Boyle
 I am not going to bother to recite here all the grievous deficiencies of the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts under International Law and U.S. Constitutional Law. But suffice it to say that the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts constitute war crimes under the Laws of War.

Big Pharma Commits the Crime, Doesn't Do the Time:
 "Hundreds of thousands of people are languishing in jail for relatively minor drug possession or distribution crimes involving illegal drugs or, in a smaller number of cases, prescription drugs such as OxyContin. Why have the three wealthy Purdue executives, who have pleaded guilty to orchestrating this dangerous promotional campaign, escaped jail time."

US Health System Ranks Last Compared To Other Countries:
 By Jocelyne Zablit
 Studies ranked U.S. last in most areas, including access to health care, patient safety, timeliness of care, efficiency and equity. Americans were also last in terms of whether they had a regular physician.

Senators Want CIA to Release 9 / 11 Report
The CIA has spent more than 20 months weighing requests under the Freedom of Information Act for its internal investigation of the attacks but has yet to release any portion of it....Many of the individuals highlighted in the inspector general's report are likely to have retired. But some are believed still to be in senior government positions, making the report's findings even more sensitive at the CIA and perhaps elsewhere within the intelligence community.
The AP has reported that the two-year review of what went wrong before the suicide hijackings harshly criticized a number of the agency's most senior officials.
That includes Tenet, former clandestine service chief Jim Pavitt and former counterterrorism center head Cofer Black, according to individuals familiar with the report, who spoke in 2005 on condition they not be identified...Pavitt is now a principal with The Scowcroft Group, an international business advisory firm, and Black is vice chairman of Blackwater USA, an international security firm whose clients include the CIA and other U.S. agencies.

"NYT poll: three out of four Americans now suspect the U.S. government of not telling the truth about 9/11"
An explosion of disbelief - fresh doubts over 9/11
By SUE REID -9th February 2007

The official story of what happened on 9/11 never fails to shock. Four American airliners are hijacked by Osama Bin Laden's terrorists in an attack on the heart of the Western world on September 11, 2001....
Yet today, more than five years on, this accepted version of what happened on 9/11 is being challenged by a 90-minute internet movie made for £1,500 on a cheap laptop by three young American men. The film is so popular that up to 100 million viewers have watched what is being dubbed the first internet blockbuster.
The movie was shown on television to 50 million people in 12 countries on the fifth anniversary of 9/11 last autumn. More than 100,000 DVDs have been sold and another 50,000 have been given away. In Britain, 491,000 people have clicked on to Google Video to watch it on their computers.

Called Loose Change, the film is a blitz of statistics, photographs pinched from the web, eyewitness accounts and expert testimony...And it is dramatically changing the way people think about 9/11. [google Loose Change Website - Version 2.0]
A recent poll by the respected New York Times revealed that three out of four Americans now suspect the U.S. government of not telling the truth about 9/11. This proportion has shot up from a year ago, when half the population said they did not believe the official story of an Al Qaeda attack.

The video claims the Bush administration was, at the very least, criminally negligent in allowing the terrorist attacks to take place. It also makes the startling claim that the U.S. government might have been directly responsible for 9/11 and is now orchestrating a cover-up....
Indeed, the movie's assertions are being explored by a number of commentators in America and Britain - including the former Labour Cabinet Minister Michael Meacher - who are questioning the official account of 9/11.
Mr Meacher, who last year proposed holding a screening of Loose Change at the House of Commons (he later changed his mind), has said of 9/11: "Never in modern history has an event of such cataclysmic significance been shrouded in such mystery. Some of the key facts remain unexplained on any plausible basis."

These words were written in a foreword for Professor David Ray Griffin's bestselling book, The New Pearl Harbour...Griffin, now nearing retirement, is emeritus professor at the Claremont School of Theology in California and a respected philosopher. While Loose Change is capturing the interest of internet devotees, Professor Griffin's equally contentious theories are receiving standing ovations in book clubs across the U.S.
Together, the book and the movie have raised the question: could the attack be a carbon copy of Operation Northwoods, an aborted plan by President Kennedy to stage terror attacks in America and blame them on Communist Cuba as a pretext for a U.S. invasion to overthrow Fidel Castro?

In other words, on a fateful September morning in 2001, did America fabricate an outrage against civilians to fool the world and provide a pretext for war on Al Qaeda and Iraq?
This, and other deeply disturbing questions, are now being furiously debated on both sides of the Atlantic.

Why were no military aircraft scrambled in time to head off the attacks? Was the collapse of the Twin Towers caused by a careful use of explosives? How could a rookie pilot - as one of the terrorists [sic] was - fly a Boeing 757 aircraft so precisely into the Pentagon? And who made millions of dollars by accurately betting that shares in United and American Airlines, owners of the four doomed aircraft, were going to fall on 9/11 as they duly did? An extremely high volume of bets on the price of shares dropping were placed on these two airline companies, and only these two. In the three days prior to the catastrophe, trade in their shares went up 1,200 per cent.

Initially, like most people in America, Professor Griffin dismissed claims the attacks could have been an inside job.

It was only a year later, when he was writing a special chapter on American imperialism and 9/11 for his latest academic tome, that the professor was sent a 'timeline' on the day's events based entirely on newspaper and television accounts. It was then that he changed his mind.
And one of the most puzzling anomalies that he studied was that none of the hijacked planes was intercepted by fighter jets, even though there was plenty of time to do so and it would have been standard emergency procedure in response to a suspected terrorist attack.
Indeed, it is mandatory procedure in the U.S. if there is any suspicion of an air hijack. In the nine months before 9/11, the procedure had been implemented 67 times in America.

Readers of The New Pearl Harbour and viewers of Loose Change are reminded that it was 7.59am when American Airlines Flight 11 left Boston. Fifteen minutes later, at 8.14am, radio contact between the pilot and air traffic control stopped suddenly, providing the first indication that the plane might have been hijacked.
Flight 11 should have been immediately intercepted by fighter pilots sent up from the nearby McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey. They could have made the journey to the World Trade Centre in three minutes.
But, surprisingly, F-15 fighter jets were instead ordered out of an airbase 180 miles away at Cape Cod. They appear to have flown so slowly - at 700mph, instead of their top speed of 1,850mph - that they did not arrive in time to stop the second attack, on the South Tower of the World Trade Centre. They were 11 minutes too late.

And this is not the only worrying question. Incredibly, the attack on the Pentagon was not prevented either. The defence headquarters was hit by the hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 at 9.38am. But fighter jets from Andrews Air Force Base, just ten miles from Washington, weren't scrambled to intercept it. Instead, jets were ordered from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, 100 miles away. By the time they arrived, Flight 77 had already hit the Pentagon.

So what of the fall of the Twin Towers?
The official version is that the buildings collapsed because their steel columns were melted by the heat from the fuel fires of the two crashed planes.... according to the allegations of Loose Change (which are endorsed by Professor Griffin), the science does not stand up....
The President reportedly showed little reaction when an aide told him that the first plane had crashed into the Twin Towers... He, apparently, told the school's principal: "A commercial plane has hit the World Trade Centre, but we're going ahead with the reading thing anyway." Then President Bush, who is also the commander-in-chief of the American military, settled down to recite My Pet Goat to a group of seven-year-olds.... The scene had been swiftly set for the West's war on terror

The Pentagon's "Second 911"
"Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity to retaliate against known targets"
by Michel Chossudovsky
One essential feature of "defense" in the case of a second major attack on America, is "offense", according to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff: "Homeland security is one piece of a broader strategy [which] brings the battle to the enemy."(DHS, Transcript of complete March 2005 speech of Secr. Michael Chertoff)
In the month following last year's 7/7 London bombings, Vice President Dick Cheney is reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM to draw up a contingency plan "to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States". Implied in the contingency plan is the certainty that Iran would be behind a Second 9/11.
This "contingency plan" uses the pretext of a hypothetical "terrorist" attack "Second 9/11", which has not yet happened, to prepare for a major military operation against Iran, while pressure was also exerted on Tehran in relation to its (non-existent) nuclear weapons program.

Fake Al Qaeda Tapes
Below is a 'catalogue of terrors'...a full analysis of the history of Fake Al Qaeda, Bin Laden, al-Zwahiri & other tapes. ...

How many more times can they get away with this perpetuating lie? a number of these Al Qaeda tapes are uploaded from government websites in America.

A few 911 tapes from ICH Video Library,com_seyret/Itemid,63/:

Empire Of Oil: The Hidden History Of 9/11
Learn the secret history behind the events leading up to the September 11 attacks, seldom revealed to the public and who actually may have benefited the most from the attacks and why.

911 cover up

 Rev. David Ray Griffin 9/11 Interview

9-11 Justice
A brief but carefully presented and supported criminal indictment of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Richard Myers, and Condoleeza Rice for murder in the events of 9-11, presenting all the best evidence in a concise but powerful manner. It includes Larry Silverstein's admission that the explosives were used

"Politics is war without bloodshed ... war is politics with bloodshed."

Anti-Colonial Ally or New Colonial Missionary?
Marta Rodriguez,
... The words "insurgents" and "terrorists" are too often present in our discourse about the Resistance. The terms reinforce the notion that there' s something "legitimate" about the U.S. presence in Iraq, and "illegitimate" about the Iraqis' efforts to force them out of their country. For example, "antiwar "guru Noam Chomsky, in his racist arrogance, described the sham elections set up to legitimize the United States' violent usurpation of Iraqi sovereignty, as a "triumph," "not of the bomb throwers, but of nonviolent resistance."

Some peace activists fault the Iraqi Resistance for "murdering" the working class youth that comprise the U.S. occupation forces... they conveniently ignore that those "innocent" "working class youngsters"wouldn't be getting shot at if they'd stayed in the United States, instead of deciding that the college education and other material benefits offered by the U.S. military are worth the murder of Iraqis and the destruction of an entire country....

The American left's obsession with what it calls the presence of "Islamic fundamentalism" in the Iraqi and Palestinian resistance would be humorous if the issues that produced those resistance movements weren't life-and-death issues,... painting the Iraqi Resistance as the source of "Islamic oppression of women," and ignoring the fact that the ones who have been banning women from schools, work centers and the streets are folks like the Badr Brigades, who happen to work for the occupation.... It's ironic that those of us who demonize the resistance on "feminist" grounds expect the Iraqis to settle things amiably with cruel and ruthless occupiers who are responsible for the rise of prostitution in Iraq, who have caused the impoverishment of Iraqi women and their families, who are behind most of the violence these women face on a daily basis, and who use rape as a weapon to terrorize those who oppose the occupation....

The U.S. liberal-left's condemnation of the Iraqi Resistance and the attempts of some to promote anything other than that resistance, even if it turns out to work in the service of the occupation...comes from the very citizens of the aggressor country that is devastating Iraq. Since when do the citizens of aggressor nations get to dictate how the victims of that aggression defend themselves? If that weren't enough insult and injury, there's the fact that none of us are exacting the kind of cost on this government that would compel it to get out of Iraq. Our demonstrations are few and far between... on days when the government officials that we're supposed to be demanding accountability from are not even around to see or be inconvenienced by them. We make sure to secure permission from this same government to hold demonstrations, and we hold them away from structures responsible for the smooth sailing of this war, when we could at least effect temporary disruptions of their murderous operations. Demonstrationsin the U.S. look more like Easter parades than the determined disruption of this government' s genocidal business that they should be....

Those of us who live in the U.S., be we members of this country's internal colonies, or the willing citizens in whose name the U.S. executes its aggression, need ... to stop thinking that we have the right to ignore, condemn, or replace the resistance movements of the countries the U.S. assaults if they are not to our liking, because our responsibility to those movements goes beyond the international solidarity which some of us seem to think we can give and take back as if it were charity. For as taxpayers, as recipients of some of the comforts generated by this government's theft abroad, as friends, relatives, and compatriots of those who join the American armed forces, we have a
relationship to the theft and aggression this government dishes out throughout the world. Our responsibility to undo that aggression takes precedence over our fantasies about what other movements should look like.[...]

By Jonathan Mowat
Online Journal Contributing Writer

"Gene Sharp started out the seminar by saying 'Strategic nonviolent struggle
is all about political power.' And I thought, 'Boy is this guy speaking my
language,' that is what armed struggle is about."
Col. Robert Helvey

Part 1 The new Gladio in action
Ukrainian postmodern coup completes testing of new template

...The new techniques of warfare include the use of both lethal (violent) and nonlethal (nonviolent) tactics. Both ways are conducted using the same
philosophy, infrastructure, and modus operandi...
It is known as Cyberwar.

International Center on Nonviolent Conflicts
The International Center on Nonviolent Conflicts has been heavily involved in the new Postmodern Coups, especially through its top figures, Dr. Peter
Ackerman and Jack DuVall.

According to its website, the center "develops and encourages the use of
civilian-based, nonmilitary strategies to establish and defend democracy and
human rights worldwide." It "provides assistance in the training and
deployment of field advisors, to deepen the conceptual knowledge and
practical skills of applying nonviolent strategies in conflicts throughout
the world where progress toward democracy and human rights is possible."

The most significant nonviolent conflicts in the world today, which may lead
to "regime changes," it reports, are occurring in Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Chinese
Tibet, Belarus, Ukraine [now nearing completion], Palestine, Iran, and

Indicative of the common objective are the comments of the theoreticians of
the post modern coup, for example, Dr. Peter Ackerman, the author of
"Strategic Nonviolent Conflict" (Praeger 1994). Writing in the "National
Catholic Reporter" on April 26, 2002, Dr. Ackerman offered the following
corrective to Bush's Axis of Evil speech targeting Iraq, Iran, and North
Korea, which he otherwise approved: "It is not true that the only way to
'take out' such regimes is through U.S. military action."

Speaking at the "Secretary's Open Forum" at the State Department on June 29,
2004, in a speech entitled, "Between Hard and Soft Power:The Rise of
Civilian-Based Struggle and Democratic Change," Ackerman elaborated on the
concept involved. He proposed that youth movements, such as those used to
bring down Serbia, could bring down Iran and North Korea, and could have
been used to bring down Iraq—thereby accomplishing all of Bush's objectives
without relying on military means. And he reported that he has been working
with the top US weapons designer, Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, on
developing new communications technologies that could be used in other youth
movement insurgencies. "There is no question that these technologies are
democratizing," he stressed, in reference to their potential use in bringing
down China, "they enable decentralized activity. They create, if you will, a
digital concept of the right of assembly."

Dr. Ackerman is the founding chairman of International Center on Nonviolent
Conflicts of Washington, DC, of which former US Air Force officer Jack
DuVall is president. Together with former CIA director James Woolsey, DuVall
also directs the Arlington Institute of Washington, DC, which was created by
former Chief of Naval Operations advisor John L. Peterson in 1989 " to help
redefine the concept of national security in much larger, comprehensive
terms" it reports, through introducing "social value shifts into the
traditional national defense equation." [...]

New Study on the Role of US Foundations
from R.U.R.P.E.
On occasion, the most striking evidence of power and influence is the invisibility of its source. Since the early twentieth century, a number of foundations have been set up in the United States by the wealthy — the Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Bill Gates foundations are prominent examples. A new study by American political scientist Joan Roelofs (Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism, State University of New York Press, 2003) provides an outline of the US foundations' activities, and an analysis of their role. [see below]

Roelofs argues that foundations play an important role in maintaining the social-political hegemony of the ruling classes. For the ruling classes do not rule by guns and laws alone. Rather, they need to be able to do so without the constant resort to force. So, she argues, they manufacture the consent of the ruled through the activities of a broad range of institutions, activities and persons (not necessarily themselves members of the ruling class) who disseminate the ideology of the ruling class as if it were merely common sense. While dissent from ruling class ideas is labeled 'extremism' and is isolated, individual dissenters may be welcomed and transformed. Indeed, ruling class hegemony is more durable if it is not rigid and narrow, but is able dynamically to incorporate emergent trends.

The NED, NGOs and the Imperial Uses of Philanthropy: Why They Hate Our Kind Hearts, Too
May 13 / 14, 2006

...Why would these philanthropic efforts offend anyone? Why do they hate our kind hearts?
In the first place, these public-private philanthropies have worked together to fund and direct overthrow movements. We had a "Subversive Activities Control Board" here, but export was encouraged. The grantees' activities included destabilization, the creation of mobs preventing elected governments from ruling, chaos, and violence. Among those funded were the Civic Forum in Czechoslovakia, Solidarity in Poland, Union of Democratic Forces in Bulgaria, Otpor in Serbia, and, more recently, similar groups in the succession states of the USSR. Sometimes mobs (especially of young people) have been moved around from one country to another to give the impression of vast popular opposition. The NED, Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, and the Soros philanthropies have been particularly active in these operations. Human Rights Watch (formerly Helsinki Watch) has nurtured opposition groups....
Many were shocked by the NED activities complementing other instruments of intervention that helped to destroy the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua. Yet the 1990 election was judged by the NGO observers to be a free one; neither threats of physical annihilation nor millions of foreign dollars violated the purity of that process. "Cold-war liberal" policymakers have advocated covert actions as a peaceful alternative to invasion, but it isn't as if military action has faded away; they work together.

Such attempts are ongoing. The Venezuelan indictment is just one indication of a larger NED-NGO operation. Plans for annihilating the Cuban revolution, via "independent libraries," "Red Feminista Cubana," and other created organizations, are clearly spelled out on the NED web site.

NGOs are also used to disrupt revolutionary or even reformist movements that might interfere with neo-liberal goals, hampering the ability of corporations to go anywhere and do anything....

NGOs are now extensively occupied in the relief of disasters, whether natural or man-made, and the US military (with its "coalition") is deeply involved in both the comforting and the afflicting. To receive US funds, humanitarian organizations must support US foreign policy. Consequently, some, such as Oxfam UK, have withdrawn their workers from Iraq. Those remaining are often regarded as collaborators, which is not surprising, as many international NGOs have been handmaids to subversion, overthrow, and occupation. Some have even supported "humanitarian" bombing, especially in the case of Yugoslavia...

The peak of international NGOs, the World Social Forum, meets at the same time as the World Economic Forum, only far away. The WSF's general funding is rarely scrutinized by the participants, whose travel expenses come from similar sources. An exception is a report by the Research Unit on Political Economy-India, [R.U.P.E.: see above] which explains why foundation funding was refused for the 2004 WSF in Mumbai, and discusses critically the activities of the Ford Foundation in India.

Between 1989 and 1994, private foundations spent $450 million in Eastern Europe. Among the recipients were important officials and advisers in various countries. By 1995, there were 29,000 NGOs in the Czech Republic, 20,000 in Poland, and similar numbers in other countries. "They were almost entirely supported by foreign corporations, foundations, governments, political parties and international institutions such as the European Union and the World Bank."

George Soros is perhaps the single most significant private funder to the region. Soros foundations can be found in 34 countries around the globe, 26 of them in Eastern Europe and the former USSR. The recent 'revolution' in Georgia was backed among others by Soros (see Jacob Levich, "When NGOs Attack: Implications of the Coup in Georgia",, 6/12/03). Soros, the NED and other western funding agencies have a hand in the current crisis in Ukraine (see "US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev", Ian Traynor, 26/11/04, The Guardian; "Western aggression: How the US and Britain are intervening in Ukraine’s elections", John Laughland, The Spectator, 5/11/04,; "IMF Sponsored 'Democracy' in The Ukraine", Michel Chossudovsky, 28/11/04,

When NGOs Attack: Implications of the Coup in Georgia
By Jacob Levich
Nongovernmental organizations--the notionally independent, reputedly
humanitarian groups known as NGOs--are now being openly integrated into
Washington's overall strategy for consolidating global supremacy.
Events surrounding last month's coup in post-Soviet Georgia, read in light
of recent State Department documents, suggest that seemingly innocuous NGOs
now play a central role in the policy of US-engineered "regime change" set
forth in the notorious National Security Strategy of the United States.
The November 24 Wall Street Journal explicitly credited the toppling of
Eduard Shevardnadze's regime to the operations of "a raft of
non-governmental organizations . . . supported by American and other
Western foundations." These NGOs, said the Journal, had "spawned a class of
young, English-speaking intellectuals hungry for pro-Western reforms" who
were instrumental laying the groundwork for a bloodless coup.
Astute commentators have correctly noted connections between these
provocateur NGOs and mega-philanthropist George Soros, but the billionaire
speculator did not act independently. Georgia's so-called "Velvet
Revolution" appears to have been a textbook case of regime change by
stealth, carefully planned and centrally coordinated by the US government.

George Soros: Prophet of an "Open Society"
Karen Talbot,  
The URL of this article is:

George Soros — a profile by Neil Clark New Statesman (UK)
June 2, 2003

Connie Bruck, "The World According to Soros," New Yorker, January 23, 1995.


Federal Bureau of Investigation:

The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to
intimidate or coerce a government or civilian population, or any segment
thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or
violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the
United States or its territories without foreign direction committed against
persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian
population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social

International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life
that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or
that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the
United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or
coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by
assassination or kidnapping.

International Terrorists
What makes a terrorist “international” from a U.S. standpoint?
• Originate outside the U.S.
• Get support from outside the U.S.
as well as within
• Attack U.S. interests overseas as
well as targets within the U.S.
22 U.S.C. § 2656f(d)

Islamic extremists:
• Want the U.S. to stay out of Middle Eastern affairs and this includes support for Israel

State Sponsored Terrorists
The other major international source of terrorism in the U.S. is from State Sponsored Groups.
Often state sponsored terrorism is used to describe what oppressive governments do to their own people. In this case, we are talking about countries that use terrorism as a way to do business with other countries, to further their own national goals.

State Sponsored Terrorism is used by a country:
• to gain economic, social, military, or political advantage
• to intimidate and silence its opposition

Domestic Terrorists
• believe every organization or government will eventually be corrupted by power
• evolved from left wing or communist groups of the 60s and 70s
• focus on specific issues that represent corruption of power
• are often responsible for violent protests against:
- military intervention
- world trade and banking
- globalization
- “hate” groups

5/13/7 Democracy 101: PsyOps, 911, Global Terror War, Torture, P20G, Death Squads, "Civil War, NGOs

COMMENTARY: Capitalism's inherent need to expand or die underlies the current U.S. global war to secure its political-economic world dominance. It demands the political, economic and military surveillance, control, suppression or defeat of resistance. This is called "the war on terror".

By definition, "terrorists" are NOT white so to save its white ass, america must patriotically support transparent racist terror in the guise of "national security" ... and in almost unbelivable lies it is for the "security" and "liberation" of those whose lands and lives it destroys to achieve its white supremacist imperialist 'manifest destiny'.

The criminal terror war depends on the historically embedded, and feverishly whipped up racism post 911 in the "homeland". This is the ideological engine supporting and driving the fascist juggernaut ... as it has the entire history of north american capitalism, a grotesque history of national oppression, genocide and slavery called the peak of "civilization", the racist fruits of which seep through every pore of this country 24/7, distilled from ''think-tanks', scientific & military research centers, from media, churches, schools & 'entertainment' -- relentless psywarfare and social engineering of oppression and racist ignorance, fear, hatred and violence that keeps our enemy securely in power.


The tale of the slaughter at Wounded Knee in South Dakota is [an] example too well known to require detailed repeating here, but what is less well known about that massacre is that, a week and a half before it happened, the editor of the South Dakota's Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer -- a gentle soul named L. Frank Baum, who later became famous as the author of The Wizard of Oz -- urged the wholesale extermination of all America's native peoples: "The nobility of the Redskin is extinguished, and what few are left are a pack of whining curs who lick the hand that smites them. The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians. Why not annihilation? Their glory has fled, their spirit broken, their manhood effaced; better that they should die than live the miserable wretches that they are."
David E. Stannard

"Christopher Columbus not only opened the door to a New World, but also set an example for us all by showing what monumental feats can be accomplished through perseverance and faith."
--George H.W. Bush, 1989 speech

Conquered states that have been accustomed to liberty and the government of their own laws can be held by the conqueror in three different ways. The first is to ruin them; the second, for the conqueror to go and reside there in person; and the third is to allow them to continue to live under their own laws, subject to a regular tribute, and to create in them a government of a few, who will keep the country friendly to the conqueror
Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince

"...depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World."
Henry Kissinger, National Security Memo 200, dated April 24, 1974

American Ideology
North Americans have come to regard themselves as the "chosen people" -- in practice, a synonym for the Nazi term, Herrenvolk. This is the threat which we are facing today. And this is why American imperialism will be even more brutal than its predecessors, most of whom never claimed to have been invested with a divine mission.
Samir Amin


The End of Race?
By Salim Muwakkil,
July 1, 2003
...a three-part PBS series, "Race: The Power of an Illusion." produced by California Newsreel ...covers a wide range of race-related issues. But the program's title is its major point: Racial differences are illusory.... science is revealing that those observable, "natural" differences are social constructions rather than biological facts.

"The Difference Between Us," the first episode of "Race," explains that humanity emerged in Africa about 150,000 to 200,000 years ago and began migrating out about 70,000 years ago. As humans spread across the planet, populations intermingled, creating a variety of genetic interrelationships. These are not always what one might expect: Some Europeans have more genes in common with Nigerians than do Nigerians with Ethiopians, and so on. Most variation is within, not between, "races."

The first segment also notes that many of our "phenotypic" characteristics, like skin color, evolved recently, after we left Africa. But traits like intelligence, musical ability, and physical aptitude are of a more ancient genetic vintage and thus are common to all populations.

... a recent archeological find provided corroborating fossil evidence for this... The June 12 issue of Nature revealed that scientists working in northeast Ethiopia found the 160,000-year-old remains of two adults and a child that are said to be the earliest human remains ever discovered. According to Tim White, the University of California paleoanthropologist who led the team, "this discovery means our roots are African."... the theory of an African genesis of humanity had gained wide support in the last two decades thanks to the research findings of the growing science of molecular genetics.... based on evolutionary changes in mitochondrial DNA, which is passed from mother to daughter, have concluded that humanity had a common ancestor in Africa -- the so-called "African Eve."

... the reigning doctrines of white supremacy discouraged any consideration of an African genesis of humanity. And despite increasing archaeological evidence, many anthropologists resisted tracing humanity's origins to the so-called Dark Continent. The more radical white supremacists postulated that there was a "multiregional evolution," in which Europeans evolved from another branch of hominids altogether -- the hearty Neanderthals. However, genetic studies have revealed no Neanderthal DNA in modern humans. A preponderance of genetic evidence reveals the ironic fact that the same Europeans who created the idea of race and white supremacy are genetic progeny of the Africans they devalued. With this view of history, it's clear that the concept of race is an insidious fiction created primarily to justify exploitation, slavery, and imperial conquest.
"Race"'s second episode, "The Story We Tell," explores this sordid history, tracing the origins of the racial idea to the European conquest of the New World and to the American slave system. We see how the logic of racial hierarchy, which placed Africans on the lowest rung of humanity, allowed self-professed Christians to justify the institution of racial slavery. New York University historian Robin D. G. Kelley points out that the Enlightenment idea of freedom led to the ideology of white supremacy: "The problem that they had to figure out is how can we promote liberty, freedom, democracy on the one hand, and a system of slavery and exploitation of people who are non-white on the other?" They did it by dehumanizing enslaved Africans. The episode notes that by the mid-19th century, the idea of racial hierarchy and its corollary, white supremacy, had become conventional wisdom. "The idea found fruition in racial science, Manifest Destiny, and our imperial adventures abroad,"....
The final episode, "The House We Live In," focuses on the ways U.S. institutions and policies advantage some groups at the expense of others. It outlines the historical trajectory of racial disadvantage and shows how it remains easily discernable in the wealth gap and disparities in other social indices. The segment also examines the "unmarked" race of white people. Here the documentary slides in some of the insights developed by the nascent "Whiteness" movement, which defines the very idea of white identity as an ideology of racial domination.[...]

Iran's President Did Not Say "Israel must be wiped off the map"
By Arash Norouzi
Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus of political oppression... the "Zionist regime" was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world's struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.

There isn’t a war on terror. It’s impossible for the world’s greatest terrorist organisation - the United States - to conduct a war on terror... Since 1946, they’ve overthrown some 50 governments, many of them by terrorist means - that’s terrorism.
from an interview with John Pilger:


Nine-Eleven, Manna from Heaven
by Anwaar Hussain
This 9/11, as the swirling ashes of the twin towers continue to fall far and wide, it will be full five years since the start of American Inquisition. 9/11.. has turned out to be Manna from Heaven for the flag bearers of American Inquisition.
This cabal is not a group of ragtag carpetbaggers. They are the inheritors of a tradition from their ilk of bygone years. In the hunt for new lands for their Imperial masters, their ideological forefathers practiced their art and craft for centuries. Waiting just beyond the circle of light, they appear at the scent of new opportunities like hyenas do at the stench of rotting carcasses at the dead of the night.

As far back as 1492, Christopher Columbus the points man for the Spanish Inquisition export into foreign lands, that most barbarous periods in all of human history, was funded by private investors because the royal monarchs were broke from their Granada campaign against the Muslims of Spain. The investors promised, but never fulfilled, 10 percent of all the revenues from the new lands in perpetuity to Columbus.

Likewise, the Jewel of the British Empire, India, was conquered for the queen by the British East India Company. Based in London, this company was nothing more than a commercial trading venture having a trade monopoly over all East Indies for 21 years. Instead of trading for Her Imperial Majesty, it presided over the creation of a far more profitable entity--the British Raj. Starting from the decisive victory by Sir Robert Clive at the Battle of Plassey in 1757 that established the British East India Company as a military as well as a commercial power, until its dissolution in 1858, the company virtually ruled India.
Five years back to date, airline jets appeared in the cobalt blue New York Skies as if sent by the gods above. Within minutes they had bumped through tall wonders of human achievements reducing them and their occupants to a tangled mass of steel, concrete and human flesh. While the world stood aghast and numb from the pain of the victims and the sheer scale of the crime, somewhere in some dark unlit corners of America, a small cabal of malicious, hateful and warmongering few soaked themselves in this Manna from Heaven.
Not very much later these humanoids had firmly catapulted America on a ceaseless warpath not of self defense, but of fear, insecurity, suspicion, hatred, anger, reprisal and a blind, jingoistic patriotism that continues to take its toll on humanity. No one has put it better than Manuel Valenzuela who, in his profound essay ‘Gods of War, Gods of Greed and Profiteers of Misery’, says;
“It was on that day that the misery of millions became the fortune of a few thousand. It was on that day that the MIC and the Corporate Leviathan wrestled ultimate control from the people of the world, usurping global power and forever altering the future of humanity. Our 9/11 became their Pearl Harbor, a moment in time needed to unleash already predetermined plans to expand power and control on a now easily manipulated and mobilized citizenry. The greatest profiteers in the history of the United States were now free to release their hounds of war, conquest, greed and violence upon the rest of civilization.” ...

9/11 and the "War on Terrorism"
Selected articles and essays
by Michel Chossudovsky
The Big Lie
This evolving bipartisan consensus is based on a lie. Confirmed by congressional transcripts, intelligence and news reports, this illusive outside enemy is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus.
The enemy of America is "Made in America".
"Millions of people have been misled regarding the causes and consequences of September 11.
When people across the US and around the World find out that Al Qaeda is not an outside enemy but a creation of US foreign policy and the CIA, the legitimacy of the bipartisan war agenda will tumble like a deck of cards." (Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalization, The Truth behind September 11, 2002)


...Only in a clumsily faked video put out by the Pentagon did "Bin Laden" even claim to have a few days' advance knowledge of the attacks -- the Pentagon, CIA, Justice Department, FBI and White House knew months in advance, while preparations for the attacks had been in the works for years... see "NORAD exercise had jet crashing into building", Barbara Starr CNN Washington Bureau, April 19, 2004
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sometime between 1991 and 2001, a regional sector of the North American Aerospace Defense Command simulated a foreign hijacked airliner crashing into a building in the United States as part of training exercise scenario, a NORAD spokesman said.

Contingency planning Pentagon MASCAL exercise simulates scenarios in preparing for emergencies
The following is mirrored from its source at:
A plane crash is simulated inside the cardboard courtyard of a surprisingly realistic-looking model Pentagon.  This "tabletop" exercise was designed to help emergency relief personnel better prepare for disasters when they occur.
Police and fire department personnel contemplate responses during the MASCAL drill. back to MASCAL exercise sim | CAH | ratville times| tree

911 Jersey Girls’ online petition: "Public's Right To Know - Declassification and Release of 911 Documents":


Into the Dark: The Pentagon P20G Plan to Provoke Terrorist Attacks
by Chris Floyd
November 1, 2002
... in last Sunday's Los Angeles Times. There--in an article by military analyst William Arkin, detailing the vast expansion of the secret armies being amassed...came the revelation of Rumsfeld's plan to create "a super-Intelligence Support Activity" that will "bring together CIA and military covert action, information warfare, intelligence, and cover and deception."
According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld by his Defense Science Board, the new organization--the "Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG)"--will carry out secret missions designed to "stimulate reactions" among terrorist groups, provoking them into committing violent acts which would then expose them to "counterattack" by U.S. forces.
...the classified Pentagon program puts it this way: "Their sovereignty will be at risk."...

Darkness Visible: The Pentagon Plan to Foment Terrorism Now in Operation (2005)
From the Moscow Times, Jan. 25, 2005. This is the follow-up to "Into the Dark."
...Now the United States stands openly – even proudly – for terrorism, torture and... aggressive war...
More than two years ago, we wrote here of a secret Pentagon plan to foment terrorism: sending covert agents to infiltrate terrorist groups and goad them into action – i.e., committing acts of murder and destruction. The purpose was two-fold: first, to bring the terrorist groups into the open, where they could be counterattacked; and second, to justify U.S. military attacks on the countries where the terrorists were operating – attacks which, in the Pentagon's words, would put those nations' "sovereignty at risk." It was a plan that countenanced – indeed, encouraged – the deliberate murder of innocent people and the imposition of U.S. military rule anywhere in the world that American leaders desired. This plan is now activated. In fact, it's being expanded, as the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh revealed last week. Not only will U.S.-directed agents infiltrate existing terrorist groups and provoke them into action; the Pentagon itself will create its own terrorist groups and "death squads." After establishing their "terrorist credentials" through various atrocities and crimes, these American-run groups will then be able to ally with – and ultimately undermine – existing "terrorist" groups...
The activation of the Pentagon terrorist operation is part of Bush's second-term expansion of the "war on terror." Despite some obfuscating rhetoric about "diplomacy," the Bush regime is pressing ahead with a hard-line strategy aimed at opening new military fronts in the "global free-fire zone." Any dissenting voices within the government are being ruthlessly purged. The Pentagon's secret forces are set for operations in at least 10 countries, and Bush insiders "repeatedly" told Hersh that "Iran is the next strategic target."
Iran has long been a focus of the small clique of "global dominationists" ...who engineered the invasion of Iraq....Their first objective – openly stated years ago, before Bush took office – was the overthrow of Saddam's regime and the planting of a U.S. "military footprint" in Iraq... The fact that it has plunged the Iraqi people into a hell of violence, chaos, terror and extremism is of no real concern ... lofty rhetoric about "freedom" and "liberation" is meaningless sham, shuck and jive for the rubes.... they seek strategic control over the world's energy resources in order to preserve and expand American geopolitical and economic hegemony in the new century.


1986: CIA Officially Backs ISI Program Promoting Militant Islam Worldwide
During a secret visit to Pakistan CIA Director William Casey commits the CIA to support the ISI program of recruiting radical Muslims for the Afghan war from other Muslim countries around the world. In addition to the Gulf States, these include Turkey, the Philippines, and China. The ISI started their recruitment of radicals from other countries in 1982 (see 1982). This CIA cooperation is part of a joint CIA-ISI plan begun the year before to expand the “Jihad” beyond Afghanistan (see March 1985). [Rashid, 2001, pp. 128-129]
Timeline Tags: Western Support for Islamic Militancy
Category Tags: Soviet-Afghan War, Pakistani ISI, Philippine Militant Collusion
Late 1980s: Bin Laden, CIA, and ISI Train Core of Future Philippines Militant Group
The core of the future Philippine militant group Abu Sayyaf fights with bin Laden in Afghanistan and its training there is paid for by the CIA and Pakistani ISI. In 1986, the CIA agreed to support an ISI program of recruiting radical Muslims from other countries, including the Philippines, to fight in the Afghan war (see 1986). By one estimate, initially between 300 and 500 radical Muslims from the southern Philippines go to Afghanistan to fight. [Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College, 9/1/2005 ] In 1987 or 1988, bin Laden dispatches his brother-in-law Mohammed Jamal Khalifa to the Philippines to find more recruits willing to go to Afghanistan. It is estimated he finds about 1,000 recruits. One of them is Abdurajak Janjalani, who emerges as the leader of these recruits in Afghanistan. When the Afghan war ends in 1989 most of them will return to the Philippines and form the Abu Sayyaf group, still led by Janjalani (see Early 1991). [Contemporary Southeast Asia, 12/2002; Manila Times, 2/1/2007] Journalist John Cooley will write in a 1999 book that Abu Sayyaf will become “the most violent and radical Islamist group in the Far East, using its CIA and ISI training to harass, attack, and murder Christian priests, wealthy non-Muslim plantation-owners, and merchants and local government in the southern Philippine island of Mindanao.” [Cooley, 1999, pp. 63] After having read Cooley’s book and gathering information from other sources, Senator Aquilino Pimentel, President of the Philippine Senate, will say in a 2000 speech that the “CIA has sired a monster” because it helped train this core of the Abu Sayyaf. [Senator Aquilino Q. Pimentel website, 7/31/2000]
Entity Tags: Pakistan Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, Osama bin Laden, Abu Sayyaf, Central Intelligence Agency, Aquilino Pimentel, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, Abdurajak Janjalani Category Tags: Philippine Militant Collusion, Pakistani ISI
Early 1991: Islamist Group Abu Sayyaf Formed [see this critical history in detail to March 2006]


Targeting the “US Home Audience”
by Sunil K. Sharma
...The Bush Administration has desperately tried to portray the Iraqi resistance as being to a significant extent a tool of “foreign” jihadists like Zarqawi, rather than the inevitable and legitimate, overwhelmingly homegrown resistance to US occupation and brutality that it in fact is. As one US intelligence agent commented: “We were basically paying up to $US10,000 a time to opportunists, criminals and chancers who passed off fiction and supposition about Zarqawi as cast-iron fact, making him out as the linchpin of just about every attack in Iraq.” “Back home this stuff was gratefully received and formed the basis of policy decisions. We needed a villain, someone identifiable for the public to latch on to, and we got one.”

Indeed, as the Washington Post reported on April 11, 2006, based on military documents it obtained, the US military had conducted a “propaganda campaign to magnify the role” of Zarqawi in Iraq. “The documents explicitly list the ‘U.S. Home Audience’ as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.” The Post went on to report that, “The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.” One military briefing from 2004 cited by the Post states: “Villainize Zarqawi/leverage xenophobia response.” The document listed three methods to be employed in this campaign: “Media operations,” “Special Ops (626)” (referring to Task Force 626, an elite US military unit assigned primarily to hunt down senior officials in Saddam Hussein's government) and “PSYOP”, the military term for propaganda work. Another briefing states that the “The Zarqawi PSYOP program is the most successful information campaign to date,” in the view of Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, now a senior planner on the Central Command staff directing operations in Iraq and the Middle East.[...]

Pentagon PSYOP: "Terror Mastermind" Abu Musab Al Zarqawi is "Incompetent"
By Michel Chossudovsky
Modern psychological operations, or PSYOP,... is not unlike the public advertising that we are all exposed to wherever we go, every day, through all kinds of mass media. US Airborne, Psychological Operations/Warfare ..

Osama, Death Squads and the Biggest Lie Ever Told
Joe Quinn
... "Osama", "al-Qaeda", "al-Qaeda in Iraq", "al-Zarqawi" "al-Zawahiri" are, or were, all part of a US government psychological operation that pitched them as the likely suspects to take the blame for the US and Israeli government Middle Eastern predations, not to mention the imposition of a police state in the US and Britain...
...It has already been exposed that the killings and bombings are the work of "death squads" working out of the Iraqi interior ministry, which itself is entirely controlled by the CIA. Let me reiterate that in every war waged by the US government against a foreign nation, a counter-insurgency operation has immediately been implemented. Counter-insurgency operations are required in such circumstances because when a country is invaded, ! an insurgency of some form invariable arises to defend the country. Such insurgents are very difficult for an invading army to defeat given the extensive support and collaboration they enjoy from the general population. Essentially, an invading army finds itself at war with the population of the country they are invading rather than a separate and independent insurgency. Strategies developed over the years to deal with such situations has come to be known as "counter-insurgency", and include attempts to identify divisions within the society, usually religious, political or ethnic, however insignificant, and to then attempt to provoke these divisions...

In-depth examination of prototype psyops phenomena
Reasonable Doubts about the Guilt and Death of the Deceptive "Mr. Zarqawi"
Dr. Richard Marsden
"What one man can invent, another can discover."
Sherlock Holmes

CIA disbands "Bin laden" unit
The Guardian,,1812598,00.html
Nearly five years after George Bush vowed to bring Osama bin Laden to justice "dead or alive", it's the end of the line for the CIA's Alec Station, the unit dedicated to the hunt for the al-Qaida leader.
CIA officials insisted today that the hunt for al-Qaida's founder continued. "Tracking and gathering intelligence about Bin Laden, Zawahiri ... remains a high priority for the CIA and the intelligence community," one official said...
"The reorganisation just reflects the understanding that the Islamic jihadist movement continues to diversify," an intelligence official said.

Zarqawi -- Bush's man for all seasons
by Pepe Escobar, Asia Times
Oct. 15, 2004

Orwell in Iraq: Snow Jobs, Zarqawi and Bogus Peace Plans
By Dahr Jamail
With the plan to secure Baghdad, "Operation Forward Together," now three weeks old, and the so-called terror leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, killed, the security situation has only continued to deteriorate.

Hubub in Hibhib: The Timely Death of al-Zarqawi
Written by Chris Floyd
Abu Musab Saddam Osama al-Zarqawi, the extremely elusive if not entirely mythical terrorist mastermind responsible for every single insurgent action in Iraq except for the ones caused by the red-tailed devils in Iran or the stripey-tailed devils in Syria, has reportedly been killed in an airstrike in Hibhib, an area north of Baghdad, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki announced today.

Fort Dix informants' actions examined
He railed against the United States, helped scout out military installations for attack, offered to introduce his comrades to an arms dealer, and gave them a list of weapons he could procure, including machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. These were not the actions of a terrorist, but of a paid FBI informant who helped bring down an alleged plot by six Muslim men to massacre U.S. soldiers at New Jersey's Fort Dix.
Those actions have raised questions of whether the government crossed the line and pushed the six men down a path they would not otherwise have followed.
Entrapment is an argument that has been made in other terrorism cases, and one that has failed miserably in the post-Sept. 11 era....
Prosecutors portrayed the six men — Serdar Tatar, 23; Agron Abdullahu, 24; Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer, 22; Dritan "Anthony" or "Tony" Duka, 28; Shain Duka, 26; and Eljvir "Elvis" Duka, 23 — as driven by hatred of the United States, a description disputed by relatives and acquaintances.
Entrapment occurs when law-enforcement officials entice others into committing a crime they otherwise would not have committed. Under the law, people cannot be convicted if they were entrapped. But there is no entrapment if a person is willing to break the law and law officers offer to help.
"In the post-9/11 era, the entrapment defense is basically useless" Klingeman said. [...]

U.S., Germans Fear Terror Attack
May 11, 2007
U.S. air marshals have been diverted to provide expanded protection of flights between Germany and the United States.
"The information behind the threat is very real," a senior U.S. official told ABC News.
"The danger level is high. We are part of the global threat by Islamist terrorism."
Of particular concern, according to U.S. and German law enforcement officials, is Patch Barracks, the headquarters for U.S. European Command, near Stuttgartt... following reports that suspected terrorists had conducted surveillance of the Patch Barracks facility.
"The attack would be designed to create high numbers of casualties among both Germans and the U.S. military," said ABC News consultant Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterror official.
A spokesperson at Patch Barracks said they were not aware of any specific surveillance on the location, and they are not under any more specific surveillance than other U.S. facilities in Germany.
When asked today about ABC News' report of a terror threat in Germany, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said... they didn't have a specific, credible threat, but they were quite concerned."

Another day, another ferry bomb threat
P-I STAFF (notice no byline)
Ferry service between Seattle and Bremerton was delayed for more than two hours Tuesday after a bomb threat [SIC] forced a shutdown of the service. It was the second bomb threat [SIC] against the ferry system this week. As in Monday's incident, no bomb was found...


Counterintelligence Interrogation
July 1963

CIA Torture Manual
This manual cannot teach anyone how to be, or become, a good interrogator. At best it can help readers to avoid the characteristic mistakes of poor interrogators. Its purpose is to provide guidelines for KUBARK interrogation, and particularly the counterintelligence interrogation of resistant sources. Designed as an aid for interrogators and others immediately concerned, it is based largely upon the published results of extensive research, including scientific inquiries conducted by specialists in closely related subjects...
Torture at Abu Ghraib followed CIA's Manual
THE PHOTOS from Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison are snapshots not of simple brutality or a breakdown in discipline but of CIA torture techniques that have metastasized over the past 50 years like an undetected cancer inside the US intelligence community. From 1950 to 1962, the CIA led secret research into coercion and consciousness that reached a billion dollars at peak.l


American Torture Chambers: A Report on Today’s Prisons and Jails -- Part 1 of 2
“Abu Ghraib ... was simply the export of the worst practices that take place in the domestic prison system all the time.”...

Torture Inc. Americas Brutal Prisons; Video report:
Savaged by dogs, Electrocuted With Cattle Prods, Burned By Toxic Chemicals, Does such barbaric abuse inside U.S. jails explain the horrors that were committed in Iraq?...

Imperial Torture Doctors Without Borders
A leading bioethicist charges in a prestigious British medical journal that U.S. military medical personnel are complicit in abuse of detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and suggests an inquiry into their behavior in places such as Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, is in order...

The "Contract Interrogator"
Felicity Arbuthnot
Writing in the Washington Post (9th February 2007) Eric Fairm writes of:
... "an interrogator's nightmare". "A man with no face stares at me from the corner of a room. He pleads for help, but I am afraid to move. He begins to cry. It is a pitiful sound and it sickens me. He screams, but as I awaken, I realize the screams are mine."
Fairm is plagued by nightmares. He was a "contract interrogator", for the 82nd Airborne Division, in Falluja during part of 2004, one "... of two civilian interrogators, assigned to the division interrogation facility".
The man who returns to torment his dreams was "... a suspected associate" of a Ba'ath Party leader in Anbar province... who had been captured two months earlier". In other words, he was a possible pan-Arab nationalist, living in his own country. "Nationalist" becomes a pejorative word when used by Western politicians...
The haunted Mr Fairm has "long since forgotten" the name of his nocturnal visitor - something one would have thought might also haunt - but not his instructions:
"I was to deprive the detainee of sleep .. forcing him to stand in a corner and stripping him of his clothes." There will be many that will applaud honesty in admitting Abu Ghraib-like torment, "mistakes" and failing to "uphold the standards of human decency". Instead: "I intimidated, degraded a man who could not defend himself", writes Fairm.
He also watched naked prisoners, forced to stand through the night, shivering; saw degradation, deprivation, punching, kicking "used daily". "Appalled", he admits lacking the courage to stand up and challenge "friends and colleagues". With "friends" like these ...
One thing is clear, the man does need help. There is no hope of success in Iraq....with $2,500 a head (seemingly the current going rate) for blowing families to bits in their beds and blasting their homes over them, or blowing in the door of the family home, to invade in boots, then say "sorry", or visit the family of the illegally snatched detainee (you are illegal invaders, please remember) is not going to win hearts and minds in millennia. The "damage" done to the people of Iraq, described, hardly addresses the enormity. "Damage" is car dent, a cracked window, an accidental act, not pre-meditated torment, physical damage, physical assault and humiliation...
Notably, missing from Eric Fairm's heart-pourings is any real remorse. An outpour which must, of course, be taken at face value and can only be hoped is not another psyops effort, to pave the way for those who will surely be soon being helicoptered off the Green Zone and Embassy roof... and show a now cynical America that deviant behavior is really "post traumatic stress disorder".
"I am desperate to get on with my life and erase my memories of my experiences in Iraq. But those memories and experiences do not belong to me. They belong to history", concludes Fairm. Try being an Iraqi.
One way to assuage the conscience, might be to board a 'plane for the International Criminal Court at the Hague, give yourself up, with a list of the names of your "friends and colleagues" with you.
Remember too, those who hanged as a result of the Nuremberg Tribunals were: "only following orders". Just contract killers and "contract interrogators

CIA Supported Death Squads
by Ralph McGehee
Posted on RemarQ, 9 October 1999

Click on the links below to find partial record of CIA's death squads and destruction of human life across the world.
The information below is from CIABASE files on Death Squads supported by the CIA. Also given below are details on Watch Lists prepared by the CIA to facilitate the actions of Death Squads.

Death Squads: Miscellaneous

CIA set up Ansesal and other networks of terror in El Salvador, Guatemala (Ansegat) and pre-Sandinista Nicaragua (Ansenic). The CIA created, structured and trained secret police in South Korea, Iran, Chile and Uruguay, and elsewhere — organizations responsible for untold thousands of tortures, disappearances, and deaths. Spark, 4/1985, pp. 2-4

1953-94 Sponsorship by CIA of death squad activity covered in summary form. Notes that in Haiti CIA admitted Lt. General Raoul Cedras and other high-ranking officials "were on its payroll and are helping organize violent repression in Haiti. Luis Moreno, an employee of State Department, has bragged he helped Colombian army create a database of subversives, terrorists and drug dealers." His superior in overseeing INS for Southeastern U.S., is Gunther Wagner, former Nazi soldier and a key member of now-defunct Office of Public Safety (OPS), an AID project which helped train counterinsurgents and terrorism in dozens of countries. Wagner worked in Vietnam as part of Operation Phoenix and in Nicaragua where he helped train National Guard. Article also details massacres in Indonesia. Haiti Information, 4/23/1994, pp. 3,4

CIA personnel requested transfers 1960-7 in protest of CIA officer Nestor Sanchez's working so closely with death squads. Marshall, J., Scott P.D., and Hunter, J. (1987). The Iran-Contra Connection, p. 294

CIA. 1994. Mary McGrory op-ed, "Clinton's CIA Chance." Excoriates CIA over Aldrich Ames, support for right-wing killers in El Salvador, Nicaraguan Contras and Haiti's FRAPH and Cedras. Washington Post, 10/16/1994, C1,2

How US /CIA infiltrates "civil society" to overthrow governments
BY PHILIP AGEE, former CIA agent
....The administration of US President Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s decided that more than terrorist operations were needed to impose regime change in Cuba. Terrorism hadn't worked, nor had the Bay of Pigs invasion, nor had Cuba's diplomatic isolation, nor had the economic embargo. Now Cuba would be included in a new world-wide program to finance and develop non-governmental and voluntary organisations, what was to become known as “civil society”, within the context of US global neoliberal policies.

The CIA and the Agency for International Development (AID) would have key roles in this program as well as a new organisation christened in 1983 — the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Actually, the new program was not really new. Since its founding in 1947, the CIA had been deeply involved in secretly funding and manipulating foreign non-governmental voluntary organisations.
These vast operations circled the globe and targeted political parties, trade unions and business associations, youth and student organisations, women's groups, civic organisations, religious communities, professional, intellectual and cultural societies, and the public information media. The network functioned at local, national, regional and global levels.
Over the years, the CIA exerted phenomenal influence behind the scenes in country after country, using these powerful elements of civil society to penetrate, divide, weaken and destroy organisations on the left, and indeed to impose regime change by toppling governments.

Such was the case, among many others, in Guyana, where in 1964, culminating 10 years of efforts, the Cheddi Jagan government was overthrown through strikes, terrorism, violence and arson perpetrated by CIA agents in the trade unions.

About the same time, while I was a CIA agent assigned to Ecuador, our agents in civil society, through mass demonstrations and civil unrest, provoked two military coups in three years against elected, civilian governments.

Anyone who has watched the opposition to President Hugo Chavez's government in Venezuela develop can be certain that the CIA, AID and the NED are coordinating the destabilisation and were behind the failed coup in April 2002 as well as the failed ”civic strike” of last December-January.

The Cuban American National Foundation was, predictably, one of the first beneficiaries of NED funding. From 1983 to 1988, CANF received US$390,000 for anti-Castro activities.

The NED is supposedly a private, non-government, non-profit foundation, but it receives a yearly appropriation from the US Congress. The money is channelled through four “core foundations”. These are the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (linked to the Democratic Party); the International Republican Institute (Republican Party); the American Center for International Labor Solidarity; and the Center for International Private Enterprise (US Chamber of Commerce).

According to its web site, the NED also gives money directly to “groups abroad who are working for human rights, independent media, the rule of law, and a wide range of civil society initiatives.”
The NED's NGO status provides the fiction that recipients of NED money are getting “private” rather than US government money. This is important because so many countries, including both the US and Cuba, have laws relating to their citizens being paid to carry out activities for foreign governments.
The US requires an individual or organisation “subject to foreign control” to register with the attorney general and to file detailed activities reports, including finances, every six months.

Cuba has its own laws criminalising actions intended to jeopardise its sovereignty or territorial integrity as well as actions supporting the goals of the anti-Cuba US Helms-Burton Act of 1996, such as collecting information to support the US embargo or to subvert the government, or for disseminating US government information to undermine the Cuban government.
Efforts to develop an opposition civil society in Cuba had already begun in 1985 with the early NED grants to CANF. These efforts received a significant boost with passage in 1992 of the Cuban Democracy Act, better known as the Torricelli Act, which promoted support, through US NGOs, of individuals and organisations committed to “non-violent democratic change in Cuba”.
A still greater intensification came with passage in 1996 of the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity Act, better known as the Helms-Burton Act.
As a result of these laws, the NED, AID and the CIA (the latter not mentioned publicly but undoubtedly included) intensified their coordinated programs targeted at Cuban civil society.

One may wonder why the CIA would be needed in these programs. There were several reasons. One reason from the beginning was the CIA's long experience and huge stable of agents and contacts in the civil societies of countries around the world. By joining with the CIA, the NED and AID would come on board on-going operations whose funding they could take over while leaving the secret day-to-day direction on the ground to CIA officers.

In addition, someone had to monitor and report the effectiveness of the local recipients' activities. NED would not have people in the field to do this, nor would their core foundations in normal conditions. And since NED money was ostensibly private, only the CIA had the people and techniques to carry out discreet control in order to avoid compromising the civil society recipients, especially if they were in opposition to their governments.

Finally, the CIA had ample funds of its own to pass quietly when conditions required. In Cuba, participation by CIA officers under cover in the US Interests Section would be particularly useful, since NED and AID funding would go to US NGOs that would have to find covert ways, if possible, to get equipment and cash to recipients inside Cuba. The CIA could help with this quite well.

Evidence of the amount of money these agencies have been spending on their Cuban projects is fragmentary. Nothing is publicly available about the CIA's spending, but what is easily found about the other two is interesting. The AID web site cites $12 million spent for Cuba programs during 1996-2001, but for 2002 the budget jumped to $5 million plus unobligated funds of $3 million from 2001. AID's 2003 budget for Cuba is $6 million showing a tripling of annual funds since the George Bush junta seized power. No surprise given the number of Miami Cubans Bush has appointed to high office in his administration.

From 1996 to 2001, AID disbursed the $12 million to 22 NGOs, all apparently based in the US, mostly in Miami. By 2002, the number of front-line NGOs had shrunk to 12 — the University of Miami, Center for a Free Cuba, Pan-American Development Foundation, Florida International University, Freedom House, Grupo de Apoyo a la Disidencia, Cuba On-Line, CubaNet, National Policy Association, Accion Democratica Cubana and Carta de Cuba.

In addition, the International Republican Institute received AID money for a sub-grantee, the Directorio Revolucionario Democr tico Cubano, also based in Miami.

These NGOs have a double purpose, one directed to their counterpart groups in Cuba and one directed to the world, mainly through web sites. Whereas, on the one hand, they channel funds and equipment into Cuba, on the other they disseminate to the world the activities of the groups in Cuba. Cubanet in Miami, for example, publishes the writings of the “independent journalists” of the Independent Press Association of Cuba, based in Havana, and channels money to the writers.

Interestingly, AID claims on its web site that its “grantees are not authorised to use grant funds to provide cash assistance to any person or organisation in Cuba”. It's hard to believe that claim, but if it's true, all those millions are only going to support the US-based NGO infrastructure, a subsidised anti-Castro cottage industry of a sort, except for what can be delivered in Cuba in kind — computers, faxes, copy machines, cell phones, radios, TVS and VCRs, books, magazines and the like.

On its web site, AID lists purposes for the money: solidarity with human rights activists; dissemination of the work of independent journalists; development of independent NGOs; promoting workers' rights; outreach to the Cuban people; planning for future assistance to a transition government; and evaluation of the program. Anyone who wants to see which NGOs are getting how much can visit .

AID's claim that its grantees can't provide cash to Cubans in Cuba, makes one wonder about the more than $100,000 in cash that Cuban investigators found in the hands of the 75 mostly unemployed “dissidents” who went on trial. A clue may be found in the AID statement that “US policy encourages US NGOs and individuals to undertake humanitarian, informational and civil society-building activities in Cuba with private funds”. Could such “private funds” be money from the NED?

Recall the fiction that the NED is a “private” foundation, an NGO. It has no restrictions on its funds going for cash payments abroad, and it just happens to fund some of the same NGOs as AID. Be assured that this is not the result of rivalry or lack of coordination in Washington. The reason probably is that NED funds can go for salaries and other personal compensation to people on the ground in Cuba.

The Cuban organisations below the US NGOs in the command and money chain number nearly 100 and have names [translated from Spanish] like Independent Libraries of Cuba, All United, Society of Journalists Marquez Sterling, Independent Press Association of Cuba, Assembly to Promote Civil Society and the Human Rights Party of Cuba.

NED's web site is conveniently out of date, showing only its Cuba program for 2001. But it is instructive. Its funds for Cuban activities in 2001 totalled only $765,000 — if one is to believe what they say. The money they gave to eight NGOs in 2001 averaged about $52,000, while a 9th NGO, the International Republican Institute received $350,000 for the Directorio Revolucionario Democratico Cubano for “strengthening civil society and human rights” in Cuba. In contrast, this NGO is to receive $2,174,462 in 2003 from AID through the same IRI.

Why would the NED be granting the lower amounts and AID such huge amounts, both channelled through IRI? The answer, apart from IRI's skim-off, probably is that the NED money is destined for the pockets of people in Cuba while the AID money supports the US NGO infrastructures.

Whatever the amount of money reaching Cuba may have been, everyone in Cuba working in the various dissident projects knows of US government's sponsorship, funding and of its purpose — regime change.

Far from being “independent” journalists, “idealistic” human rights activists, “legitimate” advocates for change or “Marian librarians from River City”, every one of the 75 “dissidents” arrested and convicted was knowingly a participant in US government operations to overthrow the government and install a US-favoured political, economic and social order. They knew what they were doing was illegal, they got caught and they are paying the price.

Anyone who thinks these people are prisoners of conscience, persecuted for their ideas or speech, or victims of repression, simply fails to see them properly as instruments of a US government that has declared revolutionary Cuba its enemy.

They were not convicted for ideas but for their paid actions on behalf of a foreign power that has waged a 44-year war of varying degrees of intensity against this poor country.
To think that the “dissidents” were creating an independent, free civil society is absurd, for they were funded and controlled by a hostile foreign power and to that degree, which was total, they were not free or independent in the least.
The civil society they wished to create was not just your normal, garden variety civil society of Harley freaks and Boxer breeders, but a political opposition movement fomented openly by the US government....
[Abridged from Granma Internacional. Philip Agee was a CIA covert operations officer from 1959 to 1969 and is the author of Inside the Company: A CIA Diary. He lives in Havana, where he runs a travel web site, .]


CIA and FBI Documents Detail Career in International Terrorism; Connection to U.S.
May 10, 2005
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 153
Washington D.C. May 10, 2005 - Declassified CIA and FBI records posted today on the Web by the National Security Archive at George Washington University identify Cuban exile Luis Posada Carriles, who is apparently in Florida seeking asylum, as a former CIA agent and as one of the "engineer[s]" of the 1976 terrorist bombing of Cubana Airlines flight 455 that killed 73 passengers.
The documents include a November 1976 FBI report on the bombing cited in yesterday's New York Times article "Case of Cuban Exile Could Test the U.S. Definition of Terrorist," CIA trace reports covering the Agency's recruitment of Posada in the 1960s, as well as the FBI intelligence reporting on the downing of the plane. The Archive also posted a second FBI report, dated one day after the bombing, in which a confidential source "all but admitted that Posada and [Orlando] Bosch had engineered the bombing of the airline." In addition, the posting includes several documents relating to Bosch and his suspected role in the downing of the jetliner on October 6, 1976.
Using a false passport, Posada apparently snuck into the United States in late March and remains in hiding. His lawyer announced that Posada is asking the Bush administration for asylum because of the work he had done for the Central Intelligence Agency in the 1960s. The documents posted today include CIA records confirming that Posada was an agent in the 1960s and early 1970s, and remained an informant in regular contact with CIA officials at least until June 1976.
In 1985, Posada escaped from prison in Venezuela where he had been incarcerated after the plane bombing and remains a fugitive from justice. He went directly to El Salvador, where he worked, using the alias "Ramon Medina," on the illegal contra resupply program being run by Lt. Col. Oliver North in the Reagan National Security Council. In 1998 he was interviewed by Ann Louise Bardach for the New York Times at a secret location in Aruba, and claimed responsibility for a string of hotel bombings in Havana during which eleven people were injured and one Italian businessman was killed. Most recently he was imprisoned in Panama for trying to assassinate Fidel Castro in December 2000 with 33 pounds of C-4 explosives. In September 2004, he and three co-conspirators were suddenly pardoned, and Posada went to Honduras. Venezuela is now preparing to submit an official extradition request to the United States for his return....

Document 1: CIA, October 13, 1976, Report, "Traces on Persons Involved in 6 Oct 1976 Cubana Crash."
Document 2: FBI, October 16, 1976, Retransmission of CIA Trace Report
Document 3: CIA, June 1966, File search on Luis "Pozada"
Document 4: FBI, July 18, 1966, "Cuba
Document 5: CIA, April 17, 1972, Personal Record Questionnaire on Posada
Document 6: FBI, July 7, 1965, "Luis Posada Carriles"
Document 7: FBI, July 13, 1965, "Cuban Representation in Exile (RECE)"
Document 8: FBI, May 17, 1965, "Roberto Alejos Arzu; Luis Sierra Lopez, Neutrality Matters, Internal Security-Guatemala"
Document 9-12, FBI, October 7, 1976, Secret Intelligence Report, "Suspected Bombing of Cubana Airlines DC-8 Near Barbados"
Document 13: FBI, August 16, 1978, Secret Report, "Coordinacion de Organizaciones Revolucionarias Unidas (Coordination of United Revolutionary Organizations) (CORU), Neutrality Matters - Cuba - (Anti-Castro)"
Document 14: September 2, 1986, Contra re-supply document, [Distribution of Warehoused Contra Weapons and Equipment - in Spanish with English translation]
Document 15: May 27, 1987, Testimony of Felix I. Rodriguez Before the Joint Hearings on the Iran-Contra Investigation [Excerpt]
Document 16: May 1987, Iran-Contra Hearings, Testimony of Robert C. Dutton, Exhibit 14, "Reorganization Plan"


We need to keep spotlight on Africa
Saturday, May 5, Anthony Mitchell died in the crash of Kenyan Airways Flight 507. Based in Nairobi, he was an Associated Press reporter who had recently broken a story on secret prisons in Ethiopia and the U.S. involvement in the detention and interrogation of prisoners there...Mitchell's exposé detailed the fate of some of the hundreds of thousands of refugees. They were fleeing war, but to the United States they were possible al-Qaida operatives who had found a safe haven in Somalia. According to Mitchell, dozens of refugees were "transferred secretly and illegally in recent months from Kenya and Somalia to Ethiopia, where they are kept without charge or access to lawyers and families." In his groundbreaking report, Mitchell wrote, "CIA and FBI agents... in the Horn of Africa have been interrogating terrorism suspects from 19 countries held at secret prisons in Ethiopia, which is notorious for torture and abuse."
The U.S. State Department documented Ethiopia's use of torture, and the FBI admitted to Mitchell that it was interrogating prisoners there....
Make no mistake about it, the Horn of Africa is in the cross hairs of the United States. There is oil in Sudan, Somalia and Ethiopia. The New York Times reported that after the U.S.-backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia, the U.S. allowed Ethiopia to buy arms from North Korea even though the U.S. had just won tough U.N. sanctions against North Korea.The Pentagon recently announced the formation of AFRICOM, the "new unified, combatant command" for Africa. [...]

Ethiopia expels foreign reporter
A British journalist working for the Associated Press news agency has arrived in Kenya after his expulsion from Ethiopia.
The Ethiopian government has accused Anthony Mitchell of being hostile.
AP say they hope Mr Mitchell will be allowed back to Ethiopia so that he can be with his family and return to work.
Dozens of journalists and political activists are in prison after months of political unrest and violence following last year's disputed elections.
Last week the UK suspended direct aid to Ethiopia over concerns about its commitment to human rights...
Independent journalists and editors were among more than 100 people arrested in November and December and charged with treason, genocide and other offences. 2006/01/23 13

Detained journalists still in U.S. custody
Media group discusses arrests of photographers
WASHINGTON -- Representatives of two journalists detained by the U.S. military said Tuesday that the government should charge them or set them free.
The U.S. has been holding Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein in Iraq for a year. Sami al-Hajj, a cameraman for the Mideast news network Al-Jazeera, has been detained since late 2001 and is at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
While U.S. officials allege that Hussein took photographs synchronized with explosions, indicating he was at a location ahead of time, Kathleen Carroll, executive editor of the AP, said he was "simply the unlucky fellow who happened to be the photographer for the world's largest newsgathering organization in a difficult province."Carroll said the AP had examined 900 of Hussein's photographs and there was no indication he was on the scene before attacks occurred.

Paul Gardephe, the lawyer handling the case for the AP, said the military recently acknowledged to him that it has no evidence to support earlier allegations that Hussein was involved in a plot to kidnap two other journalists.
Carroll said, "The sort of rolling set of allegations that arise and then disappear without the benefit of a trial ... or any kind of an official court proceeding is what is distressing to all of us here." She spoke during a panel discussion in connection with World Press Freedom Day.
Officials have what they believe to be information that links Hussein to insurgent activity, but most of the evidence is classified and cannot be released publicly, said Col. Gary Keck, a Pentagon spokesman.... Al-Hajj's attorney, Zachary Katznelson, said U.S. officials have offered varying allegations against his client but have never filed charges or presented evidence against him. Al-Hajj was stopped at the Afghanistan border by Pakistani authorities in December 2001 and turned over to U.S. authorities six months later.[...]


The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is the central research and development organization for the Department of Defense (DoD). It manages and directs selected basic and applied research and development projects for DoD, and pursues research and technology where risk and payoff are both very high and where success may provide dramatic advances for traditional military roles and missions.
FEBRUARY 2007 Last Updated: May 1, 2007
Current Strategic Thrusts
3.3. Urban Area Operations
Each year the world’s urban areas increase in population and area. By 2025 nearly 60 percent of
the world’s population will live in urban areas. Given this, it is prudent to assume U.S. forces
will continue to be deployed to urban areas for combat and post-conflict stabilization. Unstable
and lawless urban areas give terrorists sanctuary to recruit, train, and develop asymmetric
capabilities, including the possibility of chemical, biological, and radiological weapons of mass
destruction (WMD).
Urban area operations can be the most dangerous, costly, and chaotic forms of combat. Cities
are filled with buildings, alleys, and interlocking tunnels, which provide practically limitless
places to hide, store weapons, and maneuver. They are hubs of transportation, information, and
commerce, and they are homes for a nation’s financial, political, and cultural institutions. Cities
are densely packed with people and their property, creating an environment in which our
adversaries can mix in and use civilians as shields to limit our military options. And insurgents
don’t just mix in, they blend in. Under these circumstances, warfighting technology that works
so superbly in the open, and even in the rugged natural terrain of the traditional battlefield, is less
effective in the urban environment.
Adversaries seek to fight in urban areas as a way to counter U.S. forces’ superior detection and
strike capabilities that work so well against fixed and mobile targets in open and semi-concealed
terrain. By moving into cities, our adversaries hope to limit our advantages, draw more of our
troops into combat, and inflict greater U.S. casualties, and cause mistakes that harm civilians and
The Urban Area Operations thrust is aimed at creating technology to help make U.S. operations
in cities as effective as operations in non-urban areas by seeking new urban warfare concepts and
technologies that would make a smaller U.S. force conducting operations in an urban area more
effective, suffer fewer casualties, and inflict less collateral damage.
If successful, these new urban warfare concepts and technologies would enable U.S forces
fighting in or stabilizing an urban area to achieve the same or greater overall effect as a larger
force using today’s technology.
DARPA’s Urban Area Operations thrust includes research in:
• Improved urban intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance to vastly improve U.S.
capabilities to understand what is going on throughout a complex urban environment,
including the ability to detect adversaries hiding in buildings and other structures, and to find
hidden explosives or WMD.
• Tagging, tracking and locating capabilities to persistently monitor targets or equipment of
interest; tag, track and locate enemy activities; track and detect weapons fabrication and
movement; and precisely discriminate threat from non-threat entities against severe
background clutter.
• Weapons for urban operations to develop ultra-precise, beyond-line-of-sight infantry
weapons for use in congested urban areas.
• Asymmetric warfare countermeasures to develop technology to detect, prevent, or
mitigate asymmetric attacks, such as suicide bomber attacks, improvised explosive device
attacks, and WMD attacks – including radiological dispersal devices.
• Pre- and post-conflict capabilities to model and understand social indicators that precede
the onset of hostility and conflict, coupled with tools to develop strategies to stabilize an
urban area and assist U.S. civil affairs units.
• Command, control, communications, and intelligence (C3I) for urban warfighting to
develop new approaches to all-echelon C2 and new intelligence analysis tools specifically
suited for urban operations that allow warfighters to see and understand what is happening
throughout the urban battlespace in real time.
A typical urban mission may require a U.S. team to pursue adversaries inside a multi-story
building. Currently, the defenders have a major advantage by knowing the interior layout. But
by using DARPA’s Radar Scope (weighing less than 1.5 pounds and running on AA batteries),
U.S. troops will be able to sense through over 12 inches of concrete to determine if someone is
hiding inside a building or behind a wall.
The Advanced Soldier Sensor Information System and Technology (ASSIST) program will
enhance the intelligence gathering capabilities of our ground troops by developing special
sensors, networks, and databases that allow a patrol leader to directly add to, and tap into the
collective experience of previous patrols, including the details of what has been encountered in specific
neighborhoods. ASSIST will help intelligence analysts and front-line patrol leaders build and share
knowledge of what’s going on in various city neighborhoods....

You are now leaving the Web Information Service site that is under the control and management of DARPA. DARPA does not exercise any responsibility at the destination. This link is provided consistent with the stated purpose of this web site. After reading this message, click to continue immediately.

USJFCOM begins Integrated Battle Command Experiment Series
U.S. Joint Forces Command recently teamed with the Defense Advanced Research Products Agency for an Integrated Battle Command Limited Objective Experiment to test a whole-of-government approach to conducting stability operations in a disadvantaged country.
The IBC program conducted a limited objective experimen, Jan. 19, 2007 at USJFCOM’s Joint Systems Integration Command here. The program began in July 2004 as the result of a memorandum of agreement for IBC development between USJFCOM and DARPA.
The experiment exceeded expectations, according to Navy Cmdr. Glenn Brown, the Joint Innovation and Experimentation Directorate’s (J9) lead for the experiment. He said the IBC LOE validated the whole-of-government approach to operations.

the memory hole recovers 'lost'/deleted/ govt. docs.
Reports From the Future of Iraq Project
exclusive: Over 1,200 pages of previously unavailable reports from State Dept planning for post-Saddam Iraq. Warnings and recommendations by experts and Iraqi exiles ignored by administration

Freedom of Information Act case logs for the CIA, DARPA, and NRO have been added here:


Excerpts From Pentagon's Plan: 'Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival'
NYT March 8, 1992
Following are excerpts from the Pentagon's Feb. 18 draft of the Defense Planning Guidance for the Fiscal Years 1994-1999: This Defense Planning guidance addresses the fundamentally new situation which has been created by the collapse of the Soviet Union, the disintegration of the internal as well as the external empire, and the discrediting of Communism as an ideology with global pretensions and influence. The new international environment has also been shaped by the victory of the United States and its coalition allies over Iraqi aggression -- the first post-cold-war conflict and a defining event in U.S. global leadership. In addition to these two victories, there has been a less visible one, the integration of Germany and Japan into a U.S.-led system of collective security and the creation of a democratic "zone of peace."

U.S. blueprint for proxy Israel's role in conquering a 'new world order' agenda for incoming Benjamin Netanyahu regime, compatible with fascist 'eretz israel' agenda:
1996 A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
Following is a policy blueprint prepared by The U.S. Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

1997 A Geostrategy For Eurasia, by Zbigniew Brzezinski [major democrat strategist]
Foreign Affairs,76:5, September/October 1997 Council on Foreign Relations Inc.

1997 THE GRAND CHESSBOARD: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives
Zbigniew Brzezinski

[Peters now 'reports' for USA Today among other things]

2000 Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century: A Report of The Project for the New American Century September 2000
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a neo-conservative think tank with strong ties to the American Enterprise Institute "established in the spring of 1997" as "a non-profit, educational organization whose goal is to promote American global leadership."

2000 “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century” September 2000 by the Project for the New American Century Policy Doc. (PNAC), advocates for total U.S. global domination, basically became the NSS of USA [below]

2002 United States Government, National Security Strategy of the United States (NSS of USA)


1] U.S. Considers Dividing Iraq Into Three Separate States After Saddam Is Gone
FORECASTS & TRENDS, Oct 1, 2002 http://www.profutures.comarticle.php/91/%20 that one of the leading long-term strategies being considered by US war planners is to divide Iraq into three separate regions. Under this plan Iraq would cease to exist. [emphasis added]

Stratfor says that such a plan reportedly was discussed at an unusual meeting between Crown Prince Hassan of Jordan and pro-US Iraqi Sunni opposition members in London in July. Further, they say that in September, the Israeli newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, stated that the US goal in Iraq was to create a United Hashemite Kingdom that would encompass Jordan and Iraq's Sunni areas. Also, Israeli terrorism expert Ehud Sprinzak recently echoed this sentiment on Russian television on September 24.
So whose idea is this? According to Stratfor, Sprinzak stated that the authors of the "Hashemite" plan are Vice President Dick Cheney and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, both considered the most hawkish of Bush administration officials.[...]

2] 2004 Rand study “U.S. Strategy in the Muslim World After 9/11”
By Abdus Sattar Ghazali, exec. editor American Muslim Perspective
Rand study titled “U.S. Strategy in the Muslim WorldAfter 9/11” suggests exploiting Sunni, Shiite and Arab, non-Arab divides to promote the US policy objectives inthe Muslim world. [...]

By Pepe Escobar
The plan [to break up Iraq] was allegedly conceived by David Philip, a former White House adviser working for the American Foreign Policy Council (AFPC).[...]

4] Dismembering the body politic in Iraq By Ahmed Janabi
Thursday 22 June 2006, 8:31 Makka Time, 5:31 GMT
Iraqi nationalists fear the break-up of their country [...]

5] Iraq's Partition
The discussion within the U.S. foreign policy establishment on the future of Iraq has come to a conclusion. The U.S. will, now officially, work to dissolve the Iraqi nation and state into three independend statelets under a powerless sham national government and, of course, total U.S. control (...) As Col. Lang emphasizes, the seeds for partioning were laid when Cheney and the neocon figures around him ordered the Iraqi army to be disbanded and the de-Baathification of the Iraqi g! overnment, i.e. its total annulment. The idea of partitioning Iraq may even have been the very reason for the war. The New Middle East expression goes back to the "Clean Break" document (pdf) prepared 1996 by U.S. neocons as a strategy for Israel's Netanyahu government. The first modern partition Iraq argument was made by Zionist strategist Oded Yinon in 1982. In A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties he recommends: In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. The now imminent, new policy of partitioning Iraq is indeed only the announcement of the result of a process that has been the plan and the policy all along. This is a real "Mission Accomplished" moment...


"People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction, and anyone who insists on remaining in a state of innocence long after that innocence is dead turns himself into a monster."
James Baldwin

5/9/7 Commentary: Not a Foreign Affair; Urgent New "Terror Threats"; “I can make your lives disappear with a stroke of my pen”;

Digest commentary:
Contrary to the rhetoric of loyal left apologists, imperialism IS 'capitalism' , the political-economic system of 'globalized' capitalism -- not just the 'foreign policy' of whichever electoral gang is selected to carry out a bipartisan U.S. agenda.

It is the same capitalist system committing ongoing genocide against the Black people in this country that is committing state - sponsored terrorist genocide against Palestine, Iraq, and Africa in a fascist military juggernaut
designed to eliminate all obstacles to total U.S.-zionist global domination ... aka imperial 'security' and 'peace'.

Those with lots to lose want to keep the U.S. ship of state afloat using sails of lies and illusions of real change through elections ... despite hundreds of years of evidence otherwise. Peddling this deception is complicity with the system and ruling class whose bloody empire is built on white supremacist 'manifest destiny', on the labor, blood and bones of millions through 'democratic' genocide, slavery, exploitation, oppression, state terror and war.

By pretending that voting, replacing Bush, a vile little weasel figurehead, will strategically change anything, the loyal left is pimping this system's absolute depravity. To passively go along with this deadly treachery instead of forging an internationalist anti-imperialist political movement is to betray the genuine interests of humanity, including our own, to aid and abet our common enemy's historically unprecedented crimes against humanity, the world and the planet.

And it is to loose a rare historic moment pregnant with immense dangers and also opportunities : U.S capitalism is in crisis, desperate to seize this moment to expand and secure its global supremacy before another rival predatory capitalist power, like China or Russia, displaces it. This world war of terror has unleashed powerful, unbeatable resistance...but not in the "homeland". Will we continue to buy into the racist made-in-usa "terrorism threats", anti-immigrant psywar, 'internet terrorism', all the relentless pretexts the state's mainstream media mouthpieces use to 'justify' expanding the war of terror and tightening the police state 'for our own good'. The 'dots' are systemically connected...following are a few:

1] contrary to reality and what growing numbers even in the u.s. believe, the "war on terrorism" is real
2] "Islamic terrorism" now directly threatens the peacekeeping 'homeland'
3] be vigilant, main dangers are immigrants, Muslims especially, because they hate our liberating justice and freedom
4] the internet is now a "terrorist" tool -- trust us, we're developing "secure trusted computing"
5] patriotic white snitches love amerika
6] support U.S. fascist state terrorist freedom

6 men charged with plotting to attack soldiers at Fort Dix :
 "What concerns us is, obviously, they began conducting surveillance and weapons training in the woods and were discussing killing large numbers of soldiers," said Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd.


Questions and answers by Newsday so you don't think...
The FBI turned to paid informants who had been helpful in other investigations...
The men were arrested at different places Monday night. Two were grabbed at a meeting that some of the suspects believed would be with someone who would sell them M-16 and AK-47 automatic rifles. That person, though, was a government informant....
Q: How did they intend to attack Fort Dix?
A: The post has had especially tight security since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Christie would not say how the men intended to get access to the installation, but he said they had a detailed plan that included cutting off the electricity, then using automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades.
Q: When were they going to attack?
A: That's not clear. But Christie said they thought the automatic weapons they wanted to buy would be "the final piece of their plan."
It usually takes several months, if not years, before major cases are tried. It's possible the charges could be dismissed or they could plead guilty before a trial.

...The complaint included an affidavit from John J. Ryan, a special agent with the F.B.I., which said that a cooperating witness infiltrated the group and last year recorded some of their conversations....
“Terrorist attacks are not always going to be on the grand scale of September 11th,” Mr. Christie said. “But keep in mind that terrorist attacks are about creating terror, [note: u.s. knows this firsthand] and an attack on an American military institution in our country clearly would have created the type of terror that people like these who believe in Jihad want to perpetrate on American citizens.”...
“We do not have any evidence at this time that they are connected directly to any other international terrorist movement around the world,” Mr. Christie said. “But clearly they used the Internet to obtain this jihadist material, which they used as both educational and inspirational for their cause.”... Mr. Duka, and two others, Eljvir Duka and Shain Duka — all three of whom are brothers — are in the United States illegally, Mr. Christie said. People at several mosques near Cherry Hill did not recognize the names of the defendants, and said there was no mosque in Cherry Hill but that one is being built that will serve an Indian Muslim sect.


...The arrests came after a 15-month investigation during which the F.B.I. and two informers... infiltrated the group...
...The authorities described the suspects as Islamic extremists and said they represented the newest breed of threat: loosely organized domestic militants unconnected to — but inspired by — Al Qaeda or other international terror groups....
“They appear to be individuals who were actively perusing radical Web sites and began shooting weapons, doing surveillance and trying to get some advanced weaponry,” said one official who spoke on the condition of anonymity, because the matter was still under investigation....
Cassie Herman, who lives in Blackwood, N.J., where the Duka family once owned a pizzeria, said she rented her 5,000-square-foot home in a gated community on Big Bass Lake to Eljvir Duka for a week in February, and to someone from the F.B.I. for a few days just before.
Kevin O’Brien, 36, who lives in the same community, said he had gone to bars twice with several of the men, who told him they were avid hunters. Mr. O’Brien said the men drank whiskey and beer and asked him about his stint in the Marines, trading stories of their own military training in the former Yugoslavia.
Tom Cornine, a bartender at the Gouldsboro Inn, recalled two of the men there on a February weekend, drinking Stoli on the rocks until they drained the bottle, then Absolut. “They drank more than the average man,” Mr. Cornine said.
For all the suspects’ talk of holy war and martyrdom, investigators said there is little indication that they were devout, or even practicing, Muslims. Leaders at nearby Muslim houses of worship said they had never seen the suspects and were troubled to learn they had tried to use faith as a justification for their plan.


will you be a good brave 'murican patriot?
In January 2006, a store clerk in New Jersey saw something.
A group of men had brought him a video showing them firing assault weapons and chanting "God is great!" in Arabic. They wanted him to dub the footage to a DVD.
So the clerk called the Mount Laurel Police Department, which in turn contacted the FBI.
FBI agent J.P. Weis saluted the unidentified Mount Laurel store clerk as the "unsung hero" of the case.
Within months, the FBI had managed to infiltrate the group with two informants, court documents said.

in case you've missed the point, a clarifying psywar editorial from the NYT:
Answering Al-Qaeda
Published: May 8, 2007
MORE than five years have passed since terrorism struck our country. Some say this is no surprise. After all, since then we have reorganized the government and created an agency dedicated to protecting us from another attack — the Department of Homeland Security. We have spent billions of dollars to better secure potential targets. We have dislodged Al Qaeda from its sanctuary in Afghanistan, and killed or captured scores of its followers around the globe.
Perhaps another strike on the country is unlikely, but I very much doubt it. From everything we know, Al Qaeda is as determined as ever to attack us at home, and it remains as capable as ever of doing so. While many of its operatives have been killed or captured since 9/11, the supply of young people who are willing and even eager to attack Americans seems limitless.
Our disastrous misadventure in Iraq has only increased that desire. Al Qaeda has reconstituted itself in Pakistan and is trying to reclaim Afghanistan. It is only marginally harder for terrorists to enter the United States now than it was before 9/11, and once they’re inside our borders the potential targets are infinite. Many of those targets are more secure today, but not to the degree they should be.
As if we needed a reminder that another 9/11 remains a real threat, let’s look at what happened just last week: Another chilling videotape from Osama bin Laden’s top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, appeared. The State Department acknowledged that attacks worldwide are on the rise. Five Britons with links to Al Qaeda were sentenced for plotting spectacular attacks in their country, highlighting the danger of “homegrown” terrorism here as well. And the former C.I.A. director George Tenet maintained that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”
We can never make ourselves invulnerable to terrorism. But certain steps would reduce our vulnerability to as close to zero as possible. Among those steps should be these:[...]

Cuban Militant's Indictment Tossed Out
HOUSTON (AP) -- A federal judge on Tuesday threw out an indictment accusing a Cuban militant of lying to immigration authorities, saying the government manipulated Luis Posada Carriles' naturalization interview.
U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone said the interpretation of the April 2006 interview ''is so inaccurate as to render it unreliable as evidence of defendant's actual statement.''
Posada, a 79-year-old former CIA operative and fierce opponent of Fidel Castro, was scheduled to stand trial next week in Texas on immigration fraud charges.
He was accused of entering the U.S. illegally and was detained in May 2005. Authorities said he later lied about how he entered the country when he sought to become a naturalized U.S. citizen.
He was released from jail last month. An immigration judge has ruled that Posada be deported but not to Cuba, where he was born, or Venezuela, where he is a naturalized citizen, because of fears that he could be tortured.
Cuba and Venezuela want Posada extradited for the 1976 bombing of a Cuban airliner... that killed 73 people.... but the United States has refused to send him to either country....
The judge said Posada was entitled to certain rights under the U.S. Constitution.
''This Court will not set aside such rights nor overlook Government misconduct because Defendant is a political hot potato,'' she wrote. ''This Court's concern is not politics; it is the preservation of criminal justice.''...

US government to gag terrorist on CIA ties
by Bill Van Auken
Global Research, May 6, 2007

...With his trial on immigration charges set for May 11, the US government has filed a motion in federal court seeking to bar the international terrorist Luis Posada Carriles from testifying on his role as an agent of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Venezuela has demanded that Posada Carriles be extradited to face charges there related to his masterminding of a 1976 bombing of a Cuban civilian passenger jet that killed 73 people. He evaded punishment for the crime—at the time the worst single act of terrorism in the Western Hemisphere—by escaping a Venezuelan prison in 1985.
Violating international and bilateral treaties, Washington has rebuffed Venezuela’s request, charging Posada Carriles instead with minor violations of US immigration law for entering the US without a visa and lying to immigration officials. Last month, the terrorist, who had been in federal custody since May 2005, was set free on bail and returned to Miami.
The release has provoked international protests and exposed the hypocrisy of the so-called “global war on terrorism” proclaimed by a government that has sponsored and continues to harbor and protect a wanted terrorist.
The nine-page motion submitted to the federal court in El Paso, Texas, argues that the relationship between Posada Carriles and the CIA ended 30 years ago and therefore is irrelevant.
Declassified documents have established that Carriles was recruited as an agent of the CIA in 1961, was sent into the US Army for a year of training in demolition and terrorist tactics and remained directly on the CIA payroll at least until 1967. From 1969 to 1974, he served as a senior officer in the Venezuelan secret police, DISIP, charged with capturing, torturing and killing left-wing opponents of the government. During that period he remained an informant and “asset” of the CIA in Latin America.

In 1976, he planned the airline bombing, leaving its execution to two employees of his private detective agency that he set up in Caracas after a change of government forced him out of the secret police. Just two weeks before the October 1976 airline bombing, he was involved in another terrorist attack, this one in the center of Washington. A car bomb killed the exiled former foreign minister of Chile, Orlando Letelier, and an American aide, Ronni Moffitt.
After his escape from prison in Venezuela, Posada Carriles made his way to El Salvador, where he became a key operative in the illegal terror war against Nicaragua financed by the CIA and directed by the network established by the Reagan administration under the direction of Lt. Col. Oliver North of the National Security Council. He went on to Guatemala, becoming a government intelligence officer during a brutal counterinsurgency campaign that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives.

In the 1990s, by his own admission, Posada Carriles directed a series of terrorist bombings against hotels and tourist spots in Cuba, killing an Italian tourist.
And, in November 2000, he was involved in an aborted attempt to blow up a conference hall in Panama, where Cuban President Fidel Castro was scheduled to speak to hundreds of people. He was arrested and jailed for the plot, but then pardoned by outgoing Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso in 2004, reportedly as the result of either US pressure or bribes from anti-Castro Cuban exile groups.

In response to the government attempt to quash any public testimony about Posada Carriles’s ties to the CIA, the terrorist’s defense lawyers filed a countermotion this week, insisting that it was impossible to discuss the “context” of the case without dealing with their client’s relation with the agency. Moreover, the document claimed, this relationship “lasted for 25 years.”

“The government’s statement that his service to the United States ended in 1976 is incorrect,” the document said.
The implications of the motion are clear. Posada Carriles was working for the CIA when he planned and executed the terrorist bombing that murdered 73 people aboard the Cuban plane as well as the car-bomb assassination in Washington. Moreover, he remained an agent or “asset” of the US intelligence agency while continuing to carry out acts of terrorist and repressive violence in Cuba, Central America and elsewhere for at least another decade. Both of the 1976 terrorist acts took place when George H.W. Bush, the current US president’s father, was director of the CIA.
Declassified documents obtained by the National Security Archive in 2005 establish that the CIA had advance intelligence on the planned airline bombing and that the FBI’s attaché in Caracas had repeated contacts with one of the operatives who placed the bomb on the plane and, just days before the bombing, obtained a visa for him to travel to the US.

Jurors in Padilla terror trial won't hear key allegations:
 The case, which includes two Muslim defendants who allegedly recruited the Islamic convert, has come to be known as "Padilla lite" because it lacks so many of the alleged ["terrorist"] criminal elements that behind designating the former Fort Lauderdale-area resident as an "enemy combatant."

“Of course our whole national history has been one of expansion… That the barbarians recede or are conquered, with the attendant fact that peace follows retrogression or conquest, is due solely to the power of the mighty civilized races which have not lost the fighting instinct, and which by their expansion are gradually bringing peace into the red wastes of the world where the barbarian peoples of the world hold sway.”
Theodore Roosevelt

Pentagon identifies 35,000 more troops for Iraq:
 Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the decision was not related to the military's so-called "surge." But the replacement forces offer generals the flexibility to maintain heightened troop levels through 2007.

Cheney to seek help on Iraq, Iran:
 The US vice president, will be the senior-most official from Washington to visit Riyadh since King Abdullah railed against the "illegitimate foreign occupation" of Iraq.

Dems. Funding Bill Includes Privatization of Iraq Oil & Carte Blanche to Invade Iran:
 Democrats in Congress had made some secret concessions to the Republicans in the initial Bill to continue funding the Iraq War that was vetoed, and in a subsequent version that is currently being negotiated. according to Dennis Kucinich including:

Why the imperialists will be defeated: anti-imperialist Resistance fighters are like 'fish in the sea', supported by the masses of people. This is why they are targets of the occupiers' whose lies about helping the nation they have destroyed in a vain effort to conquer it, about 'terrorists', 'al-Qaeda', 'foreigners[!], about 'quelling the 'sectarian violence' manufactured by the U.S. to turn the people against the resistance, are only believed by fools who wish to believe, in U.S - Israel especially:

US attack 'kills Iraqi children'
An attack by a US helicopter against suspected insurgents in Iraq has killed a number of children at a primary school, Iraqi security sources say.
The officer said police had spoken to eyewitnesses and that six children had been killed and six injured but the figures have not been independently confirmed.
A spokesman for the US forces in Iraq, Lt-Col Chris Garver, said the US tried to do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties, which was why it was taking the reports seriously and conducting an investigation.

CIA-backed raid 'killed 50 Afghan villagers':
 Military specialists with the CIA were among a US force accused of killing more than 50 civilians during the hunt for a Taliban commander in Afghanistan.[SIC]

21 Afghan Civilians Killed, Official Says
The U.S.-led coalition said militants fired guns, rocket propelled grenades and mortars at U.S. Special Forces and Afghan soldiers on patrol 15 miles north of Sangin.
Maj. William Mitchell, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition, said troops killed a ''significant'' number of militants....
''We don't have any report of civilian casualties. There are enemy casualties -- I think the number is significant,'' Mitchell said without releasing an exact figure.... A resident of the area, Mohammad Asif, said five homes in the village of Soro were bombed during the battle, killing 38 people and wounding more than 20. He said Western troops and Afghan forces had blocked people from entering the area....
The report of civilian casualties comes less than a week after Afghan officials said that 51 civilians were killed in the western province of Herat.
It also comes one day after the U.S. military apologized and paid compensation to the families of 19 people killed and 50 wounded by U.S. Marines Special Forces who fired indiscriminately on civilians after being hit by a suicide attack in eastern Afghanistan in March.

Saudis, US sponsoring covert action against Iran :
 The governments of Saudi Arabia and the United States are working with other states in the Middle East to sponsor covert action against Iran, according to a report in this month's edition of The Atlantic. The report also suggests that covert attacks may occur against Iran's oil sector.

Damascus moves to imperialist center stage again:
 Fifty years ago, alarmed that Syria was becoming dangerously close to the Soviet Union, US president Dwight Eisenhower authorized a series of operations aimed at isolating, weakening and eventually overthrowing the regime of president Shukri al-Quwatli.

U.S. Blocks Israel-Syria Talks:
  Even as American officials reluctantly agreed last month to include Syrian representatives in multiparty talks on Iraqi security issues, the Bush administration continues to block Israel from resuming negotiations with Syria over its security concerns.

Assad not preparing for war:
 While Syria is repairing its military positions along the border with Israel, its army has not beefed up its forces on the Golan Heights, Austrian Maj.-Gen. Wolfgang Jilke, commander of the UN force deployed along the border, has told The Jerusalem Post in an exclusive interview

Iran's FM: We oppose nuclear weapons:
 "We are against nuclear weapons, and we do believe that the time for nuclear weapons is over," said Manouchehr Mottaki, appearing at a news conference with his Norwegian counterpart Jonas Gahr Stoere.

After Gates' Talks Fail, White House Sending Rice To Sell U.S. Defense Shield:
 U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to fly to Russia next week to pitch Washington's plan to deploy a 'missile defense shield system' in central Europe, which has sparked strong opposition from Russia and a bitter debate between the former Cold War enemies.

Look to Airbus For Clues To Sarkozy
Published: May 9, 2007
TOULOUSE, France, May 7 — For those trying to predict how France’s newly elected president, Nicolas Sarkozy, will lead his country’s economy, one of the first critical tests is likely to come here, at the home base of Airbus, the proud but ailing European plane maker.
Still reeling from costly delays in its flagship A380 plane, Airbus has embarked on a wrenching overhaul that could result in thousands of lost jobs and the sale of several factories. The turmoil is aggravating political tensions between the company’s French and German backers.
How Mr. Sarkozy navigates these thorny issues may help clarify whether he is, at heart, a free-market reformer or an economic nationalist determined to prop up France’s industrial patrimony.
“Airbus could soon become a test of his plans for a more flexible labor market,” said Nicolas Sobczak, an economist at Goldman Sachs in Paris. “It would be a good showcase to demonstrate to the unions that it’s not useful to oppose a business plan that makes sense.” Sticking to that, however, would require considerable political nerve. Workers at Airbus plants have already staged strikes to protest the plan, which will eliminate 10,000 jobs, 4,300 of them in France.
“Sarkozy, despite his pro-American attitude, still feels that Airbus is French and needs to be protected,” said Doug McVitie, the managing director of Arran Aerospace, a consulting firm in Dinan, France.
“He has this French attitude that Airbus is strategic for France, in the same way that Danone was strategic for France in the yogurt business,” Mr. McVitie said, referring to the French dairy brand that raised jitters here after becoming the target of a rumored takeover by PepsiCo.
The potential for conflict between France and Germany has increased along with the magnitude of the woes at Airbus, he said. [...]

new partners in the "secure trusted computing" project
Tech Investors Cull Start-Ups for Pentagon
...Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the military has reached out more to the private sector, trying to make use of a range of technologies in pursuing security and fighting wars. Some venture capitalists have catered to those demands, creating firms aimed at military and security needs.
On the public sector side, the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999 started In-Q-Tel, a venture that identifies and invests in start-ups and technologies whose products could be used in intelligence. And the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency backs new technology and has helped create many important advances, including the Internet.
What makes DeVenCI unusual, its participants say, is that by bringing together military procurement agents and technology investors it is creating a kind of brokerage for ideas. But it had humbler beginnings, starting out on more of a special case basis not long after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon......the Defense Department signs 6,000 or more contracts a week with various companies....
But it is not all business, the venture capitalists say. For some, there is a patriotic component, one that sometimes tests their own philosophies about the role of the military...

Recalibrated Remarks: Obama Carefully Courts Jewish Vote
WASHINGTON, May 6, 2007
(Christian Science Monitor) This article was written by Ariel Sabar
For a candidate intent on courting the Jewish vote, some of the headlines for Sen. Barack Obama in recent weeks have been less than heartening...
Obama has delivered a series of speeches since March before Jewish audiences — two before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the influential pro-Israel lobby, and one, last week, before the National Jewish Democratic Council here.

Recalibrated Remarks

Even in that short span, his remarks have undergone a subtle evolution.
In March, he spoke of relaxing restrictions on aid to the Palestinians and said "both the Israeli and Palestinian people have suffered from the failure to achieve" the "goal" of "two states living side by side in peace and security." While asserting that the United States should isolate Hamas and other Palestinian Islamic militants, he said that "Israel will also have some heavy stones to carry" in any peace process.
By last week, however, the references to Palestinian suffering and Israeli heavy lifting were gone, replaced by a less nuanced pro-Israel stance nearly indistinguishable from that of his chief rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
"When I am president, the United States will stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel in search of this peace and in defense against those who seek its destruction," Obama told an audience at the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC), where his staff also handed out a 29-page "American-Israeli Relationship Issue Packet."
Yet two days later, when asked at the debate at South Carolina State University to name America's three most important allies, Obama listed the European Union, NATO, and Japan.
"I didn't hear you mention Israel," Mr. [NBC's Brian] Williams interjected, asking whether the senator still stood behind his statement that "no one is suffering more than the Palestinian people."
"What I said is, nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel, to renounce violence, and to get serious about negotiating peace and security for the region," Obama replied. "Israel has been one of our most important allies around the world." [...]

National ID card a disaster in the making
 By Richard Forno and Bruce Schneier
 It is perhaps quite telling that despite bipartisan opposition, Real ID was buried in a 2005 "must-pass" military spending bill and enacted into law without public debate or congressional hearings.

The Lethal Media Silence On Kent State's Smoking Guns:
 The 1970 killings by National Guardsmen of four students during a peaceful anti-war demonstration at Kent State University have now been shown to be cold-blooded, premeditated official murder.

Channel 4 accused of falsifying data in documentary on climate change :
 The makers of a Channel 4 documentary which claimed that global warming is a swindle have been accused of fabricating data by one of the scientists who participated in the film.


The Hate Equation: Targeting Migrant Children
Juan Santos
Even the mayor of Los Angeles admits "Nobody, nobody should be victimized in a way we saw women, children and families victimized just a few days ago."
He was referring to the openly brutal assault by the LAPD on a peaceful rally of migrant families and their supporters on May 1 in LA’s MacArthur Park, where dozens of pigs in riot gear viciously and repeatedly fired volleys of tear gas and rubber bullets into a crowd of Brown families with children and babies, even before a helicopter hovered overhead announcing – in English only – that the Park must be vacated. The rally had a permit until 9 P.M. But, according to eyewitness accounts collected by the National Immigrant Solidarity Network, hundreds of cops arrived at 6, a mere hour after the event started, and, unprovoked, immediately began harassing a crowd watching Mexica/ Azteca danzantes, driving their motorcycles straight into the onlookers and sending a wedge of riot clad cops into their midst. More people gathered in the area to denounce this outrage, as waves of cops shot their way into the crowd of ten thousand nearby. The LAPD tried to blame “agitators” and “anarchists” for their attack, but this as a straight up lie.

Reporter Ernesto Arce of LA’s KPFK told Democracy Now!, “they were trying to clear the Alvarado Street for ongoing traffic, and there was a gathering, a large gathering, a circle of people that were gathered around Aztec danzantes, or pre-Columbian Mexican dancers, and they were holding a ceremony. And police on motorcade decided to forcibly break that up, and they drove their motorcycles through this crowd.”
A reporter for Telemundo said “One minute I was on live, the next minute I was running for my life. It was excessive force. They basically hit women, children, and journalists.”
Another reporter wrote, “Television news crews captured images of the police swinging their batons at an arm’s length of a frightened child who cried as he stood frozen in the chaos.
Let’s be clear. This would never happen to a gathering of white suburban families. No one would tolerate it for a moment if white babies were fired on by pigs using “less than lethal” weapons” that have been known to kill, hurling projectiles with the force of a 95 mile per hour baseball. Is a 95 mile per hour baseball “less than lethal” when hurled at an infants’s skull? If it strikes a baby’s eye? About 600 cops, including 100 from the ultra elite Metro Division, fired hundreds of rubber bullets and tear gas canisters and systematically beat Brown mothers, fathers, youth, and members of the news media with batons. Tear gas projectiles have long been known to have lethal potential. LA Times writer Ruben Salazar was killed by the LAPD with a tear gas canister during the police riot against the anti-war Chicano Moratorium as far back as 1970.
But Brown children are expendable in Los Angeles, and migrants are the new scapegoats for a nation steeped in a deep tradition of white racism.
The race equation, the hate equation, is that simple. The Conservative voice website called the families “criminals” taking to the streets, and, in an effort to justify the LAPD attack, launched a racist war of words on the children themselves ,saying
”the children of illegals, who are themselves illegal (sic), do not share their parents’ work ethic or docility. The children are often lazy, are predominantly hateful, and commit crimes at rates far above the American statistical norm. Imitating the worst qualities of American blacks, they refuse to patiently work their way up the ladder of social mobility, and despise everything that America stands for. Meanwhile, they demand that everything that law-abiding Americans have worked so hard for be taken from them and given to the second-generation illegals.”
The website called the families “Thugs hiding behind children, and backs the claim with a citation from the virulently racist website VDARE:
I wonder if the plan to Boycott America also includes not giving birth to their 'jackpot' babies, not driving while drunk, not accepting welfare payments, not using food stamps, not dealing drugs, not murdering, stealing or raping, not attending government schools, not buying homes using government financing, not clogging our court system, not sending remittances to Mexico, not breaking our laws by being here and not insisting that we speak Spanish?
The essay concludes that white “Americans” should “begin exercising their legal right (sic) to effect citizens’ arrests of illegals.
” What the Right wants is for even more intense brutality to be unleashed on the Brown community, by police and vigilantes alike. “The Americans, writes the Voice,” will need to break into march lines, make citizens’ arrests, and force policemen to choose their allegiances: To America’s laws and citizens, or to foreign criminals and their American accomplices.”
The Hate Equation is so simple and so transparent that the nation’s most brutal police chief, William Bratton, was forced to apologize- but his early efforts were apologies were to the brutalized news media, and to the cops themselves, for “what happened” to them - not to the families who were attacked.
Bratton finally admitted, “ “I'm not going to defend the indefensible. Things were done that shouldn't have been done."
But the outrage over the police riot grew so intense that LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was forced to return from a trip abroad to calm the troubled waters- and prevent any potential rebellion- by promising justice at home.
But we’ve seen the kind of “justice” the system offers. Just the week before the May Day police riot, LAPD shut down a protest by the parents of children from L.A.’s Academia Semillas del Pueblo, a charter school that teaches indigenous Mexican culture – and that has been targeted by Minuteman- style racist talk jocks at Disney-owned KABC, who have claimed the children are being taught cannibalism and trained as terrorists. The school recently filed a suit against the station, noting on- air racist attacks on the children and a bomb threat against the children that resulted from the station’s hate talk.
When the children’s parents picketed peacefully on the sidewalk outside KABC, Los Angeles police moved in to “disperse” them.
A counter-demonstration against the Minutemen in Hollywood was also viciously attacked by riot squads without provocation. See the video here .
Bratton is the king of “zero tolerance” police tactics, a cop whose policies have led to a record of brutal police murders in both New York and LA.
But street level thuggery on the part of police, Minutemen and radio hate talkers is only the beginning. The physical targeting of Brown children only mirrors the orientation of politicians and the extreme Christian Right, which is mobilizing to strip our children of the birthright citizenship provided by the 14th Amendment, creating a permanent under- caste of not –quite- human, non-white workers of indeterminate legal status, who will lack the rights afforded the children of the generations of white Christian colonizers who brought genocide and slavery with them when they came here. The Minutemen call these children “Anchor babies”; the Conservative Voice calls them “Second generation illegals,” - which is to say, permanent, ready made scapegoats.
In the meantime families are being split apart by the thousands by intensified ICE raids and deportations, even as children are being locked in immigration prisons in Texas.
Carol Lloyd writes in Salon “…we are treating children of all ages (many of whom are U.S. citizens) essentially as prisoners. Initial findings by the ACLU found that the children wore prison garb, received one hour of recreation a day and no formal education, and were kept in small cells 11 to 12 hours each day without food or toys. Other complaints involve psychological abuse, including guards telling children they would be separated from their families if they didn't stop crying. (For a great Q&A with ACLU's Lisa Graybill, click here. )”
Protesting these attacks on families was one of the major focal points of the May Day demonstrations across the US, and in Los Angeles, the answer of the capitalist state to these protests was clear and concise – another brutal, merciless - and racist - attack on Brown parents and their children.

“Empire and imperialism are words that have become a form of abuse in the postmodern world. Today, there are no colonial powers willing to take on the job, though the opportunities, perhaps even the need for colonisation is as great as it ever was in the nineteenth century.”
“What is needed then is a new kind of imperialism, one acceptable to a world of human rights and cosmopolitan values. We can already discern its outline: an imperialism which, like all imperialism, aims to bring order and organisation but which rests today on the voluntary principle.”
“The challenge to the postmodern world is to get used to the idea of double standards. Among ourselves, we operate on the basis of laws and open cooperative security. But when dealing with more old-fashioned kinds of states outside the postmodern continent of Europe, we need to revert to the rougher methods of an earlier era – force, pre-emptive attack, deception, whatever is necessary to deal with those who still live in the nineteenth century world of every state for itself. Among ourselves, we keep the law but when we are operating in the jungle, we must also use the laws of the jungle. In the prolonged period of peace in Europe, there has been a temptation to neglect our defences, both physical and psychological. This represents one of the great dangers of the postmodern state.”
  The new liberal imperialism by Robert Cooper, Observer Worldview, Sunday April 7, 2002

“It is destiny that the world be rescued from its natural wilderness and savage men.”
The Star of Empire . Albert Jeremiah Beveridge

How the Inca Leapt Canyons
Centuries before the George Washington Bridge, the Andes
were crisscrossed with suspension bridges. Now students at
M.I.T. are learning to recreate them.

Note: for a powerful story of the Irish struggle for national liberation from barbaric British occupation and the reality of "peace" on the imperialist terms, see the film "Wind in the Barley":
Sounds of Silence in Northern Ireland
A promising pact in Belfast won't bring peace overnight.

The logic of Manifest Destiny is precisely the same “logic” that underlies the current bid for a Pax Americana,
and the crusade for US global domination - the crusade to “tame” the “savage” Muslims of the world....
Juan Santos
Apocalypse No! Christian Fascism and the Nazi Legacy
An Indigenist Perspective

The Collapse of Civilisation
Derrick Jensen,00300006.htm

It’s not possible to talk deeply about the US invasion of Iraq without talking about perception, entitlement, and the end of civilisation. On September 11, 2006, George W Bush said, of the US invasion of Iraq and more broadly what he calls the “War on Terror,” that, “In truth, it is a struggle for civilisation.”
Throughout that speech, as he has done throughout the past several years, he repeatedly framed his invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq as defensive wars....

As Robert Jay Lifton, probably the world’s foremost authority on the psychology of genocide, has made clear, before you can commit any mass atrocity, you must convince others and especially yourself that what you’re doing is not an atrocity, but instead beneficial. So Hitler was not, from his own perspective, killing Jews and committing genocide; he was purifying the Aryan “race”. Americans weren’t killing American Indians and committing genocide; they were fulfilling their Manifest Destiny. EuroAmericans weren’t enslaving Africans and committing genocide; they were helping the Africans: slavery, as one 1830’s philosopher put it, “has done more to elevate a degraded race in the scale of humanity; to tame the savage; to civilise the barbarous; to soften the ferocious; to enlighten the ignorant, and to spread the blessings of Christianity among the heathen, than all the missionaries that philanthropy and religion have ever sent forth.”

Today, industrialised nations don’t exploit colonies, they “help Third World Nations develop.” So, of course, Bush can’t just come out and say he’s ordering mass torture of suspects (instead, he’s “protecting our security”) or that he invaded Iraq to steal oil: even Hitler said his invasion of Poland was defensive and that Poland attacked first....
Entitlement does strange things to perception... entitlement is key to nearly all atrocity... Europeans felt they were (and are) entitled to the land of North and South America, indeed the world. The British certainly felt they were entitled to India and Indians. Slave-owners felt and feel they’re entitled to the labour (and the lives) of their slaves. Americans act as though we’re entitled to consume the majority of the world’s resources, and to change the world’s climate. Industrialised humans act like we’re entitled to anything we want on this planet.

So long as this sense of entitlement remains invisible to those reaping its benefits — so long as this entitlement isn’t seen as such but rather is described as “economics,” or “religion,” or “tradition,” or simply “the way things are,” and most especially so long as those to be exploited don’t actively resist... hatred and direct physical force remain underground. But when that rhetoric begins to fail, force — and hatred — waits in the wings, ready to explode....But threaten their access to oil (their oil, from their perspective) no matter whose land it may be under) and watch the depleted uranium fireworks begin....

5/3/7State Attacks Immigrants; Empire:Comfort & Masquerade; Hip Hop Profanity,Misogyny and Violence; A "Ho" by Any Other Color

...colonialism or imperialism, as the slave system of the West is called, is not something confined to England or France or the United States. The interests in this country are in cahoots with the interests in France and the interests in Britain. It's one huge complex or combine, and it creates... an international power structure.... used to suppress the masses of dark-skinned people all over the world and exploit them of their natural resources."
Malcolm X

Enter the Empire: Comfort and Masquerade
Manuel Valenzuela
...Will the American people ever wake up to the destruction of their cherished rights and freedoms, knowing that one more 9/11 false flag type incident will be enough for the elite to make extinct all remaining illusions of liberty and democracy? The lust for Empire in America has blinded the elite to reality, and its people to the approaching storm. The world entire has realized the danger to the world of the unrivaled superpower, hijacked by greed and addiction to vice.

Rising superpowers are aware they are being targeted and threatened, for what was the Iraq invasion turned debacle but a preemptive move against Russia, China, India and the European Union, designed to control Iraq’s vast oil fields? What is the approaching storm in Iran but the continuation of the Empire’s power grab of natural resources, of putting in place those nations who have not fallen in line with the Empire’s vision of the future? What is Afghanistan but a beachhead into central Asia, a pipeline route to vast oil fields, a grand prize in the great chess match between nations?

5/1/7 MAYDAY! Operation Contain China; The Militarization of Science: "Mind Wars:Brain Research; DARPA


Report says terror attacks up sharply
Terrorist attacks worldwide shot up more than 25 percent last year, killing 40 percent more people than in 2005, particularly in Iraq where extremists used chemical weapons and suicide bombers to target crowds, the State Department said Monday.

U.S. Cites 91 Percent Rise In Terrorist Acts in Iraq:
The number of terrorism incidents in Iraq -- and resulting deaths, injuries and kidnappings -- skyrocketed from 2005 to 2006, according to statistics released by U.S. counterterrorism officials yesterday.

Interview with Iraqi Resistance Member
By Dahr Jamail
** Dahr Jamail's MidEast Dispatches **
Abu Mohammed: I am a representative of the Ba'ath Party and Iraq's National Resistance.

DJ: Western corporate media portrays most of the violence in Iraq as if it is the Iraqis who are killing each other with suicide car bombs in markets, etc. What is your opinion of Iraqi on Iraqi violence?

AM: As a matter of fact, since the beginning of the occupation, the Iraqi resistance has been doing their operations only against American troops and their allies. Iraqis killing each other and civilians dying is the fault of the invaders because there are too many parties and all these parties formed militias. Some of these are supported by the Americans, some by the Zionists, and some by the Iranians. But the job of the Iraqi resistance is to get rid of the American occupation and they are not killing civilians.

DJ: Then who is responsible for killing the civilians?

AM: The militias and invaders. The occupation forces and militias sponsored by the Americans, the militias backed by the Americans, Zionists, and Iranians. The goal from this is to make the resistance appear bad, as well as simply to kill Iraqis....
The Iraqi resistance is a patriotic resistance by the Iraqis. It has many groups from many sects of Islam and it's not exclusively in one area of Iraq. There are so many parts of the resistance. Some are Ba'athists, some are Islamists....

DJ: Who is funding and arming the Iraqi resistance?

AM: In Iraq there are so many weapons. The Ba'ath provided enough to fight for the next 15 years. About funding, Iraq is a rich country with many rich people, so we can get the funding from inside of Iraq.

DJ: What are the demands of the Iraqi resistance?

AM: We declare liberation and independence. We do not have demands. We have rights. We want Iraq's rights. Our demand is to give back Iraq's rights. The rights of our people include the following:

1. All parts of the Iraqi resistance should be the exclusive representatives for Iraqis.
2. An immediate withdrawal of American forces without conditions.
3. Full compensation for both Iraq and Iraqis for those who have been killed since the sanctions starting in 1991 until now. During the sanctions, 1.7 million Iraqis were killed. And according to the Lancet report, 655,000 have been killed, and by now possibly even one million.
4. The release of everyone in prisons.
5. Canceling all the current political procedures and all the 100 Bremer Orders legislation done during the Iraqi Governing Council because according to international law, it is illegal to make any political and legislative action while the country is under occupation.
6. Canceling the UN legislation that has been passed since the sanctions.
7. Putting all the traitors, those who betrayed Iraq, and those who are allies of the Americans into trials.

These are the rights of the country and if the Americans and their allies respect these rights, we can sit together. Not to negotiate these rights, but to plan the withdrawal and discuss the implementation of these rights. Also, the resistance will go on no matter how long it takes or how much it costs, until there is a withdrawal....the so-called conflict between the Shia and Sunni is not something real. It is due to political goals. Shia, Sunni and Kurds have been living in Iraq for over a thousand years together and there have not been conflicts such as these we see today. This conflict is growing because of the invaders. And when the occupiers, invaders and their allies withdraw from Iraq this conflict will end.

Report says terror attacks up sharply
Terrorist attacks worldwide shot up more than 25 percent last year, killing 40 percent more people than in 2005, particularly in Iraq where extremists used chemical weapons and suicide bombers to target crowds, the State Department said Monday.

from Arabian Sights....
Gamila Zahran
gzahran (at)
To subscribe/unsubscribe send a blank message with the appropiate title in the subject window. Feel free toforward for information and educational
purposes with Signature intact, please!

"...Advocates of the proposed boycott have been calling the Beijing Games the “Genocide Olympics"...
the digest note: Capitalist China is seen by U.S. as its major geostrategic rival to global 'full spectrum dominance': every opportunity is being used to wage propaganda war against China from all angles to reduce its growing regional power and influence against U.S. hegemonic juggernaut

the U.S., worst state terrorist country in modern history dares pretend...
China fails to improve human rights
BEIJING -- China has failed to live up to promises to improve human rights for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing despite reforms to the death penalty system and more freedoms for foreign reporters, Amnesty International said in a report Monday.

How the "Stop Darfur" Movement Aids the US Drive for Hegemony
George Wright
Over the past six months in the United States, there have been calls for International Olympic Committee member-nations to boycott the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Beijing will host the twentieth-ninth Olympic Games August 8-24, 2008. The stated objective for the proposed boycott is to coerce China to pressure the Sudanese Government of National Unity-dominated by the Islamic-oriented National Congress Party to cooperate with the deployment of United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Darfur region of Sudan.

Advocates of the proposed boycott have been calling the Beijing Games the “Genocide Olympics"
Why is the Beijing Olympic Games being linked to the Darfur Crisis?

The Darfur conflict is actually part of a complex series of regional civil wars abetted by “Big Power” intervention...
The “Save Darfur” movement has utilized the corporate-media, the internet, Congressional lobbying, and political demonstrations to make its case for United States-led military intervention. This form of intervention is referred to as “humanitarian intervention". The concept was used to rationalize the United States/NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1998, allegedly aimed to prevent Serbia form committing “genocide” of the Kosovarians. The implication of this concept is that the United States can militarily intervene for “human rights” purposes...

...the United States will continue to militarize the African continent in its effort to gain complete control over the continent’s natural resources. For example, in December 2006, the United States announced the formation of an African Central Command (AFRICOM), which will be fully operational by September 2008. The mission of United States “regional commands” are to “shape the environment, respond to the full spectrum of crises, and prepare for the future.” This reality will only heighten competition with China over access to energy resources and markets throughout Africa. Even though a boycott of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games is highly improbable a confrontation between the United States and China over global resources is likely in the future. The Beijing Olympic boycott proposal may represent the opening volley in that inevitable confrontation.
George Wright is the author of The Destruction of a Nation: United States Foreign Policy Towards Angola since 1945 (Pluto Press, 1997) and Stan Wright-Track Coach: Forty Years in the “ Good Old Boy Network” (Pacifica Sports Research Institute, 2005). He in Professor Emeritus, the Political Science Department, California State University, Chico. His research interests include: International Political Economy, African International Relations, and the Politics of International Sport.

liberal 'peace' activists as useful imperialist tools...
at “Save Darfur” demonstrations, many 'peace activists' carried signs which read:
“Out of Iraq; Into Sudan”...

Containing China

... Bush and his top aides entered the White House in early 2001 with a clear strategic objective: to resurrect the permanent-dominance doctrine spelled out in the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) for fiscal years 1994-1999, the first formal statement of U.S. strategic goals in the post-Soviet era. According to the initial official draft of this document, as leaked to the press in early 1992, the primary aim of U.S. strategy would be to bar the rise of any future competitor that might challenge America's overwhelming military superiority.

"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival ... that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union," the document stated. Accordingly, "we [must] endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."

When initially made public, this doctrine was condemned by America's allies and many domestic leaders as being unacceptably imperial as well as imperious, forcing the first President Bush to water it down; but the goal of perpetuating America's sole-superpower status has never been rejected by administration strategists. In fact, it initially became the overarching principle for U.S. military policy when the younger Bush assumed the presidency in 2001.

When first enunciated in 1992, the permanent-dominancy doctrine was non-specific as to the identity of the future challengers whose rise was to be prevented through coercive action. At that time, U.S. strategists worried about a medley of potential rivals, including Russia, Germany, India, Japan and China; any of these, it was thought, might emerge in the decades to come as would-be superpowers, and so all would have to be deterred from moving in that direction. By the time the second Bush administration came into office, however, the pool of potential rivals had been narrowed in elite thinking to just one: the People's Republic of China. Only China, it was claimed, possessed the economic and military capacity to challenge the United States as an aspiring superpower; and so perpetuating U.S. global predominance meant containing Chinese power.

The imperative of containing China was first spelled out in a systematic way by Condoleezza Rice while she served as a foreign policy advisor to then Gov. George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign. In a much-cited article in the journal Foreign Affairs, she suggested that the PRC, as an ambitious rising power, would inevitably challenge vital U.S. interests. "China is a great power with unresolved vital interests, particularly concerning Taiwan," she wrote. "China also resents the role of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region."

For these reasons, she stated, "China is not a 'status quo' power but one that would like to alter Asia's balance of power in its own favor. That alone makes it a strategic competitor, not the 'strategic partner' the Clinton administration once called it." It was essential, she argued, to adopt a strategy that would prevent China's rise as regional power. In particular, "the United States must deepen its cooperation with Japan and South Korea and maintain its commitment to a robust military presence in the region." Washington should also "pay closer attention to India's role in the regional balance" and bring that country into an anti-Chinese alliance system.

... this article developed the allow-no-competitors doctrine of the 1992 DPG into the strategy now being implemented by the Bush administration in the Pacific and South Asia. Many of the specific policies advocated in her piece, from strengthened ties with Japan to making overtures to India, are being carried out today.

In the spring and summer of 2001, however, the most significant effect of this strategic focus was to distract Rice and other senior administration officials from the growing threat posed by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida [note-liz: they were not "distracted" by 911, this was their engineered pretext to lauch the bogus 'war on terrorism' as the M.O. for accomplishing the necessary steps to achieve their primary objective, global domination, as spelled out in documents from as early as the 1990's and included again in recent digest]. During her first months in office as the president's senior advisor for national security affairs, Rice devoted herself to implementing the plan she had spelled out in Foreign Affairs. By all accounts, her top priorities in that early period were dissolving the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia and linking Japan, South Korea and Taiwan into a joint missile defense system, which, it was hoped, would ultimately evolve into a Pentagon-anchored anti-Chinese alliance....

Much influenced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, whose 1997 book, "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Geostrategic Imperatives," first highlighted the critical importance of Central Asia, these strategists sought to counter Chinese inroads. Although Brzezinski himself has largely been excluded from elite Republican circles because of his association with the much despised Carter administration, his call for a coordinated U.S. drive to dominate both the eastern and western rimlands of China has been embraced by senior administration strategists.

In this way, Washington's concern over growing Chinese influence in Southeast Asia has come to be intertwined with the U.S. drive for hegemony in the Persian Gulf and Central Asia. This has given China policy an even more elevated significance in Washington -- and helps explain its return with a passion despite the seemingly all-consuming preoccupations of the war in Iraq.

Whatever the exact balance of factors, the Bush administration is now clearly engaged in a coordinated, systematic effort to contain Chinese power and influence in Asia. This effort appears to have three broad objectives: to convert existing relations with Japan, Australia and South Korea into a robust, integrated anti-Chinese alliance system; to bring other nations, especially India, into this system; and to expand U.S. military capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region.

Since the administration's campaign to bolster ties with Japan commenced a year ago, the two countries have been meeting continuously to devise protocols for the implementation of their 2005 strategic agreement. In October, Washington and Tokyo released the Alliance Transformation and Realignment Report, which is to guide the further integration of U.S. and Japanese forces in the Pacific and the simultaneous restructuring of the U.S. basing system in Japan. (Some of these bases, especially those on Okinawa, have become a source of friction in U.S.-Japanese relations and so the Pentagon is now considering ways to downsize the most objectionable installations.) Japanese and American officers are also engaged in a joint "interoperability" study, aimed at smoothing the "interface" between U.S. and Japanese combat and communications systems. "Close collaboration is also ongoing for cooperative missile defense," reports Adm. William J. Fallon, commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM).

Steps have also been taken in this ongoing campaign to weld South Korea and Australia more tightly to the U.S.-Japanese alliance system. South Korea has long been reluctant to work closely with Japan because of that country's brutal occupation of the Korean peninsula from 1910 to 1945 and lingering fears of Japanese militarism; now, however, the Bush administration is promoting what it calls "trilateral military cooperation" between Seoul, Tokyo and Washington. As indicated by Fallon, this initiative has an explicitly anti-Chinese dimension. America's ties with South Korea must adapt to "the changing security environment" represented by "China's military modernization," Fallon told the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 7. By cooperating with the United States and Japan, he continued, South Korea will move from an overwhelming focus on North Korea to "a more regional view of security and stability."

Bringing Australia into this emerging anti-Chinese network has been a major priority of Rice, who spent several days there in mid-March. Although designed in part to bolster U.S.-Australian ties (largely neglected by Washington over the past few years), the main purpose of her visit was to host a meeting of top officials from Australia, the United States and Japan to develop a common strategy for curbing China's rising influence in Asia. No formal results were announced, but Steven Weisman of the New York Times reported on March 19 that Rice convened the meeting "to deepen a three-way regional alliance aimed in part at balancing the spreading presence of China."

An even bigger prize, in Washington's view, would be the integration of India into this emerging alliance system, a possibility first suggested in Rice's Foreign Affairs article. Such a move was long frustrated by congressional objections to India's nuclear weapons program and its refusal to sign on to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Under U.S. law, nations like India that refuse to cooperate in nonproliferation measures can be excluded from various forms of aid and cooperation. To overcome this problem, President Bush met with Indian officials in New Delhi in March and negotiated a nuclear accord that will open India's civilian reactors to International Atomic Energy Agency inspection, thus providing a thin gloss of nonproliferation cooperation to India's robust nuclear weapons program. If Congress approves Bush's plan, the United States will be free to provide nuclear assistance to India and, in the process, significantly expand already growing military-to-military ties.

In signing the nuclear pact with India, Bush did not allude to the administration's anti-Chinese agenda, saying only that it would lay the foundation for a "durable defense relationship." But few have been fooled by this vague characterization. According to a recent article by Weisman in the New York Times, most U.S. lawmakers view the nuclear accord as an expression of the administration's desire to convert India into "a counterweight to China."

Accompanying all these diplomatic initiatives has been a vigorous, if largely unheralded, effort by the Department of Defense (DoD) to bolster U.S. military capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region.

The broad sweep of American strategy was first spelled out in the Pentagon's most recent policy assessment, the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), released on Feb. 5. In discussing long-term threats to U.S. security, the QDR begins with a reaffirmation of the overarching precept first articulated in the DPG of 1992: that the United States will not allow the rise of a competing superpower. This country "will attempt to dissuade any military competitor from developing disruptive or other capabilities that could enable regional hegemony or hostile action against the United States," the document states. It then identifies China as the most likely and dangerous competitor of this sort. "Of the major and emerging powers, China has the greatest potential to compete militarily with the United States and field disruptive military technologies that could over time offset traditional U.S. military advantages" -- then adding the kicker, "absent U.S. counter strategies."

According to the Pentagon, the task of countering future Chinese military capabilities largely entails the development, and then procurement, of major weapons systems that would ensure U.S. success in any full-scale military confrontation. "The United States will develop capabilities that would present any adversary with complex and multidimensional challenges and complicate its offensive planning efforts," the QDR explains. These include the steady enhancement of such "enduring U.S. advantages" as "long-range strike, stealth, operational maneuver and sustainment of air, sea, and ground forces at strategic distances, air dominance, and undersea warfare."

Preparing for war with China, in other words, is to be the future cash cow for the giant U.S. weapons-making corporations in the military-industrial complex. It will, for instance, be the primary justification for the acquisition of costly new weapons systems such as the F-22A Raptor air-superiority fighter, the multiservice Joint Strike Fighter, the DDX destroyer, the Virginia-class nuclear attack submarine and a new, intercontinental-penetrating bomber -- weapons that would just have utility in an all-out encounter with another great-power adversary of a sort that only China might someday become.

In addition to these weapons programs, the QDR also calls for a stiffening of present U.S. combat forces in Asia and the Pacific, with a particular emphasis on the Navy (the arm of the military least utilized in the ongoing occupation of and war in Iraq). "The fleet will have greater presence in the Pacific Ocean," the document notes. To achieve this, "the Navy plans to adjust its force posture and basing to provide at least six operationally available and sustainable [aircraft] carriers and 60% of its submarines in the Pacific to support engagement, presence and deterrence." Since each of these carriers is, in fact, but the core of a large array of support ships and protective aircraft, this move is sure to entail a truly vast buildup of U.S. naval capabilities in the western Pacific and will certainly necessitate a substantial expansion of the American basing complex in the region -- a requirement that is already receiving close attention from Fallon and his staff at PACOM. To assess the operational demands of this buildup, moreover, this summer the U.S. Navy will conduct its most extensive military maneuvers in the western Pacific since the end of the Vietnam War, with four aircraft carrier battle groups and many support ships expected to participate.

Add all of this together, and the resulting strategy cannot be viewed as anything but a systematic campaign of containment. No high administration official may say this in so many words, but it is impossible to interpret the recent moves of Rice and Rumsfeld in any other manner. From Beijing's perspective, the reality must be unmistakable: a steady buildup of American military power along China's eastern, southern and western boundaries.[...]

"Secret" Air Base for Iraq War started prior 9-11

With a small ceremony on April 26, 2003, control of Prince Sultan Air Base was handed back to the government of Saudi Arabia. Since the mid-nineties it had been the premier US air base in the region and the nerve center for all air force operations in the Gulf. As the home of the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC), the base was the primary command and control facility responsible for orchestrating the air campaigns for both Operation Southern Watch in Iraq and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
The timing of the closing of PSAB seemed odd, coming just weeks after the official start of military actions in Iraq. It should have, at the very least, caused unwanted logistical problems for the Pentagon and regional commanders, but it didn't. A contingency plan had long been in the works, not only for Prince Sultan Air Base, but also for the entire map of the Middle East, including Iraq.

Long before the US pullout, a new home for the operations had secretly been built in the deserts of Qatar. What had been in October 2001 "nothing more than a runway and a field of sand covered by two-dozen tents and a few warehouses", the Al Udeid Air Base was transformed in a few short months into one of the largest air bases in the world.
Published reports and official DOD statements claimed that the amazing transformation was the result of the heroic response of US servicemen to the tragedy of 9-11. A determined military had beaten indeterminate odds to transform a barren wasteland into a state of the art military base in order to "take the war to the terrorists".

The true story of the building of Al-Udeid is actually quite different. The planning for the mammoth base had in fact taken place long before Sept. 11, and actual work on the base began as early as the spring of 2001. The building of Al Udeid turns out not to be a "miracle in the desert" in response to a heinous attack, as touted by the military, but rather a required step on the path to regime change in Iraq.

It has long been accepted knowledge that the Bush Administration was working feverishly towards regime change in Iraq during the 18-month period between 9-11 and the official start of the war in March of 2003. The Downing St Minutes confirmed that the Administration was set on a path to war at least as early as mid-summer of 2002. The accounts of Paul O'Neil and Richard Clarke verified that Iraq was a front burner issue for the Administration from the very first day, and only intensified after the attacks. Yet finding hard evidence to prove that planning for the war in Iraq was taking place prior to 9-11 has been hard to find. A look at the building of Al Udied can provide that evidence. [...]

FBI outsourced dirty work to secret Ethiopian prisons:
While we have been awash in news stories about the firing of U.S. attorneys, Don Imus and the Virginia Tech horror, how many Americans know that the FBI and the CIA have been interrogating suspected terrorists in secret prisons in Ethiopia?

Heroin is "Good for Your Health": Occupation Forces support Afghan Narcotics Trade
Multibillion dollar earnings for organized crime and Western financial Institutions
By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

The occupation forces in Afghanistan are supporting the drug trade, which
brings between 120 and 194 billion dollars of revenues to organized crime,
intelligence agencies and Western financial institutions.

The proceeds of this lucrative multibllion dollar contraband are deposited
in Western banks. Almost the totality of revenues accrue to corporate
interests and criminal syndicates outside Afghanistan.

The Golden Crescent drug trade, launched by the CIA in the early 1980s,
continues to be protected by US intelligence, in liason with NATO occupation
forces and the British military. In recent developments, British occupation
forces have promoted opium cultivation through paid radio advertisements.

"A radio message broadcast across the province assured local farmers that
the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) would not
interfere with poppy fields currently being harvested.

"Respected people of Helmand. The soldiers of ISAF and ANA do not destroy
poppy fields," it said. "They know that many people of Afghanistan have no
choice but to grow poppy. ISAF and the ANA do not want to stop people from
earning their livelihoods." ( Quoted in The Guardian, 27 April 2007)

While the controversial opium ads have been casually dismissed as an
unfortunate mistake, there are indications that the opium economy is being
promoted at the political level (including the British government of Tony

The Senlis Council, an international think tank specialising in security and
policy issues is proposing the development of licit opium exports in
Afghanistan, with a view to promoting the production of pharmaceutical
pain-killers, such as morphine and codeine. According to the Senlis Council,
"the poppies are needed and, if properly regulated, could provide a legal
source of income to impoverished Afghan farmers while, at the same time,
depriving the drug lords and the Taliban of much of their income." (John
Polanyi, Globe and Mail, 23 September 2006)

The Senlis Council offers an alternative where "regulated poppy production
in Afghanistan" could be developed to produce needed painkillers. The Senlis
statement, however, fails to address the existing structure of licit opium
exports, which is characterised by oversupply .

The Senlis' campaign is part of the propaganda campaign. It has contributed
to providing a false legitimacy to Afghanistan's opium economy. (See details
of Senlis Project), which ultimately serves powerful vested interests.

How much opium acreage is required to supply the pharmaceutical industry?
According to the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), which has a
mandate to exame issues pertaining to the supply of and demand for opiates
used for medical purposes, "the supply of such opiates has for years been at
levels well in excess of global demand".(Asian Times, February 2006) The
INCB has recommended reducing the production of opiates due to oversupply.

At present, India is the largest exporter of licit opium, supplying
approximately 50 percent of licit sales to pharmaceutical companies involved
in the production of pain-killing drugs. Turkey is also a major producer of
licit opium.
India's opium latex "is sold to licensed pharmaceutical and/or chemical
manufacturing firms such as Mallinckrodt and Johnson & Johnson, under rules
established by the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs and the International
Narcotics Control Board, which require an extensive paper trail." (Opium in
The area allocated to licit State controlled opium cultivation in India is
of the order of a modest 11,000 hectares, suggesting that the entire demand
of the global pharmaceutical industry requires approximately 22,000 hectares
of land allocated to poppy production. Opium for pharmaceutical use is not
in short supply. The demand of the pharmaceutical industry is already met.

Soaring Afghan Opium Production

The United Nations has announced that opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan
has soared. There was a 59% increase in areas under opium cultivation in
2006. Production of opium is estimated to have increased by 49% in relation
to 2005.
The Western media in chorus blame the Taliban and the warlords. Western
officials are said to believe that "the trade is controlled by 25 smugglers
including three government ministers." (Guardian, op. cit).

Yet in a bitter irony, US military presence has served to restore rather
than eradicate the drug trade. Opium production has increased 33 fold from
185 tons in 2001 under the Taliban to 6100 tons in 2006. Cultivated areas
have increased 21 fold since the 2001 US-led invasion.

What the media reports fail to acknowledge is that the Taliban government
was instrumental in 2000-2001 in implementing a successful drug eradication
program, with the support and collaboration of the UN.
Implemented in 2000-2001, the Taliban's drug eradication program led to a 94
percent decline in opium cultivation. In 2001, according to UN figures,
opium production had fallen to 185 tons. Immediately following the October
2001 US led invasion, production increased dramatically, regaining its
historical levels.

The Vienna based UN Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that the 2006
harvest will be of the order of 6,100 tonnes, 33 times its production levels
in 2001 under the Taliban government (3200 % increase in 5 years).

Cultivation in 2006 reached a record 165,000 hectares compared with 104,000
in 2005 and 7,606 in 2001 under the Taliban

Multibillion dollar trade...

(See also our detailed estimates for 2003 in The Spoils of War:
Afghanistan's Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade, by Michel Chossudovsky, The
UNODC estimates the average retail price of heroin for 2004 to be of the
order of $157 per gram, based on the average purity ratio).

Narcotics: Second to Oil and the Arms Trade

The foregoing estimates are consistent with the UN's assessment concerning
the size and magnitude of the global drug trade.

The Afghan trade in opiates (92 percent of total World production of
opiates) constitutes a large share of the worldwide annual turnover of
narcotics, which was estimated by the United Nations to be of the order of
$400-500 billion.

(Douglas Keh, Drug Money in a Changing World, Technical document No. 4,
1998, Vienna UNDCP, p. 4. See also United Nations Drug Control Program,
Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 1999, E/INCB/1999/1
United Nations, Vienna 1999, p. 49-51, and Richard Lapper, UN Fears Growth
of Heroin Trade, Financial Times, 24 February 2000).

Based on 2003 figures, drug trafficking constitutes "the third biggest
global commodity in cash terms after oil and the arms trade." (The
Independent, 29 February 2004).

Afghanistan and Colombia (together with Bolivia and Peru) consitute the
largest drug producing economies in the world, which feed a flourishing
criminal economy. These countries are heavily militarized. The drug trade is
protected. Amply documented the CIA has played a central role in the
development of both the Latin American and Asian drug triangles.

The IMF estimated global money laundering to be between 590 billion and 1.5
trillion dollars a year, representing 2-5 percent of global GDP. (Asian
Banker, 15 August 2003).

A large share of global money laundering as estimated by the IMF is linked
to the trade in narcotics, one third of which is tied to the Golden Crescent
opium triangle.

US Seeks To Bar Anti-Castro Terrorist From Speaking of CIA Ties
The US government is seeking to bar former CIA agent Luis Posada Carriles, who is wanted in Venezuela and Cuba for the downing of an airliner, from talking about his links with the agency when he goes on trial in May.


The militarization of neuroscience
By Hugh Gusterson | 10 April 2007
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

... The science in question now is not physics, but neuroscience, and the question is whether we can control its militarization.

According to Jonathan Moreno's fascinating and frightening new book, Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense (Dana Press 2006),
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has been funding research in the following areas:

*Mind-machine interfaces ("neural prosthetics") that will enable pilots and soldiers to control high-tech weapons by thought alone.
*"Living robots" whose movements could be controlled via brain implants. This technology has already been tested successfully on "roborats" and could lead to animals remotely directed for mine clearance, or even to remotely controlled soldiers.
*"Cognitive feedback helmets" that allow remote monitoring of soldiers' mental state.
*MRI technologies ("brain fingerprinting") for use in interrogation or airport screening for terrorists. Quite apart from questions about their error rate, such technologies would raise the issue of whether involuntary brain scans violate the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
*Pulse weapons or other neurodisruptors that play havoc with enemy soldiers' thought processes.
*"Neuroweapons" that use biological agents to excite the release of neurotoxins. (The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention bans the stockpiling of such weapons for offensive purposes, but not "defensive" research into their mechanisms of action.)
*New drugs that would enable soldiers to go without sleep for days, to excise traumatic memories, to suppress fear, or to repress psychological inhibitions against killing.

Moreno's book is important since there has been little discussion about the ethical implications of such research, and the science is at an early enough stage that it might yet be redirected in response to public discussion.

If left on autopilot, however, it's not hard to see where all of this will lead. During the Cold War, misplaced fears of a missile gap and a mind control gap excited an overbuilding of nuclear weapons and unethical LSD experiments on involuntary human subjects. Similarly, we can anticipate future fears of a "neuroweapons" gap, and these fears will justify a headlong rush into research (quite likely to involve unethical human experiments) that will only stimulate our enemies to follow suit.

The military and scientific leaders chartering neuroweapons research will argue that the United States is a uniquely noble country that can be trusted with such technologies, while other countries (except for a few allies) cannot. They will also argue that these technologies will save lives and that U.S. ingenuity will enable the United States to dominate other countries in a neuroweapons race. When it is too late to turn back the clock, they will profess amazement that other countries caught up so quickly and that an initiative intended to ensure American dominance instead led to a world where everyone is threatened by chemicalized soldiers and roboterrorists straight out of Blade Runner.

Meanwhile, individual scientists will tell themselves that, if they don't do the research, someone else will. Research funding will be sufficiently dominated by military grant makers that it will cause some scientists to choose between accepting military funding or giving up their chosen field of research. And the very real dual-use potential of these new technologies (the same brain implant can create a robosoldier or rehabilitate a Parkinson's disease sufferer) will allow scientists to tell themselves that they are "really" working on health technologies to improve the human lot, and the funding just happens to come from the Pentagon. [...]

Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense [SIC]

Ready or Not: Q&A with Mind Wars author Jonathan Moreno

Jonathan D. Moreno, Ph.D., is the David and Lyn Silfen University Professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He is an elected member of the Institute of Medicine, an advisor to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress. He has been a senior staff member for two presidential ethics commissions and is past president of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. He has written numerous books including Is There an Ethicist in the House?: On the Cutting Edge of Bioethics (Indiana University Press, 2005), and Undue Risk: Secret State Experiments on Humans (Routledge, 2000).
Ready or Not
Q&A with "Mind Wars" Author [liberal scientist] Jonathan Moreno

By Nicky Penttila
October 2006
In his latest book, “Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense,” bioethicist Jonathan Moreno describes the range of brain-related research U.S. military agencies such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) are paying for. From drugs that could improve soldiers’ abilities and endurance (and others that could bewilder enemies) to devices controlled by or controlling people’s minds, these possible uses of cutting-edge neuroscience will change how wars are fought. As biologists are doing with bio-weaponry and physicists did with nuclear weaponry, Moreno argues, it’s time for neurobiologists -- and the rest of us -- to get a grip on the ethical and social issues of waging “mind wars” and decide how far we want this battle-science to go. ...

In the book, there’s some careful writing about talking to people and the source of your material. Were people unwilling to talk to you?

I really consider myself a member of the establishment, and I think by any fair measure I am, but I did find that -- unlike physicists whom I’ve spoken with about the social issues in nuclear physics, or these days, increasingly, biologists who worry about biosecurity -- people who work in neuroscience, at least the people that I spoke to, were very reluctant to talk for the record. And I think there are a number of reasons for that.

Part of it is because scientists generally don’t want to say something stupid and jeopardize a funding source. Part of it also is that some of them are working in “secured circumstances” -- they’re not just working for DARPA, which is [ note: it's the Pentagon research agency--see below] not a spy agency, but they’re working for spy agencies and they didn’t want to stumble and say the wrong thing. Part of it also is that, in general, scientists think they’re the smartest guys in the room, and even believe that -- and I pretty much got this reaction from a couple of people -- “Well, this agency, I don’t know what their goal is but they’re funding important research that’s going to help people and I don’t think I’m doing anything that’s going to be a problem downstream.”...

Most of the work you describe in the book is funded by DARPA? How much cutting-edge neuroscience applications do you think you’re missing?

You know, we don’t know what the denominator is. The CIA’s budget is black [secret]. But my gut tells me that DARPA is working on the most interesting science, and that the other agencies are more interested in short-term applications of the science....there really is no standard in the academy about classified research....Some places allow classified research, but they’ll create off-campus facilities for it, on the theory that that way it doesn’t interfere with the open academic discourse. And some places don’t seem to have any policies at all.
Nicky Penttila is a senior writer and editor for Dana Press. She may be reached at npenttila (at)

Excerpts from the book:

On the Strategic Advantages of Enhancing the Brain and Nervous System

In a sense, all warfare ultimately happens between our ears. If opponents believe they have been defeated, then that becomes the reality, hence the military’s investment in psychological operations, such as propaganda leaflets and disinformation, despite their uncertain payoffs. But if targeted interventions are made possible by the greatly enhanced knowledge of the brain and nervous system now being generated at a feverish pace in our top neuroscience labs, complemented by ingenious new engineering and pharmacologic products, the battle of the brain will have truly begun.

The powers that can claim the advantage and establish a ‘neurotechnology gap’ between themselves and their adversaries will establish both tactical and strategic advantages that can render them dominant in the twenty-first century.

On the Conflict Between Objective Scientific Research, Government Aims, and Highly Classified Conditions

The relationship between science and the national security state in the context of a war on terror is still unfolding. Unlike the post-World War II era, when scientists who had eagerly joined the war effort saw military-related funding as a continuation of their previous employment, today significant distance lies between much of the scientific establishment and defense organizations. First, science has many other funding sources, including venture capital, that were not important players in the 1950s. Second, cultural differences between scientists and military officials bring with them a degree of mutual skepticism, if not outright suspicion, that was not the case fifty years ago, before Vietnam and Watergate. Third, unlike the experience of physics with the atomic and hydrogen bomb projects, the life sciences have not had much experience with operating under highly classified conditions. Many important researchers and their institutions chafe under security constraints, including not only sequestering their data but also tightening rules on the handling of pathogens in their labs and limiting visas for graduate students from abroad.

Robots as Soldiers: Science Fiction or the Reality of the Future?

Here’s a science fiction scenario: an army of robots capable of movement nearly as precise as that of a human soldier, each controlled by an individual hundreds or even thousands of miles away. These automata could undertake actions that would be foolhardy for human beings but worth the tactical risk for machines; because they are controlled by people, they would have the benefit of creativity that might limit even the most advanced android. But the old-fashioned remote control scenario would have the operator pushing buttons or moving levers while seeing on a monitor what the robot is seeing, a method that would be far too clumsy for the instantaneous reactions often required in combat. What is wanted is a technology that would allow the robot to respond as soon as the distant operator does. . . . Ultimately, decades from now, human abilities could be augmented so that combat soldiers could have vastly more powerful and faster robotic arms and legs, and pilots could control vehicles through intentional thought alone. Warfighters, intelligence offers, medics, and rescuers could wirelessly manage legions of robots through direct communication between the human brains and on-board artificial brains.

On Creating the Perfect Soldier: The 21st-century Warfighter

“The human being is the oldest instrument of warfare and also its weakest link. Although astonishing and terrifying “improvements” have been made in the devices of conflict over the millennia, soldiers are still basically the same. They must eat, sleep, detect danger, discern friend from foe, heal when wounded, and so forth. The first state (or nonstate actor) able to build better soldiers using medical enhancement technologies will have taken an enormous leap in the arms race. The concept of “an army of one” and the recent shift from soldier to “warfighter” in the military lexicon . . . are tied into the goal of building a more self-sufficient individual warrior. However better soldiers are built – and there’s good reason to believe that the warfighter of the late twenty-first century will be enhanced – the fighter’s brain will have been the object of great interest...Should we build better soldiers through ‘artificial’ enhancements? Is there even a valid distinction to be drawn between artificial and ‘natural’ enhancements such as exercise and discipline? Aren’t we just trying to gain whatever advantages we can as nations have always tried to do, or are these techniques cheating nature? Can we manage the consequences, or are the risks for the individual and for our society too great?

Forgive and Forget?: On Increasing the Brain’s Capacity to Remember

The introduction of a new memory storage system and bypassing our evolutionarily developed hippocampus raise the question whether our usual ability to slough off unneeded memories will be threatened, resulting in a cacophony of useless data that could drive one to distraction. Forgetting is often annoying but mostly adaptive, even a great relief. In the film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, ex-lovers undergo a high-tech brain-erasing procedure to forget about the pain of their breakup. In a literally touching moment in Star Trek, Mr. Spock engages in an (unconsented) Vulcan mind-meld with Captain Kirk to help him forget a tragic love affair. Less romantically, undercover agents would benefit from the ability to lose their memories upon capture. Neuropsychologists have already found that deliberate memory loss among victims of parental abuse is both a demonstrable phenomenon (they are not “lying” when they say they don’t recall) and a very effective defense mechanism. As the philosopher Bernard Williams has put it, “Forgetting is the most beneficial process we possess.”

On Disarming Opponents Through Disruption of the Human Brain

Proponents of “nonlethal” weapons (NLWs) claim that they will obviate the need to kill or maim. These weapons are actively being sought by all branches of the U.S. military and come in a dazzling variety of forms: calmatives or “incapacitants” – chemicals that put people to sleep; acoustic and light-pulsing devices that disrupt cognitive and neural processes; odors so disgusting they sicken; sudden colored fog that creates panic; optical equipment that causes temporary blindness; and mechanisms that stimulate nerve endings as though they are fire, among dozens of others. A striking fact about this list is that all are related to the human brain and nervous system.... Growing concerns about terrorism have fed interest in NLWs. Contemporary arms and stockpiles have typically been designed for fighting between nation-states. The use of conventional nonnuclear and nuclear weapons in the places terrorists like to operate would result in high levels of noncombatant casualties that may be politically as well as morally unacceptable.

more on DARPA [major creator of the internet for the military and now involved in destroying it to construct "secure"new internet
[see 4/23 issue of the digest]
Frankensteins in the Pentagon : DARPA's Creepy Bioengineering Program
By Cheryl Seal
25 August 2003
DARPA Bioengineering Program Seeks to Turn Soldiers Into Cyborgs

Not long ago, the public was stunned by the practical and moral idiocy of the Pentagon researcher (and unprosecuted war criminal) John Poindexter, who proposed a 'football pool' scheme for predicting terrorist attacks. We all laughed at such insanity and were relieved to see the scheme speedily deep-sixed. However, this bit of lunacy was just the lightest ice in the tip of the very large, very dark iceberg that the Pentagon's research program, better known as DARPA, has become.

Just a few weeks before the bizarro world 'terrorism gambling' project was exposed, a DARPA (which stands for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency)-sponsored conference was held in Washington, DC, that showcased the latest love child of the Bush Pentagon: military bioengineering. The euphemisms being used by the Pentagon to disguise the true nature of this research are being spread as thick as bondo and cheap paint at a used car lot. For example, the title of the conference was: 'Harvesting Biology for Defense Technology,' while the subheading of the section on human 'bioengineering' was entitled, rather ominously, in light of the military's history, 'Enhancing Human Performance.'

So how does the Bush DARPA seek to 'enhance' human performance? In a kinder, gentler administration, the solution would be better training, better food, better pay, more leave time, and greater use of stress-reducing duty rotations. But this is not a kinder, gentler -or even rational- administration. Bush and Company plan to enhance soldier performance by squeezing the most that can be humanly -and not so humanly- squeezed from troops without having to resort to anything as primitive as decent pay. Their motto: Get the most human output for the least human input: After all, it's the corporate way!

Here are some examples of DARPA 'Human-enhancing' schemes:

The 'Brain Interface Program' is the most lavishly funded of nearly all the DARPA bioengineering efforts (the project has been given $24 million for the next two years). It is aimed at developing ways to 'integrate' soldiers into machines -literally- by wiring them (remotely or directly) to their planes, tanks, or computers. An implantable brain chip is now under development in this sick program, which has already proudly demonstrated how rats can be turned into living robots through the manipulation of stimulus-response signals in the brain via electrodes. The Pentagon hopes to use these pathetic, 'modified' creatures (you should see the photos -makes you want to join People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals!) in mine clearance.

"The use of animals in warfare is ugly enough without the further insult to their dignity involved in turning them into involuntary cyborgs," writes James Meek in the Guardian. "And a military command committed to the use of creatures which are part-animal, part-machine, is going to be that bit less reluctant to interfere in its soldiers in similar ways."

But, as the conference heading would have you believe, DARPA isn't interfering -it is merely 'enhancing.' After all, as an official at DARPA recently observed, "The human is becoming the weakest link in defense systems."

Enhancement efforts at the Brain Interface Program are now progressing nicely. The chief Frankenstein of the project, one Alan S. Rudolph, now wants to be able to transmit images or sound directly into the brains of rats -and of course, later, soldiers...or prisoners of war (just imagine the torture potential here!).

The 'Metabolic Dominance and Engineered Tissue' program is aimed at being able to artificially pump up soldier endurance and muscle strength.

The 'Persistence in Combat' program is a bizarre self-treatment scheme which would include pain-reducing and blood-stopping devices and techniques soldiers would apply to their own wounds -even moderately severe ones- thereby bypassing the need for a medic and enabling a soldier to keep fighting, despite serious wounds! Yep, just keep on runnin' through the jungle on that broken leg or with that bullet in the gut! Once that pain-obliterating electrode in your brain is activated, you won't feel a thing!

The 'Continuous Assisted Perfomance' program hopes to find biotechnological ways (implants, metabolic manipulation, etc) to make it possible to push exhausted soldiers on without loss of performance for up to seven days without sleep.

The above technologies are referred to by DARPA under the subheading of 'neuroengineering.' Neuroengineering was played around with back in the early 1990s (no doubt given the initial green light by Bush I), but became a rather minor and exotic 'side line' of research in the Clinton years. Since Bush II came on the scene, however, neuroengineering programs have been shoved into a position of major importance.

The wording of the descriptions of all the 'human enhancement' programs is extremely deceptive -even deliberately misleading. For example, having read the Brain Interface Program background in Nature magazine, I know for a fact that 'noninvasive' technologies (contrary to what is claimed in the description) are not currently the project priority and are considered at best a remote goal. What is in the works right now is a microprocessing chip that can be implanted beneath the skull and remotely manipulated. In a June 19 Nature article, Rudolph estimated that a usable chip that could be field-tested in rats is about two years away, while noninvasive technologies (whatever that means -how can it not be when you are manipulating someone's neurons?) is only an aspired-to ideal.

The researchers also try to hide behind grandiose-sounding claims of working to the greater good as a way to fool the public, and possibly themselves, into believing that these projects really do have some benign reasons for being, if only to promote the cause of 'science.' That is why nearly every program in the conference guide comes with a 'suggested benign use' (my own flippant phrase). After all, whines Rudolph, today's soldier's brain chip may be tomorrow's brain damage therapy. We should be impressed? After all, the same argument was used by Hitler's researchers to justify their heartless 'medical' experiments on Jews, gypsies, retarded children, enemy soldiers, prisoners, et al.). What is truly chilling is that these technologies, in essence, are seeking to turn our soldiers into human fighting machines, sacrificing their autonomy and, very likely, long-term quality of life for short term military savings -savings that will go right into the pockets of the government's beloved defense contractors. There is no way these technologies can be benign -the whole concept is totally against what America stands for and against any other reasonable code of ethics, for that matter. In addition, with the way they are being rushed through the research gamut,there is no way they can be proven safe, especially long-term. I can just imagine the residual tissue damage, cancers, post-traumatic stress disorders, etc, that DARPA-style 'human enhancement' will inflict on our guys and gals in uniform. Remember Agent Orange? Remember aboveground nuke testing? Remember submarine sailors being gassed as a DARPA 'experiment,' or those soldiers, most of them black or Hispanic, fed LSD? As it is, more than half of all Gulf War vets have now filed for disability because of the devastating effects of Gulf War Syndrome.

The only variable that has been conclusively linked to the syndrome is the ingestion by US Gulf War soldiers (and some British troops) of a 'cocktail' of anti-bacterial inoculations (including the anthrax vaccine) and an anti-nerve gas agent. A clear pattern was shown: Soldiers who did not receive the 'cocktail' (including all French soldiers) did not later report Gulf War syndrome symptoms, even if exposed to depleted uranium (another suspected cause). This finding came out in European journals way back in the mid-1990s. French commanders and many British commanders seriously questioned the wisdom of the cocktail at the time. But not the Pentagon! After all, the cocktail was 'human enhancing.' So now, will beneath-the-skull implants for soldiers become as mandatory as anthrax vaccines? (for my theory of Gulf War syndrome, read the paragraph after this article).

With the insane Bush DARPA plunging forward with its Darth Vader research, the possibilities for horrific misuse and long-term consequences are staggering. For example, one of the DARPA Frankensteins, one Ted Berger of the University of Southern California, envisions pilots who would be able to pilot their planes by thought alone, thanks to brain implants. This concept, like so much military research, fails to consider realistic variables. To name just a few of these: what about the impact of fear, exhaustion, pain, or dizziness on effective neural function? Whoops -didn't mean to crash into that busy highway! Or how about ruthless generals turning their pilots into 'instant Kamikazes' as a shortcut to winning a battle? Or, for that matter, who's to stop the enemy or a lone terrorist who has gained access to the technology from finding a way to repeat 9/11 scenarios using our own pilots or soldiers? At the very least, there can be no benign consequence to pushing men and women beyond their 'unassisted' endurance. The risk of brain damage, brain tumors, cancers, catastrophic immune responses similar to host-graft disease, heart attacks (from electronic signals triggering arrhythmias), and other assaults on the body seem the most imminent dangers. But who knows what unforeseen consequences may emerge? For example, the children conceived during and right after the first above-ground nuclear tests are just now approaching 60 - who knows what sort of long smoldering cancers may yet erupt into 'epidemics.' ...

Resources on DARPA's Neuroengineering Project

Click here for information on the DARPA-sponsored convention.

Click here for James Meek's Roborat Ethics article.

Click here for tips on how to investigate military research at your university.

To help get you started, here's a list of names of DARPA 'human enhancement' program research fund recipients and their universities. Miguel Nicolelis, Duke University at Durham, North Carolina; Tomaso Poggio, James DiCarlo and Christof Koch, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Sam Deadwyler, Wake Forest University; Jon Kaas, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee; Ted Berger, University of Southern California.

"depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World."
Henry Kissinger

The Genetically Modified Bomb
by Thom Hartmann

Imagine a bomb that only kills Caucasians with red hair. Or short people. Or Arabs. Or Chinese.

Now imagine that this new bomb could be set off anywhere in the world, and that within a matter of days, weeks, or months it would kill every person on the planet who fits the bomb's profile, although the rest of us would be left standing. And the bomb could go off silently, without anybody realizing it had been released - or even where it was released - until its victims started dying in mass numbers. ...

When creating a genetic bomb to target specific groups, such genetic profiles are actually far subtler and more accurate than the coarse pseudo-category we call race. Among men named Cohen all over the world, for example, researchers have found a specific genetic profile tying them all back to a common ancestor. Another group with a common genetic profile are people with ADHD ("The Edison Gene"), who uniquely share common inherited variations in their dopamine-regulating genes regardless of their ostensible race, geography, or ethnicity.

Thus, anybody who's part of a group with a shared genetic profile may be at risk in the future, suggest the authors of The Project for a New American Century's (PNAC) report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century."

The report notes that, "Much has been written in recent years about the need to transform the conventional armed forces of the United States to take advantage of the 'revolution in military affairs....'" They point out that our military requires a dramatic transformation, lest we lose our ability to fight future, unconventional wars. Some may be fought in cyberspace, others underwater or in outer space. And some even within our own bodies.

Consider what would happen if there was a virus or bacteria that only infected a particular type of person, killing, disabling, or sterilizing only those of a particular genetic profile. Consider the political leverage a nation would have if they could credibly threaten the extinction of all people worldwide with almond-shaped eyes, or the sterilization of everybody with a gene that tracks them back to a common ancestor or region.

Three years ago, Wolfowitz, Kristol, and their colleagues suggested this is something the Pentagon should be thinking about. Not just germ warfare, but gene warfare. ...

Genetically targeted weapons could change world politics forever, according to PNAC. ... their report notes, "advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool." ...

Thom Hartmann (thom at is the award-winning, best-selling author of over a dozen books, and the host of a syndicated daily talk show that runs opposite Rush Limbaugh in cities from coast to coast. His most recent book (September 2003) is "The Edison Gene." This article is copyright by Thom Hartmann, but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, blog, or web media so long as this credit is attached and the title is unchanged. Published on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 by

August 07, 2003
Surveys show that on US college campuses over 70% of all science funding comes directly from DARPA. DARPA is the successor to ARPA, a federal bureaucracy created in 1958 to push forward scientific research with potential military applications. I find it interesting that in 1960 outgoing President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangerous undue influence that the military-industrial complex was having in America's infrastructure, and especially on college campuses.

There are thousands of facets to this nightmare agency, but there are several more that we will look at today. One was reported on in the August 5, 2003 Boston Globe. The paper ran the headline, "Defense Department funding brain-machine work." The project is developing technology that "promises to directly read thoughts from a living brain - and even instill thoughts as well." It does not take much imagination to see in this the makings of a "matrix-like cyberpunk dystopia: chips that impose false memories, machines that scan for wayward thoughts, cognitively augmented government security forces that impose a ruthless order on a recalcitrant population."

The technology has already been installed in five airports in the US. CBS news reported on the high-powered MRI systems that scan travelers' brains as they walk through the airport checkpoint at Boston Logan. The technicians are trained to determine what aggressive thought patterns look like and to single out passengers for questioning. They are then put under another brain scanner that supposedly detects lies and are asked questions. This gives new meaning to the term "thought crime."

DARPA was also instrumental in developing machines that pierce your clothes and give crystal-clear images of your naked body. For eight years we have seen mainstream media reports cover this technology and the FCC's approval for police helicopters to have DARPA-funded ground penetrating radar mounted on them to surveil US cities.

While newer systems of ground penetrating radar remain classified, the older systems have been demonstrated on national television so we can all appreciate our new slave status. Viewers are treated to a black and white x-ray style view of people walking around in their homes. What ever happened to the Fourth Amendment barring search and seizure and the invasion of privacy without a warrant?

DARPA is also getting Congressional approval for a fleet of drones fitted with similar scanning systems to feed streaming data 24 hours a day back to the FEMA continuity of government bunkers.

And finally, on DARPA's own website, they promote the "Centibots." These tiny 5-pound robots have their own artificial intelligence and hunt fugitives or provide surveillance and security for government agencies in wolf packs of twenty. They are identical in many aspects to the police spiders in Minority Report.

Cops Planted Pot on 92-Year Old Woman They Killed:
According to federal documents released this week, these are the events that led to Kathryn Johnston's death and the steps the officers took to cover their tracks.

A History Of US Secret Human Experimentation
3-25-03: Health News Network

1931 Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, under the auspices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations, infects human subjects with cancer cells. He later goes on to establish the U.S. Army Biological Warfare facilities in Maryland, Utah, and Panama, and is named to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. While there, he begins a series of radiation exposure experiments on American soldiers and civilian hospital patients.

1932 The Tuskegee Syphilis Study begins. 200 black men diagnosed with syphilis are never told of their illness, are denied treatment, and instead are used as human guinea pigs in order to follow the progression and symptoms of the disease. They all subsequently die from syphilis, their families never told that they could have been treated.

1935 The Pellagra Incident. After millions of individuals die from Pellagra over a span of two decades, the U.S. Public Health Service finally acts to stem the disease. The director of the agency admits it had known for at least 20 years that Pellagra is caused by a niacin deficiency but failed to act since most of the deaths occured within poverty- striken black populations.

1940 Four hundred prisoners in Chicago are infected with Malaria in order to study the effects of new and experimental drugs to combat the disease. Nazi doctors later on trial at Nuremberg cite this American study to defend their own actions during the Holocaust.

1942 Chemical Warfare Services begins mustard gas experiments on approximately 4,000 servicemen. The experiments continue until 1945 and made use of Seventh Day Adventists who chose to become human guinea pigs rather than serve on active duty.

1943 In response to Japan's full-scale germ warfare program, the U.S. begins research on biological weapons at Fort Detrick, MD.

1944 U.S. Navy uses human subjects to test gas masks and clothing. Individuals were locked in a gas chamber and exposed to mustard gas and lewisite.

1945 Project Paperclip is initiated. The U.S. State Department, Army intelligence, and the CIA recruit Nazi scientists and offer them immunity and secret identities in exchange for work on top secret government projects in the United States.

1945 "Program F" is implemented by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). This is the most extensive U.S. study of the health effects of fluoride, which was the key chemical component in atomic bomb production. One of the most toxic chemicals known to man, fluoride, it is found, causes marked adverse effects to the central nervous system but much of the information is squelched in the name of national security because of fear that lawsuits would undermine full-scale production of atomic bombs.

1946 Patients in VA hospitals are used as guinea pigs for medical experiments. In order to allay suspicions, the order is given to change the word "experiments" to "investigations" or "observations" whenever reporting a medical study performed in one of the nation's veteran's hospitals.

1947 Colonel E.E. Kirkpatrick of the U.S. Atomic Energy Comission issues a secret document (Document 07075001, January 8, 1947) stating that the agency will begin administering intravenous doses of radioactive substances to human subjects.

1947 The CIA begins its study of LSD as a potential weapon for use by American intelligence. Human subjects (both civilian and military) are used with and without their knowledge. [Operation Artichoke]

1950 Department of Defense begins plans to detonate nuclear weapons in desert areas and monitor downwind residents for medical problems and mortality rates.

1950 In an experiment to determine how susceptible an American city would be to biological attack, the U.S. Navy sprays a cloud of bacteria from ships over San Franciso. Monitoring devices are situated throughout the city in order to test the extent of infection. Many residents become ill with pneumonia-like symptoms.

1951 Department of Defense begins open air tests using disease-producing bacteria and viruses. Tests last through 1969 and there is concern that people in the surrounding areas have been exposed.

1953 U.S. military releases clouds of zinc cadmium sulfide gas over Winnipeg, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Fort Wayne, the Monocacy River Valley in Maryland, and Leesburg, Virginia. Their intent is to determine how efficiently they could disperse chemical agents.

1953 Joint Army-Navy-CIA experiments are conducted in which tens of thousands of people in New York and San Francisco are exposed to the airborne germs Serratia marcescens and Bacillus glogigii.

1953 CIA initiates Project MKULTRA. This is an eleven year research program designed to produce and test drugs and biological agents that would be used for mind control and behavior modification. Six of the subprojects involved testing the agents on unwitting human beings.

1955 The CIA, in an experiment to test its ability to infect human populations with biological agents, releases a bacteria withdrawn from the Army's biological warfare arsenal over Tampa Bay, Fl.

1955 Army Chemical Corps continues LSD research, studying its potential use as a chemical incapacitating agent. More than 1,000 Americans participate in the tests, which continue until 1958.

1956 U.S. military releases mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Ga and Avon Park, Fl. Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials test victims for effects.

1958 LSD is tested on 95 volunteers at the Army's Chemical Warfare Laboratories for its effect on intelligence.

1960 The Army Assistant Chief-of-Staff for Intelligence (ACSI) authorizes field testing of LSD in Europe and the Far East. Testing of the european population is code named Project THIRD CHANCE; testing of the Asian population is code named Project DERBY HAT. [Opeation Dirty Tricks]

1965 Project CIA and Department of Defense begin Project MKSEARCH, a program to develop a capability to manipulate human behavior through the use of mind-altering drugs.

1965 Prisoners at the Holmesburg State Prison in Philadelphia are subjected to dioxin, the highly toxic chemical component of Agent Orange used in Viet Nam. The men are later studied for development of cancer, which indicates that Agent Orange had been a suspected carcinogen all along.

1966 CIA initiates Project MKOFTEN, a program to test the toxicological effects of certain drugs on humans and animals.

1966 U.S. Army dispenses Bacillus subtilis variant niger throughout the New York City subway system. More than a million civilians are exposed when army scientists drop lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto ventilation grates.

1967 CIA and Department of Defense implement Project MKNAOMI, successor to MKULTRA and designed to maintain, stockpile and test biological and chemical weapons.

1968 CIA experiments with the possibility of poisoning drinking water by injecting chemicals into the water supply of the FDA in Washington, D.C.

1969 Dr. Robert MacMahan of the Department of Defense requests from congress $10 million to develop, within 5 to 10 years, a synthetic biological agent to which no natural immunity exists.

1970 Funding for the synthetic biological agent is obtained under H.R. 15090. The project, under the supervision of the CIA, is carried out by the Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick, the army's top secret biological weapons facility. Speculation is raised that molecular biology techniques are used to produce AIDS-like retroviruses.

1970 United States intensifies its development of "ethnic weapons" (Military Review, Nov., 1970), designed to selectively target and eliminate specific ethnic groups who are susceptible due to genetic differences and variations in DNA.

1975 The virus section of Fort Detrick's Center for Biological Warfare Research is renamed the Fredrick Cancer Research Facilities and placed under the supervision of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) . It is here that a special virus cancer program is initiated by the U.S. Navy, purportedly to develop cancer-causing viruses. It is also here that retrovirologists isolate a virus to which no immunity exists. It is later named HTLV (Human T-cell Leukemia Virus).

1977 Senate hearings on Health and Scientific Research confirm that 239 populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969. Some of the areas included San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Key West, Panama City, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.
1978 Experimental Hepatitis B vaccine trials, conducted by the CDC, begin in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Ads for research subjects specifically ask for promiscuous homosexual men.

1981 First cases of AIDS are confirmed in homosexual men in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, triggering speculation that AIDS may have been introduced via the Hepatitis B vaccine

1985 According to the journal Science (227:173-177), HTLV and VISNA, a fatal sheep virus, are very similar, indicating a close taxonomic and evolutionary relationship.

1986 According to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (83:4007-4011), HIV and VISNA are highly similar and share all structural elements, except for a small segment which is nearly identical to HTLV. This leads to speculation that HTLV and VISNA may have been linked to produce a new retrovirus to which no natural immunity exists.

1986 A report to Congress reveals that the U.S. Government's current generation of biological agents includes: modified viruses, naturally occurring toxins, and agents that are altered through genetic engineering to change immunological character and prevent treatment by all existing vaccines.
1987 Department of Defense admits that, despite a treaty banning research and development of biological agents, it continues to operate research facilities at 127 facilities and universities around the nation.

1990 More than 1500 six-month old black and hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given an "experimental" measles vaccine that had never been licensed for use in the United States. CDC later admits that parents were never informed that the vaccine being injected to their children was experimental.

1994 With a technique called "gene tracking," Dr. Garth Nicolson at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX discovers that many returning Desert Storm veterans are infected with an altered strain of Mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe commonly used in the production of biological weapons. Incorporated into its molecular structure is 40 percent of the HIV protein coat, indicating that it had been man-made.

1994 Senator John D. Rockefeller issues a report revealing that for at least 50 years the Department of Defense has used hundreds of thousands of military personnel in human experiments and for intentional exposure to dangerous substances. Materials included mustard and nerve gas, ionizing radiation, psychochemicals, hallucinogens, and drugs used during the Gulf War .

1995 U.S. Government admits that it had offered Japanese war criminals and scientists who had performed human medical experiments salaries and immunity from prosecution in exchange for data on biological warfare research.

1995 Dr. Garth Nicolson, uncovers evidence that the biological agents used during the Gulf War had been manufactured in Houston, TX and Boca Raton, Fl and tested on prisoners in the Texas Department of Corrections.

1996 Department of Defense admits that Desert Storm soldiers were exposed to chemical agents.

1997 Eighty-eight members of Congress sign a letter demanding an investigation into bioweapons use & Gulf War Syndrome.

ª 1998-2000 Health News Network


Big Brother and You: The Latest From the NSA
by Rahul Mahajan

Big Brother is watching you. At least when you’re on the phone -- he knows what numbers you’ve called, how many times and for how long, what numbers people at those numbers have called, and so on.

Last week’s revelation that, for almost five years now, the National Security Agency has gotten AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth to turn over all the calling records of all their clients, marks a qualitatively new step in the Bush administration’s post-9/11 creation of the panoptic state, one of its key goals in the constantly metastasizing “war on terror.”

The answer mount a renewed effort to explain to the public what the “war on terror” really is. In a nutshell, it’s an organizing principle to be used to transform not only U.S. military policy but also, domestically, the relationship between government and society, in the direction of increased authoritarianism and militarization....
“preventive war,” fought against an enemy that might conceivably become a threat at some nebulous point in the future)... It’s quite clear now that the ever-evolving plans for domestic surveillance embody the same principle... this latest program involves finding necessary information about all of us before we become terrorists. Combine that with a very broad view of who the “enemy” is (potentially including all those who disagree with the administration) and you have not only a rather frightening vision of the destruction of liberty in this country, you have a paranoid, secretive, incompetently run proto-panopticon ...
Rahul Mahajan is publisher of Empire Notes. He was in Fallujah recently and is currently writing and blogging from Baghdad. His latest book, “Full Spectrum Dominance: U.S. Power in Iraq and Beyond,” covers U.S. He can be reached at rahul (at)

american-style fascist state depends on electoral politics and major media for 'legitimacy' and public support...

Legislation Seeks to Ease Rules on Domestic Spying
Published: April 14, 2007
The administration proposed a bill on Friday to relax certain legal restrictions on the government’s ability to intercept telephone calls and other communications in the United States.
The proposal would change provisions in the primary law on domestic surveillance that the Bush administration says limit its ability to spy on the domestic and international communications of foreigners and would provide new legal immunity for telecommunications companies that have been sued for cooperating with the government as it conducts domestic wiretapping...
“I think this is all really going to have to await a decision by the courts on this matter,” said Mr. Specter, ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.... and he said he was now working with Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, on a plan that could attract bipartisan support....

Director Wants More Authority in Intelligence
April 5, 2007
The top United States intelligence official said Wednesday that his position lacked the authority needed to run the country’s 16 intelligence agencies. The job Mr. McConnell now holds was created in a restructuring after intelligence agencies failed to detect and thwart the Sept. 11 terrorist plots and underestimated sectarian violence in postwar Iraq....[note the neat little summary of U.S. psywar propaganda]

Mr. McConnell, who replaced John D. Negroponte as director seven weeks ago, said he was working on a plan to bring his job’s power in line with its responsibilities. He also said he wanted to shorten the time it took to get security clearances from a year to a matter of weeks, using processes developed in the financial services industry.

He said he would work with Congress to ensure a more stable flow of financing and improve oversight of operations....

Another focus will be on preventing terrorists or foreign governments from attacking or infiltrating computer systems... [note: see 4/23/7 issue of the digest for govt. plans to reconstruct a "secure" internet with control of users and content]One of his biggest worries, Mr. McConnell said, is a terrorist group attacking the computer network serving the United States’ financial services industry...

Fascism: American reality
By Larry Pinkney
July 6, 2006

The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word fascism as "a philosophy or system of government that is marked by stringent social and economic control, a strong centralized government usually headed by a dictator, and often a policy of belligerent nationalism." Moreover, and most importantly, it also defines fascism clearly and succinctly as "oppressive or dictatorial control." There are those who will sarcastically say that the political/social situation in and with America is not "that bad," when in fact things are far, far worse.

Whether or not one chooses to define this increasingly all-encompassing suppression of people in America as authoritarian, totalitarian or fascist is a ridiculously moot point for the overwhelming majority of people who have lost or are losing their already limited freedoms, their livelihoods and their very lives to the organized repression of this hypocritical, cynically racist and genocidal American state apparatus. The organized and sustained political, economic, social and cultural repression being waged by the American state against its own citizens and persons globally is nothing short of fascism.

At this precarious period in history, with repression intensifying on all levels, quibbling about whether or not America is technically fascist amounts to intellectual masturbation. The fact is that the internal and external repressive policies of the United States of America have already destroyed -- and continue to decimate -- millions of people inside America and throughout the world. Especially is this true with respect to the vast majority of people of color in the ghettos, reservations and barrios of the U.S., as well as in Africa, Asia, Central and South America, the Caribbean and elsewhere.

Contrary to the well perpetuated myth, fascism is not limited to storm troopers blatantly goose-stepping down streets and alleyways, engaging in bloody search and destroy missions. Germany's fascism under Adolf Hitler differed from Italy's fascism under Benito Mussolini, but they were both fascist nation states. Fascism has different forms, all of which are equally deadly, all of which must be identified, seriously resisted and stopped.

Complacently insisting that the organized state repressive apparatus of, in and by the United States must not be defined as fascism is incredibly dangerous, especially at this point in history. It's a bit like quibbling with a person who is in the death throes of drowning that he is not actually drowning but merely suffocating! No matter how it is defined, the person is dying, and immediate action is needed to save his or her life!

Whether it is defined as blatant fascism, benign fascism or so-called creeping fascism, it is still fascism; and if left unchecked, the end result is precisely the same: total and utter disenfranchisement under an authoritarian, repressive state apparatus. The urgency of this reality in America cannot be overstated.

The enormous internal and external destruction of peoples and cultures around the world caused by the fascistic policies of the United States -- cloaked in a mythical democracy -- have wreaked more havoc, misery and destruction upon peoples nationally and around the world than the blatantly fascist regimes of World War II Germany and Italy combined. Notwithstanding the over 100 million Black people who had previously been murdered as victims of Europe and America's African "legalized" slave trafficking, it should be remembered that many years subsequent, Adolf Hitler, in his published book "Mein Kampf," made it quite clear that the idea for waging the horrible genocide against Jews and other so-called "undesirables" had been borrowed from none other than the earlier genocide waged by the United States against the indigenous -- so called "Indian" -- peoples of America.

Ironically, many pundits of that 1930s era confidently and incorrectly argued that due to Germany's achievements in culture, politics, the arts and technology of that period, the unthinkable could never happen there. Obviously, they were wrong. Nevertheless, the enormous horrors inflicted by fascist Germany and Italy upon the world pale by comparison to those carried out by the much larger, deadlier and far more sophisticated United States of America, whose internal and external "news" and information propaganda machine would make the former fascist German and Italian propaganda machines green with envy.

Thus, to compare the contemporary United States, or any of its leaders, to the former fascist leaders Adolf Hitler or Benito Mussolini is utterly missing the point, as the U.S. is much, much worse, and its global power is far more encompassing and devastating.

It is important not to be fooled by the feigned surprise on the part of some at the limited, tip-of-the-iceberg revelations about U.S. torture, internal spying by the U.S. government and corporations, the militarization of the judicial process, massive national voter disenfranchisement and the demonstrated de facto contempt by the U.S. government and corporations for the Black victims of Hurricane Katrina, etc. Substantively, virtually none of these systemic practices are new but now are integrally part and parcel of an increasingly blatant form of American fascism.

No matter what individual may be the nominal "leader" of the United States, or what political party -- Republican or Democratic -- is in power, fascism has undeniably become an American reality. No matter what name or under what guise America cloaks its fascist policies, the undeniable fact is: America's own style of fascism is a reality here and now.

It is no wonder that Austrian born Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrated no compunction or inhibition whatsoever in repeatedly and openly expressing his "admiration" for German fascist leader Adolf Hitler before going on later to become the Republican Party's governor of the state of California (see "Events Related to Schwarzenegger.")

Moreover, there is no sustained and overwhelming outrage and incensed repudiation of Schwarzenegger from the leadership of either the Democratic or Republican parties regarding his arrogant and chilling admiration for a fascist leader who was directly responsible for the dehumanization and murder of millions of people. A distinctly American version of fascism has taken root in this nation, and has created a political climate wherein politicians can openly embrace with admiration past fascist leaders without seriously jeopardizing their own political careers.

Furthermore, other than as an increasingly obvious propaganda tool to further its global hegemonic objectives, America's cynical racism and hypocrisy has made a meaningless mockery of words and phrases such as democracy, legality, freedom, fair judicial process and justice. This is a reality which most of the peoples of the world outside of the United States have already acknowledged.

Attempting to minimize the precariousness of the political situation in this nation by denying the reality of fascism in America does not change or stop it. Maintaining, like ostriches, the denial of fascism's active, significant existence and role in the American body politic, actually strengthens its stranglehold on the people of this nation and world. Only by removing our heads from the sand, facing up to, organizing against, resisting and struggling for systemic change here and now is there the real hope, for ourselves and for people around the world, of stopping and dismantling this fascist onslaught. Indeed, we can ill afford to do otherwise.

Larry Pinkney is a veteran of the Black Panther Party, the former Minister of Interior of the Republic of New Africa, a former political prisoner and the only American to have successfully self-authored his civil/political rights case to the United Nations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Email him at Lecconsult at

Syndicate content