They tried it at least once already, and that time, rather than the Assad government, it was proven that, if anyone had used chemical weapons in Syria, it was the Western government-backed ‘Syrian rebels’ aka ‘al-Qaeda’, and that those weapons had been supplied to them by the same Western governments and intel agencies via proxies like the Bahrain or Qatar government. The same spurious allegation has been raised again, as if the ‘elite’ believe that the average citizen has a memory span of only a few months (maybe they’re right about that). Read More →
Ten years ago, more or less to the day, I wrote the following on the then Signs of the Times page:
“As I sit here, a motion in the UK House of commons has been defeated by some 415 votes to 149. Not that any other result would have stopped the US, yet it signifies a full green light for the attack on Iraq. Bush’s ‘ultimatum’ to Saddam expires at midnight (GMT) Thursday (7pm EST). “Shock and Awe” (read “death and destruction”) may come at any time between now and then. We have at most one day, one day left to ponder at the edge of the abyss before the coming darkness engulfs us all.
As if to mock those who are against this illegal invasion and the lies and deceit that have been used to justify it, Ari Fleishcer today stated that, even if Saddam went into exile now, the US would still invade. It’s not about WMD, it’s about domination and the destructive principle. Perhaps Ari feels he can be more truthful now that it is a ‘done deal’, now that Cheney, Rumsfeld and Blair have told the peace-loving people of the world to go f**k themselves. It must have been hard for Fleischer to stand up in front of the world’s media every day and lie so profusely. (Then again, maybe not).
It’s hard for me to describe the feelings I have right now; there is an enormous sense of impending doom, mixed with anger at being made to feel so helpless in the face of such rampant psychopathy. Who are these men that they can simply decide to throw the world and its inhabitants into “war without end”, and who are we that they could, for so long, fool us with such pathetic and barely-disguised lies and know that we would just roll over and let them get away with it?” Read More →
I’ve been reading James W. Douglas’ excellent book JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it matters. If you have time to read only one book on JFK, this is the one to pick. Douglas presents a detailed picture of Kennedy’s all-too-short time in office that leaves the reader in no doubt about how and why he was eventually killed, and who did it. In addition, it’s very well-written.
Douglas recounts that, during the summer of 1961, Kennedy was being harassed by the militant members (i.e. all) of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to approve the use of nuclear weapons on Laos and Berlin, against the ‘Communists’ (of course). After one meeting where the Joint Chiefs reiterated their psychopathic demands, Kennedy just walked out and, looking back at generals and admirals left in the Cabinet Room, said to an aide: “These people are crazy“. Read More →
How many Americans are aware that their government has claimed the authority to arbitrarily kill their fellow citizens when it chooses, and that it can do so ‘legally’, without any evidence that the citizen in question posed any threat to anyone, let alone the US government or its ‘interests’?
How many Americans are aware that the US government has responded to court cases brought by the ACLU questioning the US government’s authority to engage in targeted assassinations of US citizens by saying that this is a political question and that US courts and judges have no say in the matter (“There exists no appropriate judicial forum to evaluate these constitutional considerations“)? I’d wager not many. But that’s precisely what the US government has done, according to a leaked unsigned and undated Justice Department white paper, obtained by NBC News. You can read the white paper here. The actual legal justification as defined by Justice Department lawyers in 2010 is being kept secret by the government, but the ‘white paper’ explains that, not only has the government decided that targeted assassinations without due process are legal, but that no evidence of any imminent threat from a target is necessary for the target to be deemed an imminent threat. (Go figure). Read More →
By now most people reading this already know that there are a number of unanswered questions surrounding the Colorado theater shooting, so I just want to quickly point out a few things and maybe make a few connections along the way.
Apart from the fact that the DHS and the FBI released a memo in May this year to security and emergency services to be on the alert for a ‘terrorist’ attack at a movie theater; apart from the fact that on the same day as the Aurora massacre, Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine was holding an identical drill 17 miles away that simulated a shooter in a movie theater; apart from the fact that the FBI is officially known to have set up ‘terror attacks’ that included creating the plan, providing the weapons and equipment, preparing the location of the attack and even driving the vehicles to pull it off; APART from all that, there is the also the problem of the eyewitnesses to the Colorado shooting who stated that the gunman (James Holmes) seemed to have an accomplice. Read More →
“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows, that the Iraq war is largely about oil” – Alan Greenspan former head of the Federal Reserve
Tin-pot Iraqi dictator-in-waiting, Ayad Allawi was the US-appointed ‘interim-Iraqi Prime Minister’ for 9 months in 2004-5. Today he defeated incumbent Nouri al-Maliki to the position of Prime Minister by 10,000 votes according to reports.
Now there’s one more CIA stooge ruling over yet another formerly sovereign nation and people.
Under CIA direction he ran an exile organization, the Iraqi National Accord, in the early 1990s that sent agents into Baghdad to plant bombs and sabotage government facilities in an effort to depose Saddam Hussein. Their targets included a mosque, a movie house and a newspaper — the latter strike killing a child passing by. Ex-CIA operatives said a bus full of schoolchildren was also blown apart.
As interim Iraqi Prime minister in 2004-5, Allawi was responsible for operating death squads out of the Iraqi interior ministry in an effort to divide Iraqi society and create the appearance of ‘civil war’ between Iraq’s Sunni and Shia populations and thereby divide and conquer the Iraqi resistance to US occupation lead by Moqtada al Sadr.
On Thursday 14 October 2004, Allawi stated: “[w]e have asked Fallujah residents to turn over al-Zarqawi and his group. If they don’t do it, we are ready for major operations in Fallujah”. Fallujah, a city of 300,000 people was then mercilessly bombed. Tens of thousands of innocent civilians were killed, many of them horribly burned with illegal white phosphorus shells.
In 2004 it was reported that Allawi personally executed six bound ‘insurgents’ – ordinary Iraqis fighting US occupation.
On at least one occasion in 2004 Allawi personally intervened to prevent a ceasefire and peace talks with the Iraqi resistance because he realised that any just peace settlement in Iraq would, by popular mandate, not include either him or his CIA masters in a controlling position.
In 2005 arrests were issued for Allawi and 27 of his former ‘ministers’ in the interim government over the alleged disappearance or misappropriation of $1 billion in military procurement funds.
With Allawi as Prime Minister, Iraq will be more secure as the latest trophy in the American Empire’s cabinet, as will the the illegal contracts originally signed by Paul Bremer in 2004 to give all of Iraq’s resources to American companies.
|Diamonds are a spooks best friend|
Charles Taylor, Liberian President for 6 years until 2003, is currently on trial for international war crimes at a U.N.-backed special court in the Hague. Those that facilitated his crimes will not be there.
Taylor seized the presidency in 1998 after an appalling eight-year campaign of terror. Taylor is accused of orchestrating rape, murder, mutilation and recruitment of child soldiers during the 1991-2002 civil war in neighboring Sierra Leone.
Some of the harrowing testimony has been provided by Alex Tamba Teh. Teh claims that he saw a rebel commander from Liberia called “Rocky” shoot 101 people:
“After he killed the civilians… he gave the instruction that they should be decapitated. Rocky gave the order to the small boy units”
Tamba Teh recounted how child soldiers rounded on one child and chopped off his hand, then his arm, then both his feet, before tossing him into a toilet pit. In all somewhere between 75,000 and 200,000 Sierra Leoneans were killed (estimates vary) with many more suffering mutilations and around 2 million left homeless.
[Today Sierra Leon’s shy teenagers] show you their scars and explain that RUF rebel commanders cut them and rubbed cocaine into the wound to make them mad enough to fight or to chop people’s limbs off. Sometimes the victims were their neighbours, or their brothers and sisters.
“They gave us drugs the whole time,” says Saidu, 16, who was abducted and recruited into the RUF when he was five. First, he worked as a bearer and messenger for the soldiers’ “wives”, most of whom were themselves abducted adolescent girls. When he was seven he was given a gun, a couple of months’ training in Liberia, and sent to fight.
“It was fun, like a big boy’s game,” he says. “They made us so crazy, we enjoyed the smoking, the drinking, the shooting, all that.” He didn’t enjoy having to cut a man’s arm off, though, one morning on the road in from the airport. They were all lined up at gunpoint, the men, shaking, their arms obediently held out. Saidu couldn’t look when it was his turn to swing his machete. He doesn’t think the man survived. “I can’t forget his scream,” he says.
The civil war in Sierra Leon was fought over control of the lucrative diamond mining trade with the neighboring nations of Guinea and Liberia deeply involved. In 1991 a small band of men calling themselves the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) under the leadership of a former-corporal, Foday Sankoh, began to attack villages in eastern Sierra Leone on the Liberian border. The RUF’s signature terror tactic was physical mutilation. An estimated 20,000 civilians suffered amputation, with machetes and axes being used to sever arms, legs, lips, and ears. Over the course of the next 12 years a series of coups and counter-coups followed with the British, who ruled Sierra Leon as a colony until 1961, choosing to do little but observe the bloodshed, until the UN chose to enforce a relative peace in 2003 which still holds.
Foday Sankoah created the RFU with substantial support from Liberian leader Taylor who remained one of the primary antagonists throughout the conflict. In that respect, the current proceedings against him are indeed justified, but the evidence that will be undoubtedly missing from his trial concerns the claims of former Washington Post West African Bureau chief Douglas Farah. In 2004 Farah published Blood From Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror detailing the ties between “al-Qaeda” and diamond networks in West Africa. Farah is also a senior fellow at the National Strategy Information Center, a “right-wing think tank for military strategy with a history of working with hard-line, anti-Soviet groups promoting an aggressive U. S. foreign policy”, according to Group Watch.
In 2004 the news web site AllAfrica.com conducted an interview with Farah on the 9-11 Commission findings, the interaction between “al-Qaeda” and West Africa’s diamond trade, and his view of the role U.S. intelligence has played. Excerpts from the Allafrica article and interview follow with my emphasis:
August 5, 2004
Washington Post correspondent Douglas Farah, in a recently published 225-page book entitled “Blood from Stones: The Secret Financial Network of Terror,” provides a detailed description of al Qaeda’s activity in West Africa.
According to Farah, American intelligence agencies “overlooked” the connection between diamond trading and al Qaeda and the central role played in harboring and profiting from the illicit dealing by Liberian President Charles Taylor, who was forced into exile in Nigeria last year under a deal brokered by the U.S. government.
Farah’s findings have been hotly disputed by the CIA and FBI, and their viewpoint was reflected in the recently release report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9-11 Commission. “We have seen no persuasive evidence that al Qaeda funded itself by trading in African conflict diamonds,” the report states (page 171).
But a confidential investigation by the Sierra Leone Special Court further bolsters the view that that the alliance between Taylor and al Qaeda was substantial, according to an article in Wednesday’s Boston Globe by Washington correspondent Bryan Bender.
“Al Qaeda allegedly paid Taylor for protection and then joined him in the African diamond trade, raising millions of dollars for terrorist activities, according to UN war crimes documents,” Bender wrote.
Citing the Special Court’s investigation and U.S. intelligence official, Bender said a planned raid a few weeks after September 11, 2001 by U.S. Special Forces aimed at capturing Ghailani and an associate in Liberia was called off for unexplained reasons. One explanation raised by Bender’s sources was Taylor’s reported longstanding relations with the CIA.
In 2002 the Washington Post reported that European intelligence agencies had found evidence that Taylor hosted “senior terrorist operatives” who oversaw a $20 million diamond-buying spree that effectively cornered the market on the region’s precious stones, receiving a $1 million payment for his help. Senior European intelligence sources were however “baffled” by the lack of U.S. interest from the CIA in these findings.
AllAfrica: What is your reaction to the single sentence in the 9-11 Commission report that dismisses African diamonds as a source of al Qaeda funding?
Farah: If you look at the footnotes of that particular citation, it’s all FBI and CIA reports with the exception of an interview they quote with Allan White from the Special Court in Sierra Leone. I find it disturbing because they had access to the Belgium police report, which I have on my website, which they were given. The Special Court also wrote a special brief to them and the intelligence indicating al Qaeda’s presence. The book, the Global Witness Report – none of those are cited as having been used at all in making their determination.
I think the 9-11 Commission was under a great deal of pressure to make hurried judgments. In my limited communication with them, they told me that they could not get to the bottom of the dispute. If you read my book, I have a lot of discussion of why the CIA tried to discredit the story, and the great lengths that they went to do so, despite the fact that they did not succeed, and the fact that more evidence continues to emerge [that] the story is actually correct. But there is a great hostility towards the story from the intelligence community, and all the commission did was take the intelligence community reports and use them as their basis for making their assertions.
AllAfrica: The 9-11 Commission also stated “to date, we have not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9-11 attacks?” How do you respond to that?
Farah: The proof of the telephone contacts to Afghanistan on September 10th and the prior communications from the Belgium police who traced the phone call from the satellite phone used by Aziz Nassour and Samih Osailly [two al Qaeda operatives whose activities in west Africa are detailed in Farah’s book] is not hearsay evidence. They made numerous calls and it’s documented. I have the phone bills for them, and more importantly, the police got them out of the official records. I do not think it’s something you can easily dismiss. Neither are the bank records from Artesia Bank that show $20m flowing and being unaccounted for, and all the other indications that other people came up with. […]
AllAfrica: Alex Yearsley of Global Witness asserts that, “Taylor received CIA payments until January 2001.” You write about dealings between the CIA and Ibrahim Bah, the Senegalese mastermind who coordinated the diamond trade with al Qaeda. Why would the CIA form this kind of partnership?
Farah: It’s a disturbing question. I do not have direct knowledge myself of the CIA dealings with Taylor. Taylor has told others and me that he has worked for the CIA over time.
AllAfrica: You write that the diamond trade in Africa transcends ideological and religious differences. Could you please talk more about the business dealings between Israeli and Lebanese merchants in West Africa?
Farah: […] I think it’s one of the truly extraordinary demonstrations of the depth to which people will sink in their greed for diamonds. It’s the epitomy of the worst kind of greed and corruption of moral principles. They come with the desire to make money at any cost. What both the Arabs and Israelis told me was, ‘Business is business. Here we do business. Back there is war and back there is not our problem.’ If you look at Lebanese with ties to radical Islamists trying to buy weapons with Israelis to ship [elsewhere], it’s a web that is very complicated, very difficult to understand, and very hard to believe unless you see it and talk to people yourself.
As Farah states, all of it is certainly very disturbing, and his comment that “it’s a web that is very complicated, very difficult to understand” is indeed true but the web is made infinitely more complex and becomes impossible to understand when, as appears to be the case with Farah, the conclusions that the data points to conflict with the lies fed to us by our governments and the mainstream media. Lies like the one that says that the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies are fighting a “war against terror” when the reality is that they are waging a war of terror on the entire planet.
Lies like the one that says “al-Qaeda” is an Islamic terror group when in fact it is just a name given by Western governments to a fictitious group that is used to take the blame for terrorist attacks carried out by Western intelligence agencies (Mossad, CIA, MI5).
Lies like the claim that the US, Israeli and British governments and their agencies are doing everything they can to stamp out “Islamic terrorism” when in truth they have for many years been actively creating a false reality of “Islamic terrorism” which they use as a cover for their own illegal and murderous activities around the world.
Charles Taylor is currently being tried in the Hague for war crimes in Sierra Leon that were financed in part by the diamond trade. It is something of an irony that not 40 miles to the south of the Hague sits the Belgian city of Antwerp where 90 percent of the world’s diamonds are cut and polished by the city’s large Hasidic Jewish community. Surely the court in the Hague could find a few answers to the real source of the Sierra Leon tragedy there?
But I digress, in fact I have been digressing since the second paragraph. What I really wanted to say as regards Charles Taylor’s ongoing trial for war crimes is that I have a question that I need someone to answer, and it is a very pressing question indeed:
Charles Taylor is being tried by an international war crimes tribunal because he is responsible for sending an army into another nation in the pursuit of personal gain and in doing so causing the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people. If the moral standards by which Taylor is being measured are just and fair, why then are George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and a host of other Neocons and Israel-firsters (both in the US and in Israel) not waiting in line behind him?
The Bush government, at the behest of their Israeli friends and with the complicity of their British lackeys, also sent an army into another country in the pursuit of personal gain and in doing so caused the deaths of not tens of thousands but hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
The following is but a tiny fraction of the massive evidence for US government war crimes in Iraq:
April 2 2003
An Iraqi mother in a van fired on by US soldiers says she saw her two young daughters decapitated in the incident that also killed her son and eight other members of her family.
The children’s father, who was also in the van, said US soldiers fired on them as they fled towards a checkpoint because they thought a leaflet dropped by US helicopters told them to “be safe”, and they believed that meant getting out of their village to Karbala.
Bakhat Hassan – who lost his daughters, aged two and five, his three-year-old son, his parents, two older brothers, their wives and two nieces aged 12 and 15, in the incident – said US soldiers at an earlier checkpoint had waved them through.
As they approached another checkpoint 40km south of Karbala, they waved again at the American soldiers.
“We were thinking these Americans want us to be safe,” Hassan said through an Army translator at a Mobile Army Surgical Hospital set up at a vast Army support camp near Najaf.
The soldiers didn’t wave back. They fired.
“I saw the heads of my two little girls come off,” Hassan’s heavily pregnant wife, Lamea, 36, said numbly.
She repeated herself in a flat, even voice: “My girls – I watched their heads come off their bodies. My son is dead.”
US officials originally gave the death toll from the incident as seven, but reporters at the scene placed it at 10. And Bakhat Hassan terrible toll was 11 members of his family.
Survivors describe wedding massacre as generals refuse to apologise
Rory McCarthy in Ramadi
Friday May 21, 2004
The wedding feast was finished and the women had just led the young bride and groom away to their marriage tent for the night when Haleema Shihab heard the first sounds of the fighter jets screeching through the sky above.
It was 10.30pm in the remote village of Mukaradeeb by the Syrian border and the guests hurried back to their homes as the party ended. As sister-in-law of the groom, Mrs Shihab, 30, was to sleep with her husband and children in the house of the wedding party, the Rakat family villa. She was one of the few in the house who survived the night.
“The bombing started at 3 am,” she said yesterday from her bed in the emergency ward at Ramadi general hospital, 60 miles west of Baghdad. “We went out of the house and the American soldiers started to shoot us. They were shooting low on the ground and targeting us one by one,” she said. She ran with her youngest child in her arms and her two young boys, Ali and Hamza, close behind. As she crossed the fields a shell exploded close to her, fracturing her legs and knocking her to the ground.
She lay there and a second round hit her on the right arm. By then her two boys lay dead. “I left them because they were dead,” she said. One, she saw, had been decapitated by a shell.
“I fell into the mud and an American soldier came and kicked me. I pretended to be dead so he wouldn’t kill me.”
One of the U.S. soldiers accused of raping and killing a 14 year-old Iraqi girl and slaying her family told investigators that after the killings he poured kerosene on the girl’s bullet-ridden body.
In an interview with the U.S. Army’s Criminal Investigative Division in June, Spec. James P. Barker, 23, said that he held the girl down while she was raped by another soldier, Sgt. Paul Cortez, during an incident in March in Mahmoudiya, according to testimony from CID Special Agent Benjamin Bierce.
Barker said that he then attempted to rape the girl himself, before she was shot to death by former Pfc. Steven D. Green, Bierce said.
For the last five years the US government and military have waged a war on the Iraqi people that dwarfs the Sierra Leon conflict in terms of its mindless brutality. The people of Sierra Leon, while traumatised for years to come, are at least enjoying relative peace – the people of Iraq continue to suffer bombings, mutilations and the predations of US soldiers on an almost daily basis. Can we therefore expect the American, Israeli and British war criminals to appear in the dock in the Hague any time soon? If not, why not?
There is something VERY wrong with this world.
There have been some hilarious goings on in the U.S. over the past few days, and by “hilarious” what I really mean is very, very disturbing. Last night, the Republicrat and Democan members of Washington’s permanent big top circus aka “the Senate”, staged a “sleep in” in an attempt to convince someone, anyone, that they actually give a damn about the Iraqi people or that US troops should be withdrawn by April 2008.
The debate was scheduled to get so “heated” that cots, pillows, toothpaste and deodorant were shipped for the hard working public servants. Of course, this makes perfect sense, because when you plan an all-night debate on an important issue, the first thing on the agenda is having somewhere comfortable to sleep, or perhaps something soft to faint onto in the unlikely event that a Senator actually says anything meaningful.
|Fear spread around the Senate last night when word spread that Mark Foley and Dennis Hastert had been spotted in the building|
From the outset, farce was assured by the fact that there was no way that Democans could ever succeed in actually getting past the debate stage because, while they have a majority of 51-49 in the house, Republicrat leaders have the option to use the “procedural hurdle” of requiring 60 votes before the proposal can be moved to the floor.
Not to be dissuaded from a good slumber party, after assorted candy bars and coffee, members bedded down for a few hours to prepare themselves for the expected fracas. Then, on the stroke of 5 hours in, something remarkable happened: lawmakers from both sides, in a startling shift away from the whole point of the publicity stunt, managed to come together to overwhelmingly pass a Republican measure stating that it was “in the U.S. interest that Iraq not become a failed state and a safe haven for terrorists”! Go Democans! You show those Republicrats!
Unfortunately for the Republicrats, in passing this measure they were badly out of sync with their task masters in the White House, because just a few hours before the Senate sleep-over, the White House had released a new (that is to say, “newly cobbled together out of nothing”) intelligence report that claimed that “al-CIA-duh” is planning to use use “battle-hardened associates in Iraq to strike inside the United States”.
I mean, is it so hard for the Republicrats to get with the program here!? The White House went to all that bother of releasing a fabricated intelligence report claiming that Iraq was already a failed state and had already become a safe haven for terrorists, (aka “al-CIA-duh in Iraq”) and the Senate Republicrats go and pass a bi-partisan motion stating that it is in the U.S. interest that Iraq not become a failed state and a safe haven for terrorists”!?
What the hell? Do they not know that Cheney has burst several blood-vessels in his efforts to finally convince U.S. intelligence agencies that there are known knowns, unknown knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns and that the CIA just needs to provide the “intelligence” that he tells them to provide? Clearly it is in the U.S. interest that Iraq is a failed state and “a safe haven for terrorists”, this was the whole point of the god-damn intelligence report! I mean, how else is the Bush cabal going to justify the next false flag terror attack on America? The terrorists aren’t just gonna do it themselves ya know! Come on people! It isn’t rocket science!
Understandably, such pusillanimous political posturing is beyond the grasp of the average American, but that doesn’t mean that they should feel excluded from true, meaningful participation in the nation’s march towards oblivion. Just as Roman leaders provided the masses with the grisly ‘entertainment’ of the Colosseum, the American government is also attentive to the needs of its subjects, and as the Senators were ‘filiblustering’ the night away, the DOD was outlining a plan to tap the creative skills of the ordinary American Joe:
Inventors across the country are being asked to find a way to lighten the load U.S. soldiers carry on their backs — largely due to the high-tech gear that uses batteries — and the solution will be decided in a $1 million contest. (yay capitalism!)
The Department of Defense is asking a person or team to come up with a way to lessen the weight of the 20-40 pounds of batteries a solider carries on a typical four-day mission. The batteries power everything from soldiers’ GPS systems to their night-vision goggles.
|‘Have a heart, lighten my load and help me kill more Iraqis.’|
You see? The success of the “troop surge” is everyone’s responsibility, not just that of a bunch of decrepit old buggers in Washington! I mean, come on folks, what true blue American wouldn’t feel overcome with patriotic pride knowing that it was their design that helped U.S. troops kill and maim Iraqi civilians more efficiently? Or helped U.S. troops more efficiently seal off an area so that U.S. government-funded death squads could wipe out a few dozen more worthless Iraqis? So don’t try and tell me that the American people don’t have a choice over Iraq. The U.S. government is making it quite clear: you can shut up and just accept the dictates of the Commander guy, or you can help him out in his divinely-ordained task. The choice is yours.
Quite frankly, it’s a little selfish for anyone to complain, because Bush really could do with some help at the moment. For example, two days ago, the decider in chief announced “a U.S.-led international conference which would take place before the end of the year to resolve what he said were all the outstanding issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. I kid you not. This is the Commander guy we’re talking about. For a gibbering idiot like him, sorting out all the problems of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a cakewalk, and he’s gonna do it in time for Christmas too!
Finally, after years of what newspapers are claiming was a “hands off approach” to the conflict, the Bush administration has now decided to step up to the plate, take the bull by the horns and get a little Palestinian dirt on its hands (to cover up the blood).
This really should be something to see folks, no, really, because for the past 6 years the Bush administration’s “hands off” approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has included:
at least $3 billion per year in non-refundable loans to prop up the Zionist state of Israel,
the provision of the latest U.S. military technology to more efficiently murder and oppress Palestinian civilians,
the deliberate political and economic isolation of Palestinian leaders
and in general, the unflinching support of the Zionist agenda to thwart forever the right of Palestinians to self-determination.
There is no doubt therefore that a Bush government “hands on” approach would have been pretty spectacular, sadly however, we shall never know just how much money he was willing offer the Zionists so that he could claim to be ‘the man who solved the Israeli-Palestinian conflict’, because the Zionists’ it seems, are not about to give up their plans for a ‘final solution’ to the Palestinian problem at this late stage of the game:
Israel on Tuesday ruled out negotiations “at this stage” on the borders of a future Palestinian state, rebuffing Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and casting doubt on a U.S. push to tackle the issue.
Israel gave its response a day after U.S. President George W. Bush said “serious negotiations toward the creation of a Palestinian state” could begin soon.
Bush said the talks should lead to a deal on Palestinian borders, suggesting other final-status issues such as Jerusalem and refugees wait until later.
Lest some readers should it inflammatory of me to refer to the Zionists “final solution to the Palestinian problem”, let’s consider for a moment the actual details of Bush’s plan for peace between Palestine and Israel that was so quickly rejected by the Zionists.
Bush insisted that, before any agreement could be reached, the Palestinians and their leaders must first “reject violence” and “accept Israel’s right to exist”, while at the same time neglecting to insist that Israel stop its ongoing policy of manufacturing fake Palestinian terrorism which is used to demonise the Palestinians as terrorists and provide justification for the arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, torture and murder of Palestinian political leaders and civilians.
Bush’s plan therefore was that Palestinians must, as a prelude to peace, stop committing acts of violence that are actually carried out by Israeli provocateurs – an impossibility. At the same time, Bush requires that Palestinians “accept Israel’s right to exist”, which naturally means Israel as it exists today, which means Palestinians must accept Israel’s “right” to hold on to large tracts of stolen Palestinian land. Would you agree to such conditions? To use an analogy: Bush’s demands are akin to asking a person whose house has been stolen by a neighbor to accept the thief’s “right” to keep the stolen house before the person will be allowed to enter into negotiations about reacquiring his house, which will never happen if he agrees to this condition. Meanwhile, the Zionists will be facilitated in their continued efforts to find a way to plausibly exterminate the Palestinians.
Basically, Bush’s “Middle East Peace Summit”, is cut from the very same cloth as the Republicrats and Democans sleep-over last night – it is a charade, nothing more, and it is designed to placate the American and world population into giving the ZioNazis and the Bush cabal more time to finalise the planning of their next “spectacular” false flag terror attack, which will possibly involve several countries at once but will, however, on close examination, bear the clear signature of the real terrorists: Mossad, the CIA and MI5/6.
All in all then, a ‘hilarious’ few days here on old planet earth, and I really would be laughing if it were not so utterly depressing.
On Monday 2nd July 2007, the decider in chief of America over-ruled the decision of a U.S. court in June this year to jail Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, for two and a half years. Libby was convicted in March this year of lying to investigators probing the 2003 leak of CIA official Valerie Plame’s identity.
Plame’s identity was leaked to the press by the office of the Vice President in retaliation for Plame’s efforts to expose the U.S. government as having lied about its reasons for the invasion of Iraq and the murder, to date, of approximately 1 million Iraqi citizens. Dick Cheney, the instigator of the leak, was not charged because he, unlike Libby, had more ‘pull’ to avoid jail time for his part in the conspiracy. Libby was the fall guy, but as today’s news makes clear, he was always going to have a soft landing.
In his statement, Bush justified the move by stating: “with incarceration imminent, I believe it is now important to react” to the appeals court’s refusal to let Libby remain free.
H. Christopher Bartolomucci, a lawyer at Hogan & Hartson in Washington who worked on pardons in the White House from 2001 to 2003 agreed:
“This is a president who is not cowed by public opinion. This was a case involving a member of his administration, […] so the normal rules go out the window.”
Is that clear enough?
When an American president feels confident that he can brazenly and without fear of retribution “pardon” a former member of his administration for committing treason against the State in a case the implicates the entire government in what amounts to crimes against humanity, there really is only one word to describe such a situation: dictatorship.
Just don’t expect the mainstream media to use such an “inflammatory” word in tomorrow’s “fair and balanced” news coverage.