Friday, September 30, 2011

NATO is the future aggressive "Earth Force"...a global invasion and occupation force...

NATO is the future aggressive "Earth Force"...transforming into a global invasion and occupation force...

September 30, 2011 -- NATO transforming into a global invasion and occupation force...

After engaging in out-of-area invasions and occupations of Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Somalia, and Libya, the "North Atlantic" Treaty Organization, NATO, has transformed itself from a Cold War defensive alliance into a global offensive axis of nations that acts with or without United Nations authorization...

NATO, under its own umbrella or the aegis of the UN or European Union, has established de facto neo-colonial governments in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, South Sudan, and Libya. Political advisers from NATO nations act as virtual colonial administrators in all these nations, exercising veto authority over the governments installed by Western military might. NATO's template for invasion and occupation is now being honed for north Sudan and Syria...

The first nation to come under NATO occupation was Bosnia-Herzegovina, created from the ashes of the former Yugoslavia. After NATO's "Stabilization Force" (SFOR) was dissolved, the European Force (EUFOR) was created. EUFOR's "OPERATION ALTHEA" authorizes 1600 troops from mostly NATO nations, including France, Italy, Turkey, and Germany, to occupy Bosnia-Herzegovina. EUFOR's main base is at Camp Butmir, a former Yugoslav air base outside of Sarajevo. Additional troops can be deployed to Bosnia-Herzegovina from NATO's Kosovo Force (KFOR) in neighboring Kosovo, carved by NATO out of Serbia.

EUFOR is also supplemented by a European Police Mission (EUPM), comprising police forces from mostly NATO nations. The European Union Special Representative (EUSR( acts as a political viceroy with effective control over the government in Sarajevo. This control has been apparent in majority Muslim Bosnia-Herzegovina's waffling on how it will vote in the UN Security Council on Palestine's membership application.

NATO exercises political and military control over Kosovo through NATO's KFOR, which is based at Camp Film City in Pristina, the capital of Kosovo, a nation which remains unrecognized by UN Security permanent members Russia and China. While most NATO nations are opposed to UN membership for Palestine, they wholeheartedly support UN membership for Kosovo, a nation governed by remnants of the Kosovo Liberation Army, once recognized as a terrorist group by the United States and which has been accused of running a number of criminal enterprises, including human organs, narcotics, cigarette, nuclear material, weapons, and stolen automobile smuggling.

KFOR mainly comprises troops from NATO countries Germany, France, the United States, Italy, Poland, Slovenia, Romania, and Turkey. Under NATO KFOR command are troops from Ukraine, Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, Morocco, Armenia, Finland, and Ireland. There is little doubt that NATO's integration of non-NATO troops in theaters like Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Libya is an attempt to integrate through the back door the armed forces of neutral and non-European nations, yet another indication of NATO's global expansion. NATO is on a fast track to becoming a worldwide military force for a de facto one-world, largely unelected, government...

KFOR's commander reports to the Commander of Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy. KFOR's political adviser exercises de facto veto authority over the "independent" government of Kosovo...

Currently, KFOR troops are engaged in asserting Kosovo control over majority Serbian communes in northern Kosovo and the troops have used "non-lethal" force, including rubber bullets, on Serbs who want to be integrated with Serbia. KFOR troops have torn
down barricades erected by Serbs town of Mitrovica that divide the Serbian northern half of the town from the Albanian southern half. NATO troops have injured a number of Serbs who have tried to protect the barriers, resulting in sharp rebukes from Serbia and Russia. Serbs in Kosovo feel they will be sacrificed to Kosovo by a Serbian government more intent on gaining membership in the EU and, eventually, NATO.

In Afghanistan, NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) exercises political and military control over the "independent" government of President Hamid Karzai. ISAF's commander is General John Allen of the U.S. Army. NATO provides most of ISAF's troop contingent with the largest military contingents from the United States, Turkey, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark, and Poland. NATO has integrated into ISAF, troops from the non-NATO countries of Georgia, Australia, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Finland, Sweden, Jordan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Montenegro, New Zealand, South Korea, Macedonia, Tonga, Ukraine, and the United Arab Emirates. ISAF forces have been active in overt and covert operations in neighboring Pakistan, which is looming more and more on NATO's target list as a future nation that will see a NATO invasion and occupation, with the major goal of securing and removing Pakistan's nuclear weapons. ISAF is coordinating its anti-Pakistan activities with special forces and intelligence units from India and Israel. Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Admiral Mike Mullen recently accused Pakistan of aiding the Haqqani network in Afghanistan in carrying out of terrorist attacks on NATO targets,, including the US embassy in Kabul.

NATO's symbol points in all directions. Where will NATO draw its boundaries? What are its ultimate TOP SECRET COSMIC plans?

NATO political advisers, including the chief ISAF political adviser, exercise de facto veto authority over Karzai's government. However, ultimate political authority over the Kabul government is maintained by the U.S. State Department's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman. Grossman replaced the late Richard Holbrooke, one of the chief architects of NATO's war against Yugoslavia and the nation's ultimate dissolution.

Although NATO's presence in Iraq has diminished with the withdrawal of a number of troops from NATO nations, NATO's presence continues under the aegis of the NATO Training Mission-Iraq (NTM-I), established in 2004 as the result of a "request" from the interim government of Iraq and under the alleged authority of UN Security Council 1546, which authorized the creation of the interim Iraqi government. NTM-I's operations are politically directed by the North Atlantic Council, NATO's top political authority. The U.S. ambassador to Iraq, housed in America's largest embassy, continues to play a major political role in Iraq. NTM-I troops, mainly from the United States and Italy, will continue their presence in Iraq after the planned withdrawal of U.S., playing a major role in border security and Iraqi intelligence activities. Obama administration officials have signaled a willingness to extend the U.S. troop presence after the planned withdrawal of combat troops on December 31 of this year. NTM-I units will continue to be deployed at Iraqi bases, including at Camp Dublin at Baghdad International Airport, the Ar-Rustamiyah base southeast of Baghdad, Taji airbase north of Baghdad, and within the Green Zone in Baghdad where a US "Embassy" contingent numers in the tousands...., half of them spies...

NATO, through the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), maintains de facto control over the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) of Somalia via the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), which consists mostly of troops from Uganda and Burundi. In addition, the TFG is supported by Ethiopian military forces and CIA operatives. The CIA operates from a secret base at Mogadishu's Aden Adde International Airport. CIA officers direct the activities of AMISOM's Ugandan and Burundian forces in Somalia and conduct drone attacks against suspected Islamist guerrillas in the country. The CIA base in Mogadishu also coordinates drone attacks throughout the Horn of Africa and Yemen with other CIA drone facilities in Djibouti, Seychelles, and Oman. The delegation representing the TFG was the only non-white/European delegation to walk out of the UN General Assembly during the recent speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In Libya, NATO has established a permanent link with the Libyan National Transition Council with plans to name a political adviser who will "advise" the Libyan government in a carbon copy of NATO's political advisory roles in Kosovo and Afghanistan. The NATO political adviser, a post pushed by the CIA-backed American Libyan Council, will coordinate the introduction of NATO "peacekeeping" forces, expected to be drawn from Turkey and those Arab nations that are taking part in NATO's military operations in Libya -- Qatar and the United Arab Emirates -- and nations participating in NATO operations in other countries, including Morocco and Jordan. NATO's outreach to Arab monarchies in the Gulf, Jordan, and Morocco to become de facto "associate members" of NATO are conducted through the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. NATO's outreach to Jordan and Morocco, as well as Egypt, Israel, Algeria, Mauritania, Tunisia, and now, Libya, is conducted through the Mediterranean Dialogue...

NATO has extended its military mission in Libya, "OPERATION UNIFIED PROTECTOR," citing UN Security Council Resolution 2009, an authorization disputed by Russia and members of the African Union that have resisted being assimilated into the AFRICOM structure, most notably, South Africa.

The Libyan National Transition Council has already agreed to a permanent NATO military presence in Libya, including the establishment of a NATO airbase at Kufra, near the border with northern Sudan. The government in Khartoum will be the next target for NATO and AFRICOM in Africa, according to intelligence sources in Africa. The goal for NATO is to deny China continued access to Sudanese oil and promote the secession of Darfur, which will, like Kosovo and South Sudan, will become a vassal state of NATO, with AFRICOM and NATO calling the shots, with diplomatic support from pro-West African Union nations like Ethiopia, Uganda, and Rwanda, used as political cover.

NATO plans also foresee NATO-directed regimes soon coming to power in Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, Iran in the near future, with North Korea, Russia, and China in a more distant crystal ball....

Some In China Are Pushing For A Declaration Of War Against Vietnam And The Philippines...

Some In China Are Pushing For A Declaration Of War Against Vietnam And The Philippines...


The lead article the Chinese Communist Party newspaper Global Times on Tuesday contained an alarming call for a declaration of war against Vietnam and Philippines, two nations that in recent weeks launched the loudest protests against China's sweeping maritime sovereignty claims over the South China Sea.

Headlined "The Time to Use Force Has Arrived in the South China Sea; Let's Wage Wars on the Philippines and Vietnam to Prevent More Wars," the article was written by Long Tao, a likely pseudonym literally translated as "The Dragon's Teaching." The name refers to the third chapter of the famous Chinese ancient military classic "Six Secret Military Teachings" that, among other things, promotes the idea that the best way to establish military awesomeness is to kill the highest-ranked dissenters.

Vietnam is viewed by China as the most militarily capable state whose government is the most politically uncompromising when it comes to challenging China's territorial claims in the South China Sea.

The Philippines recently riled China greatly for its closeness to Japan, and its cantankerous and successful move last week to hold talks within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, without inviting China, on cooperating and clarifying consensual and disputed claims in the South China Sea.

The fiery rhetoric of the article states that "the South China Sea is the best place for China to wage wars" because "of the more than 1,000 oil rigs there, none belongs to China; of the four airfields in the Spratly Islands, none belongs to China; once a war is declared, the South China Sea will be a sea of fire [with burning oil rigs]. Who will suffer the most from a war? Once a war starts there, the Western oil companies will flee the area, who will suffer the most?"

The article further calculates that "the wars should be focused on striking the Philippines and Vietnam, the two noisiest troublemakers, to achieve the effect of killing one chicken to scare the monkeys."

What about possible U.S. intervention once China starts a war in the South China Sea? No worry, the article states, because the U.S. will be utterly unable to open a second front in the South China Sea to fight China because it is deeply mired in the anti-terror wars of the Middle East.

The Global Times is China's largest paper focusing on international news under direct sponsorship from the Communist Party central authority.


China is set to launch its first space lab Thursday or Friday, depending on weather conditions at the Jiuquan Space Launch Center in the remote Gansu province.

The lab, called Heavenly Palace, is an initial part of China's plans to develop space rendezvous and docking capabilities for a future large-scale, inhabited space station to be built by 2020. It is designed to dock with the soon-to-be-launched space vehicles Divine Vessel 8, Divine Vessel 9 and Divine Vessel 10.

The 8 1/2-ton Heavenly Palace will be carried to its orbit by a Long March 2F rocket. China is taking advantage of the U.S. and Russia's rapidly dwindling space programs. The mission of the International Space Station is scheduled to end in 2020, the year China plans to take over and become the only country with its own space station.


The National Ballet of China is currently engaged in a month of performances at the Kennedy Center in Washington. Some featured selections in the troupe's programs have ignited fierce protests among Chinese-American communities in the area.

Leading the evening performance is a Maoist propaganda classic called the "Red Detachment of Women," one of the eight model operas shown during the chaos of the Cultural Revolution that advocates "revolutionary violence," "communism being the truth" and the "Communist Party being our leader." Another piece, "Yellow River," ends with the ultimate communist musical propaganda kitsch, "The East Is Red." On Saturday, an angry crowd representing 26 human-rights and democracy groups gathered near the Kennedy Center to protest the communist production.

Miles Yu

The Chinese wonder why their neighboring countries are leery of their intentions. But former Filipino President Fidel Ramos is right when he mentions that the Chinese are really focused on the United States.....

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Pakistan at a boiling point, Kayani calls emergency Corps Commanders meeting...

.The meeting — chaired by the Army chief and attended by all Corps Commanders and Pricipal Staff officers — was called to discuss key issues of importance and urgency, including matters related to national security and the regional peace. — File Photo

.The meeting — chaired by the Army chief and attended by all Corps Commanders and Principal Staff officers — was called to discuss key issues of importance and urgency, including matters related to national security and the regional peace. —

[In the continuing battle to bring American and Pakistani thinking on the terror war into alignment, we must bring to light the hidden things which are tearing us apart. The ongoing arguments over differences between our CIA and Pakistan's ISI, magnified by military differences, cannot be calmed by accusations and denials, but only through admissions. Our two "Premier" spy agencies have worked together for many years, in many criminal activities. Many of these activities have become common knowledge. Acknowledging the obvious is an important first step, which both sides must be willing to take. The disagreement now comes from Americans trying to blame Pakistan for all of it.

Both sides must acknowledging their shared responsibility for this criminal activity, instead of blaming it all on the other side. Our worst mutual crime streak has been centered around our creation of militant/terrorist networks and their continued support. Today's split comes about because of the necessary shifting of the overall mission from creating terrorists to fighting against them. Many elements of both spy agencies have refused to support the new mission and they continue to support their terrorists even after our nations have declared war upon them. These "rogue elements" are the cause of the ongoing argument between us. This big problem of trouble-making by rogue elements must be solved. Failure to approach the problem as a problem with out of control rogues will probably end in some level of war between the two nations. This has to be avoided at all costs, meaning that the rogues on both sides must be exposed so that they alone will take the blame.

The flurry of high-level meetings, ending with CENTCOM Chief Mattis confronting Kayani and now this emergency meeting of Corps Commanders (to be followed by Gen. Kayani's trip to speak before the British International Institute for Strategic Studies), is stark testimony as to how far the situation has deteriorated today. It will be interesting to see how the narrative either improves or worsens, after the Royal trouble-making institute puts their spin on the situation. There is far too much at stake here to allow the Illuminate masterminds to continue to muck it all up.

Everybody has to cut-off all support for their own proxy terrorists and in AfPak, everybody has proxies.]

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s army chief General Ashfaq Kayani on Sunday called a ‘special’ meeting of his top commanders to discuss the security situation, the military said, as the war of words with the United States escalated.

The extraordinary meeting of the corps commanders came against the backdrop of sharp US allegations that Pakistan army’s spy agency supported the Haqqani militant group Washington blames for the recent attack on its embassy and other targets in Kabul.

In a terse two-line statement, the military said the commanders would “review (the) prevailing security situation.”

Kayani, who is departing for London later tonight to address the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Royal College of Defense Studies, is chairing the meeting.

[This note on the International Institute for Strategic Studies--

The IISS is the vehicle for MI6-Tavistock black propaganda, and wet jobs (an intelligence over name denoting an operation where bloodshed is required), adverse nuclear incidents and terrorism, which goes to the world's press for dissemination, as well as to governments and military establishments.

Membership in the IISS includes representatives of 87 major wire services and press associations, as well as 138 senior editors and columnists....

The IISS is nothing more than a higher echelon opinion maker, as defined by Lippmann and Bernays. In the writing of books, and in newspapers, IISS was formed to be a coordinating centre for not only creating opinions, but to get those opinions and scenarios out much faster and to a far greater audience than could be reached by a book for example.... "

Bernays wrote: "The conscious and intelligent manipulation of organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in a democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government, which is the true ruling power in our country...... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of...."--end of quote, editor]

“The meeting reflects the gravity of crisis,” retired general, turned security analyst, Talat Masood said.

“They will issue a statement to express solidarity (within the military) and to show that they all are on one page.”

The corps commanders meeting comes a day after Kayani met with US CENTCOM commander General James N. Mattis in Pakistan, but military spokesman Major-General Athar Abbas said the two meetings were “unrelated.”...LOL

Contacts with Haqqanis

In an interview with CNN, Abbas acknowledged that army’s Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) maintained contacts with the Haqqani network, but said that didn’t mean it supported it.

“Any intelligence agency would like to maintain contact with whatever opposition group, whatever terrorist organization … for some positive outcome,” he told CNN in a telephone interview.

However, he said there was a huge difference between maintaining those contacts to facilitate peace and supporting it against an ally.

In the most blunt remarks by a US official since Pakistan joined the US-led war on militancy in 2001, the outgoing chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, on Thursday testified before the US Senate that the Haqqani militant network is a “veritable arm” of the ISI.

He also for the first time held Islamabad responsible for the Kabul attack, saying Pakistan provided support for that assault.

On Saturday night, Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani rejected US allegations as a sign of American “confusion and policy disarray”.

“We strongly reject assertions of complicity with the Haqqanis or of proxy war,” Gilani said, breaking off from a speech to aid agencies and foreign diplomats on the country’s flood disaster.

Although Pakistan officially abandoned support for the Taliban after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States in 2001 and allied itself with Washington’s “war on terror”, analysts say elements of the ISI refused to make the doctrinal shift.

Gilani’s Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told Washington on Friday that it risked losing an ally if it kept accusing Islamabad of playing a double game in the war against militancy, and escalating a crisis in ties triggered by US forces’ killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in an unannounced raid in May.

Security analyst Masood said the sharpened rhetoric between Pakistan and the United States could lead to a “collision”.

One of the options for Pakistan, he said, could be to put pressure on Haqqani fighters to leave Pakistan to avert a confrontation.

“I think both Pakistan and the United States will step back to avoid making things worse.”....

Karzai trapped in no-man's land....LOL
By M K Bhadrakumar

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has made his first political move a week after the assassination of the head of the Afghan High Peace Council and former president, Burhanuddin Rabbani.

Following a meeting in Kabul that included tribal elders, legislative chairmen, cabinet ministers, former mujahideen commanders and his two vice presidents, Karzai's office issued a statement on Wednesday admitting that a question mark should be on the Taliban's capacity to take independent decisions, implying they were merely a Pakistani proxy.

The statement suggested that Karzai no more regards the Taliban as his errant "brothers", which used to be his preferred epithet to describe the insurgents. "During our three-year efforts for peace, the Taliban has martyred our religious ulema, tribal elders, women, children, old and young. By killing Rabbani, they showed they are not able to take decisions. Now, the question is [whether we should seek] peace with whom, which people?”

Karzai's retraction
It is a belated confession by Karzai, necessitated by the force of circumstances, as he gropes for a way forward. Conceivably, it need not be taken as the final word. Karzai is grandstanding. Rabbani's departure has left Karzai stranded in a no-man's land where he stands all by himself - derided by the Taliban, disowned by the United States and despised by the many fuming detractors within the erstwhile Northern Alliance (NA) groups whom he sidelined and kept out of office.

Karzai has been one of the first and consistent advocates of peace talks with the Taliban. His speech at the London conference in January 2010 bears eloquent testimony to Karzai's deep-rooted conviction that Taliban are a part of the Afghan nation and should be allowed to participate in mainstream Afghan life. Many countries were not convinced that was the case but still went along since it was Karzai's Afghan initiative (backed robustly, of course by Richard Holbrooke, the late US special representative for AfPak).

By Karzai's own admission, Rabbani's assassination puts a question mark on his power of judgment. Which is an unfair self-indictment because he was fundamentally right in his judgment that the war was not getting anywhere and only through a political settlement with the Taliban can it be brought to an end.

His bete noir, Abdullah Abdullah, the former Afghan foreign minister and presidential candidate, has seized the moment and was in an incendiary mood this week. He said Taliban have "not demonstrated even one sign of interest in seriously coming to the table to discuss a political settlement ... They think that using this strategy will allow them to gain power in Afghanistan."

Abdullah is riding the wave of indignation among Rabbani's followers. He knows it makes good politics to do some more Karzai-bashing when Washington is listening: "Day by day, the government is losing people's support an trust. Government bodies like the police and military have not been developed, and there is no rule of law. So, this encourages the Taliban to continue terrorist attacks and bring harm to the people of Afghanistan."

But what is the alternative that Abdullah would suggest? Karzai had sensed all along that there was widespread opposition to his peace plan among the non-Pashtun groups belonging to the erstwhile Northern Alliance, which Abdullah was tapping into for mounting a political challenge to his presidency. Karzai was wary about Abdullah's channels to influential quarters in Washington.

Karzai's trump cards were two. One, he had Rabbani with him. Karzai counted on him as a political bridge to the non-Pashtun constituencies as well as to the mujahideen. With Rabbani gone, he has a problem connecting with the anti-Taliban constituency in Afghanistan, leave alone bringing them on board a broad-based settlement.

The president's other trump cards have been his two vice presidents, who are powerful satraps in the non-Pashtun political domain. One is Mohammed Fahim, the strongman from Panjshir who inherited Ahmed Shah Massoud's war machine and the other is Karim Khalili, leader of the Hazara Shi'ites. Both have everything to lose in a Taliban takeover in Afghanistan.

Karzai has also been indulging in a delicate exercise in the past few years building bridges with the Pashtun tribes and carving out a base in the southern regions. He depended heavily on the ruthless skills of his half-brother Wali Karzai on this front, but his assassination in July of Kandahar's mayor has thrown Karzai's stratagem into shambles.

If the peace process had progressed, a new political dynamic would have emerged that strengthened Karzai, but with Wali and Rabbani removed from the scene, he is forced to gravitate toward the non-Pashtun camp, although it isn't his natural constituency.

Peering into a bottomless pit
Ideally, this is a moment when the Americans should raise his comfort level. On the contrary, they are looking away and are consumed by their own problems. The latest United Nations Report on secretary general Ban Ki-Moon's desk says Afghanistan is witnessing "considerable political volatility and disconcerting levels of insecurity".

Former commander of US forces in Afghanistan David Petraeus' claims regarding the encouraging results of the US's surge seem an obfuscation of the harsh ground reality. The UN report says there has been a 40% increase in the monthly average number of "security incidents" in the first eight months of 2011 as compared to the same period last year.

More important, it says the southeastern region which was the theatre for Petraeus' surge remains the "focus of military activity" accounting for two-thirds of all violent incidents, and that even where the US handed over responsibility for security to the Afghan forces, a "resilient insurgency" is challenging the efficacy of the transition.

On top of this, the US is barely coping with Pakistan's blunt refusal to act against the Haqqani network. The standoff can turn into a confrontation any day from now if the US decides to put the Haqqanis on the list of terrorists.

Chairman of the US Senate Intelligence Committee Dianne Feinstein has written to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that on the basis of the testimony given by the outgoing chairman of the joint chiefs of staff committee Mike Mullen, the Haqqani group "meets the standards for designation" as a terrorist organization. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has agreed with Mullen's testimony.

In such a scenario, logically, the US would have to consider at some stage declaring Pakistan as a state sponsoring terrorism, putting at risk the entire future of the "war on terror".

Put plainly, the US-Pakistan relationship is peering into a bottomless pit. Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani was not far off the mark in his remark that the US's Afghan policy shows "confusion and policy disarray".

At such a juncture, where is the time or inclination for the Barack Obama administration to come to Karzai's rescue? On the other hand, Washington is resorting to blame game accusing Karzai's government for ineptitude and corruption and as responsible for all that is going wrong.

The biggest danger in Karzai's gravitation to the NA camp is that it would exacerbate ethnic polarization in Afghanistan. The strengthening of the NA hold on the power structure in Kabul at this juncture virtually forecloses any scope for reconciliation with the Taliban.

As the US drawdown accelerates through the coming months, Karzai will face the dilemma of having to depend more and more on the military muscle of the NA groups. That would be a recipe for another round of civil war.

Regional politics is bound to play a decisive role in what lies ahead. Karzai understands that Pakistan is central to any peace process with the Taliban. He already met Gilani last Thursday when the Pakistani prime minister traveled to Kabul. Gilani is expected in Kabul again in early October.

Pakistan can be expected to do all it can to kickstart another round of peace process. Its interest lies in preventing Karzai becoming a prisoner of the anti-Taliban NA groups, which is to say to prevent a return of the NA's dominance of the Kabul government. But in the present political climate in Kabul, the task of finding another consensus candidate to replace Rabbani will not be easy.

Meanwhile, Karzai is heading for New Delhi next week, his first visit abroad after Rabbani's assassination. It is a scheduled visit apparently for delivering a memorial lecture in New Delhi on regional politics, but Karzai would seek India's support with the expectation that it might give him leverage vis-a-vis Pakistan in the coming period and it has a degree of influence with the NA groups. India, however, would prefer to stand on the sidelines and it remains wary of another civil war in Afghanistan.

India's warnings of the shape of things to come are indeed coming true but this is hardly the moment for self-gratification. Delhi is exasperated with the inconsistencies and disarray in the US's policies. The aggravation of the US-Pakistan rift may appear to work to India's advantage but on the contrary, there is a sense of disquiet in Delhi over the talk of possible military strikes against Pakistan.

The point is, the result of any such US incursions into Pakistan cannot be far different from what happened in Cambodia following the US invasion in April 1970 - namely, a radicalization of the entire region. Just as the Cambodian incursion couldn't salvage the Vietnam War, in the present case, too, staving off defeat in Afghanistan is going to be very difficult for the US.

All the same, Indian commentators have almost in unison pointed out that Rabbani's assassination shows there has been hardly any change in the Taliban's mindset, which militates against the idea of any from of power sharing with other Afghan groups.

Having said that, New Delhi is also keen to build on the current atmosphere of cordiality with Pakistan and encourage Islamabad to draw a line under cross-border terrorist activities. The standoff with the US, ironically, may make Islamabad more receptive to Indian concerns. Karzai will receive renewed assurances of Indian support during his visit next week, but on balance India will not allow itself to be sucked into the Afghan endgame.

Fatal mistake
The point is, Karzai's predicament is also the manifestation of a much bigger crisis that is enveloping Afghanistan. The Afghan body polity is virtually crumbling and the US neither has the energy nor the resources and the will to fortify the Afghan state when such support is needed more than ever in the past decade.

The meltdown leading to a civil war can be rapid if the ethnic rift widens in the coming period. The signs are not good in this regard. Rabbani's assassination has torn asunder the fragile crust that was forming on the ethnic divides in the country. Karzai's dependence on the "warlords" of the NA will set the clock back in Afghan politics. Parliament is already at a standstill. There is great political uncertainty. Abdullah was echoing a widely held perception among the Afghan politicians when he said that Rabbani's is not going to be the last political assassination.

But overarching all this is the disintegration of the US's alliance with Pakistan. The US needs to grasp that it has no alternative but to concede Pakistan's legitimate interests in Afghanistan. Pakistan is not going to blink since it has high stakes on the Afghan chessboard and Washington is nobody to dictate how to frame its interests.

Any US incursion into Pakistan is sure to bring forth a furious backlash that will dwarf the Beirut Barracks Bombing in October 1983, which killed 241 American servicemen. And that will be the end of the Obama presidency. Make no mistake about it.

The only course available for the US is to rein in the irreconcilable NA elements (many of whom were foolishly propped up by the US as the "anti-thesis" to Karzai and have no standing of their own) and allow Karzai and his Pakistani interlocutors to kickstart another effort within the framework of the Afghan-Pakistan peace process.

It should allow Karzai to select his own nominee to replace Rabbani with whom he can work closely - and whom Pakistan is comfortable with. That should be the first necessary step in the coming days. A vacuum should not be allowed to develop.

Equally, there should be a change of heart on the part of the US and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies; they should not interfere with the intra-Afghan peace process. Despite whatever inadequacies he may have, Karzai is still the most credible figure to lead the Kabul set up in the peace process.

Again, he deserves to be given more space to do the sort of Afghan-style networking that he is good at, and create his own coalition and establish his credibility with the Taliban. This is simply not the time to apply Western norms of politics. Simply put, there has been far too much US interference.

The US and NATO's attempt to establish a parallel track of their own has been at the root of the discord between Washington and Islamabad. If and when the veil lifts on Rabbani's assassination, it is more than probable that his recent proximity with the US turned out to be the ultimate fatal mistake on the part of this extraordinary politician, which cost him his life.

Saturday, September 24, 2011

The US continues to make really dumb decisions....Whistling past the graveyard.....

The US continues to make really dumb decisions....Whistling past the graveyard.....

Leadership is the wise use of power. Power is the capacity to translate intention into reality and sustain it. — Warren G. Bennis

Earlier this summer I mentioned that I was reading Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, and I promised to sum up the insights that I had gleaned from it. The book is well-worth reading -- if not quite on a par with his earlier Guns, Germs, and Steel -- and you'll learn an enormous amount about a diverse set of past societies and the range of scientific knowledge (geology, botany, forensic archaeology, etc.) that is enabling us to understand why they prospered and/or declined.

The core of the book is a series of detailed case studies of societies that collapsed and disappeared because they were unable to adapt to demanding and/or deteriorating environmental, economic, or political conditions. He examines the fate of the Easter Islanders, the Mayans, the Anasazi of the Pacific Southwest, the Norse colonies in Western Greenland (among others), and contrasts them with other societies (e.g., the New Guinea highlanders) who managed to develop enduring modes of life in demanding circumstances. He also considers modern phenomenon such as the Rwandan genocide and China and Australia's environmental problems in light of these earlier examples.

I read the book because I am working on a project exploring why states (and groups and individuals) often find it difficult to "cut their losses" and abandon policies that are clearly not working. This topic is a subset of the larger (and to me, endlessly fascinating) question of why smart and well-educated people can nonetheless make disastrous (and with hindsight, obviously boneheaded) decisions. Diamond's work is also potentially relevant to the perennial debate on American decline: Is it occurring, is it inevitable, and how should we respond?

So what lessons does Diamond draw from his case studies, and what insights might we glean for the conduct of foreign policy? Here are a few thoughts that occurred to me as I finished the book.

First, he argues that sometimes societies fail to anticipate an emerging problem because they lack adequate knowledge or prior experience with the phenomenon at hand. Primitive societies may not have recognized the danger of soil depletion, for example, because they lacked an adequate understanding of basic soil chemistry. A society may also fail to spot trouble if the main problem it is facing recurs only infrequently, because the knowledge of how to detect or deal with the problem may have been forgotten. As he emphasizes, this is especially problematic for primitive societies that lack written records, but historical amnesia can also occur even in highly literate societies like our own.

By analogy, one could argue that some recent failures in U.S. foreign policy were of this sort. Hardly anybody anticipated that U.S. support for the anti-Soviet mujaheddin in Afghanistan would eventually lead to the formation of virulent anti-American terrorist groups, in part because the U.S. leaders didn't know very much about that part of the world and because public discourse about U.S. policy in the Middle East is filled with gaping holes. Similarly, the people who led us into Iraq in 2003 were remarkably ignorant about the history and basic character of Iraqi society (as well as the actual nature of Saddam's regime). To make matters worse, the U.S. military had forgotten many of the lessons of Vietnam and had to try to relearn them all over again, with only partial success.

Second, societies may fail to detect a growing problem if their leaders are too far removed from the source of the trouble. Diamond refers to this as the problem of "distant managers," and it may explain why U.S. policymakers often make decisions that seem foolish in hindsight. As I've noted here before, one problem facing U.S. foreign policymakers is the sheer number and scope of the problems they are trying to address, which inevitably forces them to rely on reports from distant subordinates and to address issues that they cannot be expected to understand very well. Barack Obama doesn't get to spend the next few years learning Pashto and immersing himself in the details of Afghan history and culture; instead, he has to make decisions based on what he is being told by people on the ground (who may or may not know more than he does). Unfortunately, the latter have obvious reasons to tell an upbeat story, if only to make their own efforts look good. If things are going badly, therefore, the people at the top back in Washington may be the last to know.

Third, serious problems may go undetected when a long-term negative trend is masked by large short-term fluctuations. Climate change is the classic illustration here: there are lots of short-term fluctuations in atmospheric temperature (daily, seasonally, annually and over eons), which allows climate change skeptics to seize upon any unusual cold snap as "evidence" that greenhouse gases are of no concern.

Similarly, it's easy to find short-term signs of American primacy that may be masking adverse long-term trends. Optimists can point to U.S. military predominance and the fact that the American economy is still the world's largest, or to the number of patents and Nobel Prizes that U.S. scientists continue to win. But just as the British Empire reached its greatest territorial expanse after World War I (when its actual power was decidedly on the wane), these positive features may be largely a product of past investments (and good fortune) and focusing on them could lead us to miss the eroding foundations of American power.

A fourth source of foolish decisions is the well-known tendency for individuals to act in ways that are in their own selfish interest but not in the interest of the society as a whole. The "tragedy of the commons" is a classic illustration of this problem, but one sees the same basic dynamic whenever a narrow interest group's preferences are allowed to trump the broader national interest. Tariffs to protect particular industries or foreign policies designed to appease a particular domestic constituency are obvious cases in point.

Ironically, these problems may be especially acute in today's market-oriented democracies. We like to think that open societies foster a well-functioning "marketplace of ideas," and that the clash of different views will weed out foolish notions and ensure that problems get identified and addressed in a timely fashion. Sometimes that's probably true, but when well-funded special interests can readily pollute the national mind, intellectual market failure is the more likely result. After all, it is often easier and cheaper to invent self-serving lies and distortions than it is to ferret out the truth, and there are plenty of people (and organizations) for whom truth-telling is anathema and self-serving political propaganda is the norm. When professional falsifiers are more numerous, better-funded, and louder than truth-tellers, society will get dumber over time and will end up repeating the same blunders.

Fifth, even when a state or society recognizes that it is in trouble, Diamond identifies a number of pathologies that make it harder for them to adapt and survive. Political divisions may make it impossible to take timely action even when everyone realizes that something ought to be done (think gridlock in Congress), and key leaders may be prone to either "groupthink" or various forms of psychological denial. And the bad news here is that no one has ever devised an effective and universally reliable antidote to these problems.

Moreover, if a group's identity is based on certain cherished values or beliefs, it may be hard to abandon them even when survival is at stake. Diamond suggests that the Norse colonies in Greenland may have disappeared because the Norse were unwilling to abandon certain traditional practices and imitate the local Inuits (e.g., by adopting seal hunting via kayaks), and it is easy to think of contemporary analogues to this sort of cultural rigidity. Military organizations often find it hard to abandon familiar doctrines and procedures, and states that are strongly committed to particular territorial objectives often find it nearly impossible to rethink these commitments. Look how long it took the French to leave Algeria, or consider the attachment to Kosovo that is central to Serbian nationalist thinking, and how it led them into a costly (and probably unnecessary) war in 1999.

To sum up (in Diamond's words):

Human societies and smaller groups make disastrous decisions for a whole sequence of reasons: failure to anticipate a problem, failure to perceive it once it has arisen, failure to attempt to solve it after it has been perceived, and failure to succeed in attempts to solve it."

That last point is worth highlighting too. Even when states do figure out that they're in trouble and get serious about trying to address the problem, they may still fail because a ready and affordable fix is not available. Given their remarkably fortunate history, Americans tend to think that any problem can be fixed if we just try hard enough. That was never true in the past and it isn't true today, and the real challenge remains learning how to distinguish between those situations where extra effort is likely to pay off and those where cutting one's losses makes a lot more sense...


By Carl Herman, National Board Certified Teacher in economics, government, and history, who blogs as the Nonpartisan Examiner at Carl was one of the leaders who launched the microcredit movement, and is a tireless activist for peace and justice.

In the story, The Emperor’s New Clothes, a single clear voice broke the public’s confusion. At once, the public recognized what was before their eyes. The illusion of the emperor and minions was over.

The United States is in a similar condition. The public knows something is terribly wrong with what appear to be unlawful wars and related War Crimes, economic looting in the trillions, and corporate media who lie and distract. Public confusion is lifting as literally millions of Americans now have sufficient command of the “emperor has no clothes” facts to explain, document, and prove the Orwellian crimes of the American emperors and minions.

And just as with our analogy, when critical mass of public understanding provides sufficient voice, the illusion of US “leadership” behaving lawfully will be over in an instant. They, and their minions, will face criminal and civil prosecution from a public that outnumbers them over a hundred to one, will have law enforcement on their side, and will be outraged by the massive crimes that annually murdered millions, attacked and harmed billions, and looted trillions of our dollars every year.

This condition brings an urgent and poignant choice upon “leadership” and their minions: given that the illusion will soon be over, who will stand with the public and the facts now (better late than never), and who will stand for the empire’s ongoing murder, misery, and plunder?

The advantages of standing with humanity:

  • The choice of connectedness and love is more attractive (literally) than murderous disconnected selfishness.
  • Many of us offer a Truth and Reconciliation process to resolve these crimes (here ). Those who cooperate now and contribute to bringing the crimes to light and termination are in stronger positions to receive Truth and Reconciliation instead of prosecution for egregious crimes against humanity.
  • It’s a much cooler story to be like Darth Vader or Severus Snape in ultimate heroism than ignominious death like the emperor and Voldemort. Those like me will seek to protect you.

The millions of awakened Americans know from the facts that “leadership” acts against public interest. For example, as I wrote with California passing a bill to fully understand the benefits of a state-owned bank:

Governor Brown, so far, has upheld the current criminal political and economic “leadership,” and requires a “Scrooge conversion” before he becomes a partner of the people. We know this is true because he does not declare his support for the people with other “emperor has no clothes” obvious crimes of “leadership”:

  1. Congressional reports disclose that all “reasons” for war with Afghanistan and Iraq were known to be lies as they were told.
  2. Orwellian unlawful wars, including using depleted uranium weapons to damn victims with continuous misery and death.
  3. Obfuscation and silence of the obvious answer of ending an Orwellian “debt supply” and replacing it with money. This is the national solution for our so-called “monetary” system.
  4. Silence while the US allows a million children a month to die of preventable poverty, even though historically ending poverty reduces population growth rate, the investment is less than 1% of the developed nations’ gross national incomes (GNI), and the US has promised this amount and reneged multiple times.
  5. Torture, extrajudicial assassinations (including against American citizens) and indefinite detentions.
  6. Destruction of the US Constitution as the US devolves into a form of government closest to fascism and nowhere near a constitutional republic.
  7. Literally throwing Americans onto the streets rather than take any of a dozen acts to allow them to stay in their homes.
  8. Intentional unemployment, crime, infrastructure decay, fear, anger, depression (both economic and psychological) rather than create money for full employment.
  9. US corporate media complicity to lie by omission and commission to keep the above facts unrecognized by the American public.
  10. You should also know this area of Truth: the King family’s civil trial found the US government guilty of Dr. King’s assassination. US Corporate media refused to cover the trial or interview Dr. King’s wife. His family’s opinion is that the US government murdered Dr. King to end his protests against unlawful US wars and his call to end poverty.

For my archive of published articles, I’m’s Nonpartisan Examiner.

For my best comprehensive article to explain, document, and prove unlawful US wars all based on known lies and criminal economic fraud that costs American trillions every year: Open proposal for US revolution: end unlawful wars, parasitic economics. 1 of 4.


Friday, September 23, 2011

Neo-Ottomanism on steroids, Turkey is over-reaching with arrogant posturing...

Neo-Ottomanism on steroids, Turkey is over-reaching with arrogant posturing in the strategic chessboard of the Middle East ....

Rudyard Kipling:
"Now it is not good for the Christian's health
To hustle the Aryan brown,
For the Christian riles and the Aryan smiles,
And it weareth the Christian down.
And the end of the fight
Is a tombstone white
With the name of the late deceased
And the epitaph drear: "A fool lies here
who tried to hustle the East."

Turkey's foreign policy hits a dead end...and a brick wall of Arab Nationalism...

By Mahan Abedin

As Turkey intensifies its efforts to influence the trajectory of the Arab Spring, the sharp rebuke by the leaders of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood to suggestions by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that Egypt adopt a "secular state", is a carefully calculated statement and may well mark the limits of Turkish influence in the Arab world.

In keeping with the tenets of its so-called "neo-Ottoman" foreign policy, which is closely associated to the scholarly persona of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkey has exerted maximum rhetorical energy in support of the Arab Spring with a view to influencing the outcome to the greatest extent possible.

But Turkey's endeavor to offer an interpretation of the Arab Spring different to the ones espoused by the West and Iran is beset by a number of problems, not least the inconvenient fact that in comparison to the West and Iran, Turkey's new foreign policy lacks sufficient conceptual clarity and ideological authenticity.

Even if the reaction by Muslim Brotherhood leaders to Erdogan's statement is in part motivated by internal Brotherhood politics, the effect is still the same; Turkey cannot expect to be a decisive influence on the Arab world's Islamists.

Neo-Ottomanism on steroids
In recent weeks, Turkey has been the most active state on the Arab political scene, with its leaders pontificating aloud on the potential of their country's power to reshape a region rocked by revolutions and civil wars. This frenetic activity was reflected most boldly by Davutoglu before his departure to the United Nations, where he told the press that Turkey was "right at the center of everything".

Beyond the headlines, the key questions for analysts are to what extent Turkey is over-reaching and could this arrogant posturing bode ill for the future of Ankara's admittedly promising new foreign policy.

Since coming to power in November 2002, Turkey's Islamic-centered Justice and Development Party (AKP) has scored major foreign policy successes, the most notable of which is the policy of "zero problems" with immediate neighbors. A brief glance at Turkey's immediate neighborhood reveals the extent of the transformation. Barely a decade ago, Turkey's relations with its neighbors were beset by complex disputes, misunderstandings and mutual recriminations; whereas now there is extensive and deepening engagement.

For their part, regional powers ranging from Iran to the key Arab states, have welcomed Turkey's pro-active role, viewing Turkey's shift toward the Arab and broader Muslim world as a long-delayed corrective to decades of westward orientation at the expense of Turkey's essential Islamic identity and its deep historical ties to the Muslim world.

Regional hopes of a growing Turkish presence on the strategic chessboard of the Middle East received a shot in the arm following the apparently steady deterioration of Turkish-Israeli ties, culminating in the Israeli attack on the Gaza freedom flotilla and the killing of nine Turkish pro-Palestinian activists on board the MV Mavi Marmara in May 2010.

The repercussions of that incident are still unfolding. Israel's refusal to apologize for killing Turkish activists on the high seas, following the publication of the United Nations Palmer Report calling for "an appropriate statement of regret", sparked an angry response from Ankara and the quick expulsion of the Israeli ambassador. Turkey also announced an increase of its naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean to accompany aid ships.

However, despite the headline-grabbing noise surrounding this apparent Turkish-Israeli fallout, it is important to note that deep bilateral commercial and defense ties have not been adversely affected. Turkey's public falling out with Israel and its attempt to pressure the Jewish state to treat the Palestinians more humanely may in part be genuine, but the reality is that Turkey is a very long way from adopting a serious anti-Israeli policy, let alone engaging in an Iranian-style proxy war with the latter.

More broadly, Turkey's attempt to stake out an original position on the Arab Spring must contend with two major challenges. The first relates to Turkey's strategic profile, the most outstanding feature of which is the country's full and deep integration into the Western global security architecture, as exemplified by Turkish membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization since 1952.
The second relates to the essence of Turkey's so-called "neo-Ottoman" foreign policy, whose genesis, precise ideational and ideological content and ultimate goals are still subject to considerable debate. In short, Turkish foreign policy, while remarkably pro-active and undoubtedly successful at many levels, is bereft of the type of deep conceptual clarity that is required of an original strategic narrative.

This places Turkey at a disadvantage vis-a-vis key Western powers and Iran, both of which espouse an original ideological and strategic discourse underpinned by deep-seated values. While the West is keen to present the Arab Spring as a quest for liberal democracy, Iran is anxious to frame the same as an Islamic awakening. In the midst of this fierce ideological clash, it is not clear if Turkey's implicit middle way can have any claims to authenticity.

Enter the Muslim Brotherhood
The seriousness of the Muslim Brotherhood's rebuke of Erdogan is underscored by the fact that it was issued, among others, by Essam al-Arian, a widely respected senior Brotherhood figure and the deputy leader of the Brotherhood-sponsored Freedom and Justice Party. Founded in late April 2011, the party is the Brotherhood's most strategic asset in the parliamentary elections slated for November 2011.

The rebuke may be viewed as in part a reaction to fierce internal debates inside the Brotherhood, some of which were brought into sharper focus by Erdogan's visit to Cairo in mid-September. Following his arrival in the Egyptian capital, Erdogan was thronged at the airport by thousands of young Egyptians, some of whom represented the younger generation of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

The strident and dashing figure of the Turkish prime minister, reinforced by his perceived Islamic credentials (Erdogan originally hails from a Turkish Islamic movement with deep ties to Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood), is an attractive proposition to many younger members of the Brotherhood.

To some in the younger generation of the Brotherhood, the ruling Turkish AKP is the model to emulate in view of its successful mix of Islamic ethics with modern and dynamic governance.

But ultimately it is a mistake to interpret the Brotherhood's rebuke of the Turkish prime minister as primarily a reflection of inter-generational party politics. It is also a mistake to interpret it as an assertion of Egyptian nationalism in the face of brazen intellectual and political arrogance by the leader of a former imperial power.

As far as this incident is concerned, the center of gravity revolves around the identity and character of the Muslim Brotherhood and the anxiety to safeguard it in the face of apparently friendly competition.

Despite admiration for Erdogan and his party, the bulk of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood rejects the AKP's vision of religious-friendly secularism, which is viewed as a distinctly Turkish product.

Despite internal divisions, there is widespread expectation among Brotherhood members and sympathizers in Egypt and outside that the movement can yet deliver an authentic form of Islamic governance. On that basis alone, Brotherhood leaders are loath to be lectured by foreigners on what type of vision and approach to adopt in their quest for political power.

Mahan Abedin is an analyst of Middle East politics.

America, Land of Zionist Liars Home of wimps...

America, Land of Zionist Liars Home of wimps...Philip Zelikow's re-appointment to the "President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board" (PFIAB) is testimony to the utter corruption in Washington and the FULL intent of covering-up the barbaric crimes of the inside Job of 9/11 for ever....

The sorcerer, back in the star chamber to work his magic...

Philip Zelikow's re-appointment to the "President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board" (PFIAB) is testimony to the enduring power of AIPAC in Washington and the enduring BOND of the Siamese twins, CIA/MOSSAD.... On this board Zelikow, A dual citizen, is A MOSSAD seat.... will have access to ALL the deepest secrets of the US intelligence community....and its infamous White House Murder INC,....

The tragedy of the Jews, so my father and his Jewish friends told me is that they always go one step too far - relying on Chutzpah....

No one has yet tied our current global financial crisis with Israeli interests. If that connection is achieved, even if it is untrue, then God help the Jewish people.

A quiet invasion:
"The collapse of Soviet power in 1989-91 contributed to the Arabs’ disarray, as did the huge success of pro-Israeli Americans in penetrating almost every institution of the American government, whether at state or federal level, most notably the U.S. Congress. The message these advocates conveyed was that the interests of America and Israel were identical and their alliance ‘unshakable.’"

The current President is beneath contempt. He has placed the interests of another country before our own. He disgraced himself, his office and any damn fool who placed any hope in his perfectly cadentic, bullshit laden rhetoric ...

It was not enough for Israel to be assured of a US veto at the UN.

Israel required even more--the public humiliation of the United States as the president bent down on one knee and pledged fealty to all things Zionist.

The good news is that the day is nearer when Israel will overplay its hand with the US public...

Philip Zelikow (Dual Citizen of Israel) - 911's Cover Up Man Zelikow was appointed the executive director of the 9/11 commission -- the most powerful position of the committee. This criminal Zionist Jew is responsible for concocting the contrived fiction that was presented to us as the 9/11 Commission Report (i.e. official story). This work of fairy-tale fiction speaks of magical explosion-proof paper passports, building collapses violating the laws of physics without explosive assistance, and cave-dwelling, box-cutter wielding Arabs with super-human piloting skills -- all the while completely omitting blatant anomalous events such as the self-demolition of Building 7 at 5:20 pm. At first Henry Kissenger was appointed as exec director of the 9/11 commission but surrendered the post after enormous protest. This paved the way for Zionist operative Zelikow to take his stead. Zelikow has numerous conflicts of interest that clearly inhibited his ability to tell the truth to the American people about the 9/11 terror attacks. Zelikow was a Bush Admin insider, having been on the transition team in early 2000. In 1989-91 Zelikow worked with Condoleezza Rice on the National Security Council for the Bush Sr. Administration. In 1995, Zelikow and Rice wrote a book together. From 1996-98 Zelikow is director of the Aspen Strategy Group which also included people such as Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz as fellow members. After George W. Bush took office, Zelikow was named to a position on the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board [PFIAB], and worked on other task forces and commissions as well. In 2004 Zelikow skews the investigation into 9/11 by deciding which topics would or would not be investigated. He was also secretly in contact with one of Bush's close advisers -- Karl Rove....

The Two Jewish-led Globalist Camps, In Competition For Global Control

By James Miller, PhD

There are two distinct ideological globalist camps, both led by Jews -- each
camp competes with the other for global control:


2) THE NEOCON CAMP (the term "New World Order" generally refers to this
globalist camp, and usually not the liberal camp)

It is critical to understand that each ideological camp was created,
developed, and fine-tuned by Jewish intellectuals. Without Jewish
intellectuals, there would be no radical liberal school of thought
(Communism, Socialism, Trotskyism, and all their supporting
submovements/ideas such as feminism, gay rights, political correctness,
etc.). Similarly, without Jewish intellectuals, there wouldn't be a Neocon
school of thought.

The liberal Jewish camp is primarily composed of Trotskyite Jews (or just
very left leaning Jews, plus their Gentile followers) who want a borderless
world with a global government based on the United Nations concept (or even
the UN itself). These are the "do-gooders" who naively dream of a John
Lennon "Imagine" type world. They feel they can "love their way" to global
power (though they can become violent against anyone who opposes their
worldview). In the 1960's they were called the "New Left" (e.g., Abbie
Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Max Horkheimer, Saul Alinsky, etc).

The Neocon Jewish camp (plus their Gentile followers) also want a borderless
world but with a global government revolving around a NY-DC-LONDON-JERUSALEM
axis. These are the exploitative-type Jews, the Super-Elite, who want 95% of
global wealth in their hands and the rest of humanity in a "global
plantation" type condition. They feel they can bomb their way to global
power. Incidentally, the cold war Gentile warriors (e.g., Nixon, Reagan,
Bush Sr., etc) and their Jewish globalist handlers (e.g., Henry Kissinger,
Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Milton Friedman, etc) fall in this camp.

Pick almost any influential globalist Jew and they'll rather neatly fit into
either the liberal camp or the Neocon camp. However, it should be noted that
occasionally you'll find a Jew who is primarily in the liberal camp but with
one foot in the Neocon/Zionist camp (out of "tribal" loyalty to Israel).

NOTE: Some people on this list are not Jews. However, they are often
referred to as "Jew-think Gentiles", i.e., they subscribe to and advance the
globalist Jewish agenda (knowingly or unknowingly).
NOTE: Many listed below are fully aware of the globalist agenda they are
involved in. Others, however, are unaware and thus are simply "pawns",
"tools", or "cogs in the machinery" of the globalist agenda they are
(unknowingly) advancing.


Thursday, September 22, 2011

OPEC’s $1 Trillion Cash Quiets Poor on Longest Ever $100 Oil....

OPEC’s $1 Trillion Cash Quiets/Bribes Poor on Longest Ever $100 Oil...., in order to distance inevitable revolutions demanding freedom and real Democracy in the GCC...

Saudi Arabia will spend $93 billion on its poorer citizens and religious institutions, another 100 $ Billion on arms which they do not know how to use...., and another 20+ $ Billion on subversions in the area using their crooked Zioconned secret services.... Kuwaitis are getting free food for a year. Civil servants in Algeria received a 34 percent pay rise. Desert cities in the United Arab Emirates may soon enjoy uninterrupted electricity.

Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries members are poised to earn an unprecedented $1 trillion this year, according to the U.S. Energy Department, as the group’s benchmark oil measure exceeded $100 a barrel for the longest period ever. They are promising to plow record amounts into public and social programs after pro-democracy movements overthrew rulers in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and spread to Yemen and Syria.

Unlike past booms, when Abu Dhabi bought English soccer club Manchester City and Qatar acquired a stake in luxury carmaker Porsche SE, Gulf nations pledged $150 billion in additional spending this year on their citizens. They will need to keep U.S. benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude oil at more than $80 a barrel to afford their promises, according to Bank of America Corp.

“A sharp increase in spending to accommodate social pressures has averted potential disquiet over governance in most countries, though in the longer-term economic reforms will be needed to buoy private-sector growth and job creation,” Jean- Michel Saliba, a London-based economist at Bank of America, said in an e-mail Sept. 8. “Without the social spending, Gulf protests would possibly move the nations toward constitutional monarchy.”

OPEC’s basket of crudes, a weighted average of the group’s main export grades, has been trading at above $100 since Feb. 21. The basket price was $110.69 a barrel on Sept. 16 while WTI on the New York Mercantile Exchange closed that day at $87.96.

Arab Spring...

Tunisia’s ouster of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in January set up the so-called Arab Spring, as protests led to the end of Hosni Mubarak’s 30-year reign in Egypt and threatened the Assad family’s hold on Syria.

Libya’s rebel council met Sept. 19 to form a cabinet after seven months of fighting to end Muammar Qaddafi’s 42-year rule. Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh is under pressure to step down after 33 years running the Arab world’s poorest country. Unemployment is at 11 percent in the Middle East and North Africa and as high as 22 percent in Algeria, according to the United Nations Development Program.

Across Yemen’s northern border, in Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s biggest member is funding housing, salary increases and the creation of 60,000 new jobs at the interior ministry, according to royal decrees announced on March 18. At least 1 billion riyals ($267 million) has been allocated to the Saudi Ministry of Islamic affairs and The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice after clerics backed a ban on domestic protests.

Religious Funding by the crooked/Zioconned crazy Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia...

The religious establishment’s new funds include 500 million riyals to restore mosques and 300 million riyals to support Islamic call and guidance offices, according to the decrees. Money is being spent on installing devices in public squares, markets and schools to deliver audio and video broadcasts with “advice and moral lessons,” the Commission’s President Muhammad al-Eidy said in May.

“They probably feel like they’ve got to do a lot more spending this time and they are focusing on social spending, whereas previous investments were business or private-sector driven,” said Gabriel Sterne, associate director in London at Exotix, an investment bank, and a former economist at the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of England.

$1 Trillion Revenue

OPEC will need WTI at above $80 a barrel to maintain the increased social spending because the costs of Persian Gulf budget obligations have more than doubled since 2006 to $77, with Saudi Arabia needing an average $82, according to Deutsche Bank AG. OPEC’s basket price at more than $100 puts it on course to earn $1.01 trillion this year, the U.S. government said.

During the oil rally that peaked in 2008 before the onset of the global financial crisis, Abu Dhabi, holder of most of the U.A.E.’s crude reserves, pledged $22 billion to construct Masdar City, powered by renewable energy that would rest on concrete blocks under which electric driverless vehicles would transport residents. Qatar began building an academic hub, attracting American institutions such as Georgetown University in Washington and Texas A&M University in College Station, Texas, with funding from a government-run foundation.

Shoring Up Support

This time, rulers are shoring up domestic support. Demonstrations in Saudi Arabia, the Arab world’s biggest economy, failed to take off in March as citizens were offered extra money for housing. Government employees had their salaries increased 15 percent and got two months extra pay. Kuwaitis received 1,000 dinars ($3,664) and free food for 13 months, state news agency KUNA said in January. Earlier this month, Qatar’s crown prince Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani ordered 30 billion riyals ($8.2 billion) in civil servant salary increases and pension-fund allowances.

“As soon as the government announced handouts, people went out and bought cars,” said John Stadwick, managing director of General Motors Co.’s Middle East operations. Sales in Saudi Arabia climbed as much as 48 percent a month since April, compared with a decline in February and March, he said.

Gulf nations are also aiding neighboring Sunni monarchies to prop up dynasties that have ruled parts of the Middle East for centuries. They pledged $20 billion for Oman and Bahrain to fend off protests and invited Morocco and Jordan to join the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council which will include economic assistance. In addition, newly democratic Egypt received $20 billion from Qatar and $4 billion from Saudi Arabia as the Gulf seeks to retain influence in the most populous Arab nation.

OPEC Spending Rises

Of OPEC’s 12 members, nine increased 2011 budgets and of the remaining three, only Nigeria amended its budget lower, while the U.A.E. doesn’t disclose its public spending. Nigeria, Africa’s biggest oil producer, set up a $1 billion wealth fund in May split into an infrastructure fund, a future generations fund and a stabilization fund. Algeria’s cabinet approved a 25 percent budget increase to pay for the salary raise and food subsidies amid protests that have ended 19 years of emergency rule and led to a review of the election law.

OPEC decided against raising oil supplies at its June meeting even as Libya’s conflict curbed exports. Output of about 30 million barrels a day lags behind the 31.3 million barrels the world needs from the region in the third quarter, according to the International Energy Agency. Half of Saudi Arabia’s 8 percent increase in June production to 9.7 million barrels a day was used in its own power plants as domestic demand reached a record, data from the Paris-based IEA showed.

Cut Production

“Saudi Arabia will cut back after its summer surge,” said Leo Drollas, London-based chief economist at the Centre for Global Energy Studies, the researcher founded by former Saudi Oil Minister Zaki Yamani. “If it doesn’t trim now then prices might lurch downwards on lower demand, and it needs a minimum basket price of $90 for what it wants to do this year.”

Oil in New York has dropped 25 percent since its April 29 high of $113.93 on concern demand will fall as Europe grapples with its debt crisis and unemployment in the U.S. hovers at 9 percent. WTI averaged $92.66 in the past year.

The OPEC basket will stay above $100 a barrel for the rest of this year, according to forecasts from five banks and consultants, including Barclays Plc and Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. Its previous record period above this level was from April 7 to Sept. 8, 2008. OPEC’s members are Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.

Not all the spending initiatives work right away, even though citizens praise the changes.

Give More Power

Abu Dhabi plans to provide more services to poorer citizens by focusing on communities like Ras Al Khaimah after academics and journalists signed an online petition calling for the country’s Federal National Council, an advisory body with no executive authority, to be chosen by universal suffrage and given more power.

Less than a week after Mubarak’s ouster in Egypt, the city of 250,000 people got a visit from Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. Learning they lacked electricity, Sheikh Mohammed, who is next in line to the nation’s presidency, summoned a utility executive who arrived within two hours by helicopter. “Give them power now,” he ordered.

Sheikh Mohammed “sat with the people and listened to our needs,” said Yousuf al-Nuaimi, chairman of the Chamber of Commerce in Ras Al Khaimah, one of seven U.A.E. cities whose per capita income is 45 times less than Abu Dhabi. The Crown Prince promised electricity to the northern sheikhdom, home to one of five pro-democracy activists arrested this year, from a plant in nearby Fujairah and 1 billion dirhams ($270 million) for road and housing improvements, al-Nuaimi said.

Seven months after the visit, Ras Al Khaimah, [ Home to a secret MOSSAD/AMAN listening station focusing on IRAN...] is still waiting for power but residents don’t blame the crown prince....LOL...

“Abu Dhabi is not the problem,” al-Nuaimi said. “The Federal Water and Electricity Authority is the problem. They need to do the connection but they are not. I hope the next step will be for Abu Dhabi to take over FEWA so that we can enjoy the power they promised us.”...

All OPEC members have seen what has happened in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey etc... and do not want to be next. But this is only a stop-gap measure, and the question has to then be asked .... what happens if the money runs out?

On a side note....LOL

Officially, Syria put forth an initiative of its own during an Arab League meeting in Cairo, shortly after al-Arabi's Damascus visit. Syria's initiative called on all Arab states to lift emergency laws imposed by their respective governments since the 1960s, as well as the abolition of all state security courts.

Syria's initiative also called for comprehensive national dialogue in all states in the region with the objective of reaching a constitutional framework that guarantees democratic political participation, the rule of law, non-discrimination and human rights.
The initiative included the establishment of constitutions that guaranteed freedoms, the establishment of parliaments, the formation of political parties and freedom of action for non-governmental organizations, throughout the Arab world.

The Syrian initiative, pretty much like the Arab League one, did not pass....LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL