 Barack star as he Baracks the Casbah |
|
|
Rise Of Mercenary Armies Menace World
By Sherwood Ross, Scoop Independent News, August 31 2009 Indeed, the Pentagon learned the perils of the draft from the massive public protests it provoked during the Viet Nam war. Today, it would prefer, and is working toward, an electronic battlefield where the fighting is done by robots guided by sophisticated surveillance systems that will minimize U.S. casualties. Meanwhile, it tolerates the use of private contractors to help fight its battles. |
|
░▒▓►video◄▓▒░ Army National Guard Advertises for “Internment Specialists”
By Kurt Nimmo, Infowars, July 31, 2009 The job opportunity announcement ends with, "Always upholding our motto, 'of the troops and for the troops.'" Translation: Desperately seeking bullies to be trained in torture experimentation on innocent prisoners, abducted for the purpose of having more bodies in the internment camps, thus legitimizing your flogging job. The worst will likely come back to staff the private prison work camps in the U.S. How else can we compete with slave-made goods? Senator says Army failed to protect troops from 'deadly poison' in Iraq By Julie Sullivan, The Oregonian, August 03, 2009 Democrats in the U.S. Senate say the Army and the nation's largest war contractor failed to protect troops from a "deadly poison" in Iraq and are demanding that the inspector general investigate. |
 Blackwater boss and guards accused of murder and 'killing Iraqis for fun'
By Deborah Haynes, UK Times Online, August 5, 2009 Two former employees of Blackwater have accused the private US security firm and its founder of killing Iraqis for fun, smuggling weapons and deceiving the State Department. 
Erik Prince, founder and CEO of Xe / Blackwater in the fabulous Blackwater 'oval office' where the marble was soon replaced with, "Xe," something easier to remember for their illiterate employees as it's likely similar to their "X" signatures on mercenary contracts.
|
Welcome back, crew and passengers of Spirit of Humanity!
To the oblivious press: Thanks for nothing. How do you like your incredible shrinking marketshares?
McKinney Kidnapping Ignored By Media
Womanist Musings, July 7, 2009
Had it not been for twitter, I doubt that I would even have been aware that Cynthia McKinney was held hostage in Israel after attempting to deliver aid and supplies to the Palestinians. There has been a resounding silence on this issue as CNN, MSNBC and other mainstream media sources rush to give us the latest news on the death of [censored by webmaster; full story linked above].
Womanist Musings, July 7, 2009
Had it not been for twitter, I doubt that I would even have been aware that Cynthia McKinney was held hostage in Israel after attempting to deliver aid and supplies to the Palestinians. There has been a resounding silence on this issue as CNN, MSNBC and other mainstream media sources rush to give us the latest news on the death of [censored by webmaster; full story linked above].
|
McKinney released, returning to United States
By Rhonda Cook, Larry Hartstein, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 5, 2009 Question: How do you bring down a tyranny? Answer: Make it act like one. ░▒▓►video◄▓▒░ Gaza activist Mairead Maguire talks to Al Jazeera from Israeli jail youtube, July 4, 2009 "We were physically abused, manhandled." ░▒▓►video◄▓▒░ Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire Speaks from Israeli Jail Cell After Arrest on Boat Delivering Humanitarian Aid to Gaza Democracy Now!, July 2, 2009 |
░▒▓►video◄▓▒░ June 21, 2009 press conference in Doha, Qatar given by Free Gaza declaring their intention to bring humanitarian and reconstruction aid through the Israeli blockade criminally imposed on Palestine.
|
 |
Update on UK Detainees
freegaza.org, July 5, 2009 Some of the UK FreeGaza 21 detainees likely to be deported Monday, should arrive to Heathrow 13.30 Monday McKinney, still in jail, expected to see judge Sunday By Rhonda Cook, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 4, 2009 |
Cynthia McKinney: I’m in jail in Israel
Ex-Ga. congresswoman detained after boat with Gaza supplies held
By Kent A. Miles, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 2, 2009
McKinney and about 18 other activists in Israeli custody for the past three days will likely be released by Sunday, according to the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C.
Spokesman Jonathan Peled said preparations are being made to deport the activists.
“It is taking slightly longer. Former congresswoman McKinney is not cooperating with the authorities” and refusing to sign a document acknowledging deportation, he said. “It’ll take a couple more days before she is put on a plane and flown out of Israel,” Peled said.
A blog entry Thursday on a MySpace page for McKinney said the passengers refused to admit in writing to violating the blockade and trespassing Israeli territorial waters.
The defamation of Cynthia McKinney and other violations of her human rights
By Ray Hanania, The American Muslim, July 2, 2009
Ex-Ga. congresswoman detained after boat with Gaza supplies held
By Kent A. Miles, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 2, 2009
McKinney and about 18 other activists in Israeli custody for the past three days will likely be released by Sunday, according to the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C.
Spokesman Jonathan Peled said preparations are being made to deport the activists.
“It is taking slightly longer. Former congresswoman McKinney is not cooperating with the authorities” and refusing to sign a document acknowledging deportation, he said. “It’ll take a couple more days before she is put on a plane and flown out of Israel,” Peled said.
A blog entry Thursday on a MySpace page for McKinney said the passengers refused to admit in writing to violating the blockade and trespassing Israeli territorial waters.
The defamation of Cynthia McKinney and other violations of her human rights
By Ray Hanania, The American Muslim, July 2, 2009
Pirates of the Mediterranean: Israel Kidnaps Peace Boat Crew
By Paul Craig Roberts, VDare (mirrored here at Baltimore Chronicle), July 1, 2009
Israel captures peace activists en route to Gaza
By Stephen C. Webster, Raw Story, June 30, 2009
By Paul Craig Roberts, VDare (mirrored here at Baltimore Chronicle), July 1, 2009
Israel captures peace activists en route to Gaza
By Stephen C. Webster, Raw Story, June 30, 2009
"This is an outrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip," said Ms McKinney in a statement. "President [Barack] Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that's exactly what we tried to do. We're asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey."
IDF seizes control of boat bound for Gaza By Barak Ravid and Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz, June 30, 2009
The 20 passengers include former U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire and other activists from Britain, Ireland, Bahrain and Jamaica.
The eight British Embassy workers charged with destabilization efforts in Iran, and therefore allegedly worked in secret, are being called hostages by the U.K. Assuming they're guilty, such efforts are anti-humanitarian, the kind Obama has disavowed. After an unlawful boarding of the vessel, Spirit of Humanity, will Israel now torture or otherwise persecute the crew and passengers for making a conspicuous humanitarian effort, so defiant of Israel's imagined authority? Demand Israel release these prisoners of conscience and, if they still wish, allow them to deliver their cargo to Gaza.
Cynthia McKinney Demands Immediate Release After Her Gaza-Bound Boat is Seized by Israeli Navy FOXNews.com, June 30, 2009
IDF seizes control of boat bound for Gaza By Barak Ravid and Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz, June 30, 2009
The 20 passengers include former U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire and other activists from Britain, Ireland, Bahrain and Jamaica.
The eight British Embassy workers charged with destabilization efforts in Iran, and therefore allegedly worked in secret, are being called hostages by the U.K. Assuming they're guilty, such efforts are anti-humanitarian, the kind Obama has disavowed. After an unlawful boarding of the vessel, Spirit of Humanity, will Israel now torture or otherwise persecute the crew and passengers for making a conspicuous humanitarian effort, so defiant of Israel's imagined authority? Demand Israel release these prisoners of conscience and, if they still wish, allow them to deliver their cargo to Gaza.
Cynthia McKinney Demands Immediate Release After Her Gaza-Bound Boat is Seized by Israeli Navy FOXNews.com, June 30, 2009
After Deadly Attacks, No Finding of Blame
By Eric Schmitt, The Caucus, The Politics and Government Blog of The New York Times, June 20, 2009
A military investigation into American air strikes in western Afghanistan on May 4 that killed dozens of Afghan civilians calls for additional training of United States air crews and ground forces. But the inquiry does not hold any military personnel culpable for failing to follow strict rules devised to avoid civilian casualties.
By Eric Schmitt, The Caucus, The Politics and Government Blog of The New York Times, June 20, 2009
A military investigation into American air strikes in western Afghanistan on May 4 that killed dozens of Afghan civilians calls for additional training of United States air crews and ground forces. But the inquiry does not hold any military personnel culpable for failing to follow strict rules devised to avoid civilian casualties.
 |
Israel's deployments in Lebanon raise tension PressTV, June 20, 2009 Lebanon’s military is deployed at border By Mitchell Prothero, The National, June 20, 2009 Ireland to hold second referendum on Lisbon Treaty By Our Foreign Staff, London Daily Telegraph, June 19, 2009 The EU won't give up trying to assimilate highly-resistant Ireland. |
|
America a weapons supermarket for terrorists, inquiry finds: Undercover inspectors manage to buy high-grade gear including nuclear triggers and evade export bans
By Daniel Nasaw, London Guardian, June 8, 2009 North Korea Ends Armistice, Threatens to Attack South Korea By Kurt Nimmo, Infowars, May 27, 2009 UN wants ‘flood of drugs’ in Afghanistan to devalue opium By Jon Boone, London Guardian, May 26, 2009 Do you think the 21,000 troops Obama was just allowed to send to Afghanistan ought to be enough to tend their victory gardens? North Korea’s Nukes: Paid For By The U.S. Government By Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com, May 25, 2009 |
 |
Iran in the 1970s, Iran in 2009
By Mithridates, Daily Kos, June 5, 2009
This might partly explain the immense popularity Mousavi is suddenly having now just a bit over a week before the election, because now that Cheney and thus the possibility of an invasion has been removed, the idea of a defiant president suddenly doesn't look so inviting, and Ahmadinejad is beginning to look like a bit of a buffoon.
Members of the anti-sovereignty organization, Council on Foreign Relations, include Barack Obama and Dick Cheney, former CFR President, now criticizing Obama to give him political cover from the right which he needs almost as much as cover from the left. When Obama was asked about his CFR memership and NAU during the presidential campaign, with his placating lies delivered in sarcastic fashion he evoked ignorantly supportive laughter. Cheney, when addressing the CFR after an election (see 1 minute, 37 seconds) with his blunt honesty, admitting to keeping his CFR presidency a secret from his homestate Wyoming constituents, he aroused advisedly-sinister laughter from fellow CFR predators. Other CFR members include Joseph Biden, John McCain and Richard N. Haass, CFR President, Obama's current foreign policy adviser and Mike Huckabee's former foreign policy adviser, who has contributed anti-dollar, anti-sovereignty policy to the CFR, explaining how to sell it under the pretext of anti-terrorism and environmentalism.
By Mithridates, Daily Kos, June 5, 2009
This might partly explain the immense popularity Mousavi is suddenly having now just a bit over a week before the election, because now that Cheney and thus the possibility of an invasion has been removed, the idea of a defiant president suddenly doesn't look so inviting, and Ahmadinejad is beginning to look like a bit of a buffoon.
Members of the anti-sovereignty organization, Council on Foreign Relations, include Barack Obama and Dick Cheney, former CFR President, now criticizing Obama to give him political cover from the right which he needs almost as much as cover from the left. When Obama was asked about his CFR memership and NAU during the presidential campaign, with his placating lies delivered in sarcastic fashion he evoked ignorantly supportive laughter. Cheney, when addressing the CFR after an election (see 1 minute, 37 seconds) with his blunt honesty, admitting to keeping his CFR presidency a secret from his homestate Wyoming constituents, he aroused advisedly-sinister laughter from fellow CFR predators. Other CFR members include Joseph Biden, John McCain and Richard N. Haass, CFR President, Obama's current foreign policy adviser and Mike Huckabee's former foreign policy adviser, who has contributed anti-dollar, anti-sovereignty policy to the CFR, explaining how to sell it under the pretext of anti-terrorism and environmentalism.
|
Report Ties Dubious Iran Nuclear Docs to Israel
Analysis by Gareth Porterm, Inter Press Service News Agency, June 3, 2009 WASHINGTON - A report on Iran’s nuclear programme issued by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last month generated news stories publicising an incendiary charge that U.S. intelligence is underestimating Iran’s progress in designing a "nuclear warhead" before the halt in nuclear weapons-related research in 2003. Obama Admits US Involvement in Iran Coup in 1953, But Doesn't Admit American Involvement in False Flags Washington's Blog, June 4, 2009 AP report: Source claims Obama intel pick tied to CIA torture program By Ron Brynaert, Raw Story, June 4, 2009 Breaking: US Army moves to DEFCON 2 Macedonian International News Agency, May 28, 2009 |
 |
 |
Bin Laden criticizes Obama in new tape: report
Reporting by Inal Ersan and Jason Benham, Reuters, June 3, 2009 Obama seeks Saudi king's advice before Cairo speech Yahoo! News, June 3,2009 Obama's meeting and scheduled speech in Cairo on Thursday drew condemnation from al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, who said in a taped message aired by Al Jazeera television that the U.S. leader had planted seeds for "revenge and hatred" toward the United States in the Muslim world. The message, which aired shortly after Obama's arrival in the kingdom, came a day after bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, called Obama a criminal and warned Muslims not to fall for his polished words, part of a propaganda effort to pre-empt Obama's Cairo speech. |
I always knew that some day he would begin to understand! Being a war criminal and war profiteer, he compares our individual rights to some imagined collective "right" to support fellow war criminals.
Click here for Cheney's video confession to war crimes from Countdown with Keith Olbermann.
Click here for Cheney's video confession to war crimes from Countdown with Keith Olbermann.
Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, during a Senate hearing on Thursday.
Pakistan Is Rapidly Adding Nuclear Arms, U.S. Says
By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER, New York Times, May 17, 2009
WASHINGTON — Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program.
Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.
“Yes,” he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan’s sensitivity to any discussion about the country’s nuclear strategy or security.
Inside the Obama administration, some officials say, Pakistan’s drive to spend heavily on new nuclear arms has been a source of growing concern, because the country is producing more nuclear material at a time when Washington is increasingly focused on trying to assure the security of an arsenal of 80 to 100 weapons so that they will never fall into the hands of Islamic insurgents.
The administration’s effort is complicated by the fact that Pakistan is producing an unknown amount of new bomb-grade uranium and, once a series of new reactors is completed, bomb-grade plutonium for a new generation of weapons. President Obama has called for passage of a treaty that would stop all nations from producing more fissile material — the hardest part of making a nuclear weapon — but so far has said nothing in public about Pakistan’s activities.
Bruce Riedel, the Brookings Institution scholar who served as the co-author of Mr. Obama’s review of Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, reflected the administration’s concern in a recent interview, saying that Pakistan “has more terrorists per square mile than anyplace else on earth, and it has a nuclear weapons program that is growing faster than anyplace else on earth.”
Obama administration officials said that they had communicated to Congress that their intent was to assure that military aid to Pakistan was directed toward counterterrorism and not diverted. But Admiral Mullen’s public confirmation that the arsenal is increasing — a view widely held in both classified and unclassified analyses — seems certain to aggravate Congress’s discomfort.
Whether that discomfort might result in a delay or reduction in aid to Pakistan is still unclear.
The Congressional briefings have taken place in recent weeks as Pakistan has descended into further chaos and as Congress has considered proposals to spend $3 billion over the next five years to train and equip Pakistan’s military for counterinsurgency warfare. That aid would come on top of $7.5 billion in civilian assistance.
None of the proposed military assistance is directed at the nuclear program. So far, America’s aid to Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure has been limited to a $100 million classified program to help Pakistan secure its weapons and materials from seizure by Al Qaeda, the Taliban or “insiders” with insurgent loyalties.
But the billions in new proposed American aid, officials acknowledge, could free other money for Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure, at a time when Pakistani officials have expressed concern that their nuclear program is facing a budget crunch for the first time, worsened by the global economic downturn. The program employs tens of thousands of Pakistanis, including about 2,000 believed to possess “critical knowledge” about how to produce a weapon.
The dimensions of the Pakistani buildup are not fully understood. “We see them scaling up their centrifuge facilities,” said David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, which has been monitoring Pakistan’s continued efforts to buy materials on the black market, and analyzing satellite photographs of two new plutonium reactors less than 100 miles from where Pakistani forces are currently fighting the Taliban.
“The Bush administration turned a blind eye to how this is being ramped up,” he said. “And of course, with enough pressure, all this could be preventable.”
As a matter of diplomacy, however, the buildup presents Mr. Obama with a potential conflict between two national security priorities, some aides concede. One is to win passage of a global agreement to stop the production of fissile material — the uranium or plutonium used to produce weapons. Pakistan has never agreed to any limits and is one of three countries, along with India and Israel, that never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Yet the other imperative is a huge infusion of financial assistance into Afghanistan and Pakistan, money considered crucial to helping stabilize governments with tenuous holds on power in the face of terrorist and insurgent violence.
Senior members of Congress were already pressing for assurances from Pakistan that the American military assistance would be used to fight the insurgency, and not be siphoned off for more conventional military programs to counter Pakistan’s historic adversary, India. Official confirmation that Pakistan has accelerated expansion of its nuclear program only added to the consternation of those in Congress who were already voicing serious concern about the security of those warheads.
During a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, veered from the budget proposal under debate to ask Admiral Mullen about public reports “that Pakistan is, at the moment, increasing its nuclear program — that it may be actually adding on to weapons systems and warheads. Do you have any evidence of that?”
It was then that Admiral Mullen responded with his one-word confirmation. Mr. Webb said Pakistan’s decision was a matter of “enormous concern,” and he added, “Do we have any type of control factors that would be built in, in terms of where future American money would be going, as it addresses what I just asked about?”
Similar concerns about seeking guarantees that American military assistance to Pakistan would be focused on battling insurgents also were expressed by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the committee chairman.
“Unless Pakistan’s leaders commit, in deeds and words, their country’s armed forces and security personnel to eliminating the threat from militant extremists, and unless they make it clear that they are doing so, for the sake of their own future, then no amount of assistance will be effective,” Mr. Levin said.
A spokesman for the Pakistani government contacted Friday declined to comment on whether his nation was expanding its nuclear weapons program, but said the government was “maintaining the minimum, credible deterrence capability.” He warned against linking American financial assistance to Pakistan’s actions on its weapons program.
“Conditions or sanctions on this issue did not work in the past, and this will not send a positive message to the people of Pakistan,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because his country’s nuclear program is classified.
By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER, New York Times, May 17, 2009
WASHINGTON — Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program.
Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.
“Yes,” he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan’s sensitivity to any discussion about the country’s nuclear strategy or security.
Inside the Obama administration, some officials say, Pakistan’s drive to spend heavily on new nuclear arms has been a source of growing concern, because the country is producing more nuclear material at a time when Washington is increasingly focused on trying to assure the security of an arsenal of 80 to 100 weapons so that they will never fall into the hands of Islamic insurgents.
The administration’s effort is complicated by the fact that Pakistan is producing an unknown amount of new bomb-grade uranium and, once a series of new reactors is completed, bomb-grade plutonium for a new generation of weapons. President Obama has called for passage of a treaty that would stop all nations from producing more fissile material — the hardest part of making a nuclear weapon — but so far has said nothing in public about Pakistan’s activities.
Bruce Riedel, the Brookings Institution scholar who served as the co-author of Mr. Obama’s review of Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, reflected the administration’s concern in a recent interview, saying that Pakistan “has more terrorists per square mile than anyplace else on earth, and it has a nuclear weapons program that is growing faster than anyplace else on earth.”
Obama administration officials said that they had communicated to Congress that their intent was to assure that military aid to Pakistan was directed toward counterterrorism and not diverted. But Admiral Mullen’s public confirmation that the arsenal is increasing — a view widely held in both classified and unclassified analyses — seems certain to aggravate Congress’s discomfort.
Whether that discomfort might result in a delay or reduction in aid to Pakistan is still unclear.
The Congressional briefings have taken place in recent weeks as Pakistan has descended into further chaos and as Congress has considered proposals to spend $3 billion over the next five years to train and equip Pakistan’s military for counterinsurgency warfare. That aid would come on top of $7.5 billion in civilian assistance.
None of the proposed military assistance is directed at the nuclear program. So far, America’s aid to Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure has been limited to a $100 million classified program to help Pakistan secure its weapons and materials from seizure by Al Qaeda, the Taliban or “insiders” with insurgent loyalties.
But the billions in new proposed American aid, officials acknowledge, could free other money for Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure, at a time when Pakistani officials have expressed concern that their nuclear program is facing a budget crunch for the first time, worsened by the global economic downturn. The program employs tens of thousands of Pakistanis, including about 2,000 believed to possess “critical knowledge” about how to produce a weapon.
The dimensions of the Pakistani buildup are not fully understood. “We see them scaling up their centrifuge facilities,” said David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, which has been monitoring Pakistan’s continued efforts to buy materials on the black market, and analyzing satellite photographs of two new plutonium reactors less than 100 miles from where Pakistani forces are currently fighting the Taliban.
“The Bush administration turned a blind eye to how this is being ramped up,” he said. “And of course, with enough pressure, all this could be preventable.”
As a matter of diplomacy, however, the buildup presents Mr. Obama with a potential conflict between two national security priorities, some aides concede. One is to win passage of a global agreement to stop the production of fissile material — the uranium or plutonium used to produce weapons. Pakistan has never agreed to any limits and is one of three countries, along with India and Israel, that never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Yet the other imperative is a huge infusion of financial assistance into Afghanistan and Pakistan, money considered crucial to helping stabilize governments with tenuous holds on power in the face of terrorist and insurgent violence.
Senior members of Congress were already pressing for assurances from Pakistan that the American military assistance would be used to fight the insurgency, and not be siphoned off for more conventional military programs to counter Pakistan’s historic adversary, India. Official confirmation that Pakistan has accelerated expansion of its nuclear program only added to the consternation of those in Congress who were already voicing serious concern about the security of those warheads.
During a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, veered from the budget proposal under debate to ask Admiral Mullen about public reports “that Pakistan is, at the moment, increasing its nuclear program — that it may be actually adding on to weapons systems and warheads. Do you have any evidence of that?”
It was then that Admiral Mullen responded with his one-word confirmation. Mr. Webb said Pakistan’s decision was a matter of “enormous concern,” and he added, “Do we have any type of control factors that would be built in, in terms of where future American money would be going, as it addresses what I just asked about?”
Similar concerns about seeking guarantees that American military assistance to Pakistan would be focused on battling insurgents also were expressed by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the committee chairman.
“Unless Pakistan’s leaders commit, in deeds and words, their country’s armed forces and security personnel to eliminating the threat from militant extremists, and unless they make it clear that they are doing so, for the sake of their own future, then no amount of assistance will be effective,” Mr. Levin said.
A spokesman for the Pakistani government contacted Friday declined to comment on whether his nation was expanding its nuclear weapons program, but said the government was “maintaining the minimum, credible deterrence capability.” He warned against linking American financial assistance to Pakistan’s actions on its weapons program.
“Conditions or sanctions on this issue did not work in the past, and this will not send a positive message to the people of Pakistan,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because his country’s nuclear program is classified.
San Antonio to get AF cyber command
By Gary Martin, My San Antonio Express-News, web posted May 15, 2009
WASHINGTON — Lackland AFB in San Antonio is being selected by Air Force officials as the headquarters for a new cyber command, an official close to the selection process said late Thursday.
The Air Force is expected to make the selection official today, but lawmakers representing states and cities with potential sites were being notified in advance of the announcement.
Lackland was selected by the Air Force as the best of several other candidates for the headquarters, which would mean an influx of infrastructure, security and 400 staffers.
The headquarters will include the commander's staff and an operations center.
The operations primarily will focus on defending Air Force computers against cyber attack and preventing computer disruptions.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, said selecting Lackland was “great news for San Antonio.”
Hutchison said Lackland “and its dedicated military personnel have the unique and varied attributes that made it the obvious choice.”
Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff said he was surprised to hear Lackland was selected, because a Louisiana site was considered the front-runner.
“This is a good surprise,” Wolff said, adding that it comes on the heels of last week's announcement that Medtronic Diabetes Therapy Management and Education Center is moving to San Antonio and will hire 1,400 workers over five years.
The selected site for the cyber command now must undergo an environmental impact assessment.
A final announcement of where to place the command will come later this summer, after the assessment is conducted, said Carla Pampe, a spokeswoman for the command in Louisiana.
Alternative sites also will be announced, should the finalist site be eliminated by the environmental impact assessment.
The temporary location of the command is at Barksdale AFB in Shreveport, La. The Louisiana base was one of six finalists.
Other potential sites were Langley AFB, Va.; Offut AFB, Neb.; Peterson AFB, Colo.; and Scott AFB, Ill.
Hutchison and Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, D-San Antonio, led efforts to sway Air Force officials to locate the command at Lackland, where existing missions are located.
When Lackland was named a finalist in January, Gonzalez said the Air Force base was “well-positioned” to get the command because of existing work there.
Lackland is home to the Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Agency, the Cryptologic Systems Group, the 67th Network Warfare Wing, the Information Operation Center and the Join Operation Warfare Command.
In addition, the University of Texas at San Antonio has cyber-related research, and the National Security Agency's Texas Cryptologic Center is in San Antonio.
Wolff said landing the command at Lackland also would boost local efforts to get “more jobs here with NSA.”
“This is a positive step toward that effort,” Wolff said.
Rep. Ciro Rodriguez agreed, saying, “The Air Force cyber center is a major component of security, but it also will have some other components for the private sector, which will trigger other forms of jobs.”
Rodriguez, D-San Antonio, said the command would be a “a good incubator” for business.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and the entire Texas congressional delegation signed onto a letter urging the Air Force to put the command in San Antonio.
And Hutchison, the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on military construction and military affairs, touted San Antonio as the location for the center in a March meeting with Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz.
In the selection process, the Air Force considered factors that included existing cyber activities, network capabilities, infrastructure and security.
San Antonio demonstrated it had the networks and infrastructure to become a national center for cyber security, Hutchison said.
Hutchison said she would work with Congress, the Air Force and San Antonio leaders to “ensure a smooth and efficient transition process so we can stand up this critical new command as quickly as possible.”
By Gary Martin, My San Antonio Express-News, web posted May 15, 2009
WASHINGTON — Lackland AFB in San Antonio is being selected by Air Force officials as the headquarters for a new cyber command, an official close to the selection process said late Thursday.
The Air Force is expected to make the selection official today, but lawmakers representing states and cities with potential sites were being notified in advance of the announcement.
Lackland was selected by the Air Force as the best of several other candidates for the headquarters, which would mean an influx of infrastructure, security and 400 staffers.
The headquarters will include the commander's staff and an operations center.
The operations primarily will focus on defending Air Force computers against cyber attack and preventing computer disruptions.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, said selecting Lackland was “great news for San Antonio.”
Hutchison said Lackland “and its dedicated military personnel have the unique and varied attributes that made it the obvious choice.”
Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff said he was surprised to hear Lackland was selected, because a Louisiana site was considered the front-runner.
“This is a good surprise,” Wolff said, adding that it comes on the heels of last week's announcement that Medtronic Diabetes Therapy Management and Education Center is moving to San Antonio and will hire 1,400 workers over five years.
The selected site for the cyber command now must undergo an environmental impact assessment.
A final announcement of where to place the command will come later this summer, after the assessment is conducted, said Carla Pampe, a spokeswoman for the command in Louisiana.
Alternative sites also will be announced, should the finalist site be eliminated by the environmental impact assessment.
The temporary location of the command is at Barksdale AFB in Shreveport, La. The Louisiana base was one of six finalists.
Other potential sites were Langley AFB, Va.; Offut AFB, Neb.; Peterson AFB, Colo.; and Scott AFB, Ill.
Hutchison and Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, D-San Antonio, led efforts to sway Air Force officials to locate the command at Lackland, where existing missions are located.
When Lackland was named a finalist in January, Gonzalez said the Air Force base was “well-positioned” to get the command because of existing work there.
Lackland is home to the Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Agency, the Cryptologic Systems Group, the 67th Network Warfare Wing, the Information Operation Center and the Join Operation Warfare Command.
In addition, the University of Texas at San Antonio has cyber-related research, and the National Security Agency's Texas Cryptologic Center is in San Antonio.
Wolff said landing the command at Lackland also would boost local efforts to get “more jobs here with NSA.”
“This is a positive step toward that effort,” Wolff said.
Rep. Ciro Rodriguez agreed, saying, “The Air Force cyber center is a major component of security, but it also will have some other components for the private sector, which will trigger other forms of jobs.”
Rodriguez, D-San Antonio, said the command would be a “a good incubator” for business.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and the entire Texas congressional delegation signed onto a letter urging the Air Force to put the command in San Antonio.
And Hutchison, the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on military construction and military affairs, touted San Antonio as the location for the center in a March meeting with Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz.
In the selection process, the Air Force considered factors that included existing cyber activities, network capabilities, infrastructure and security.
San Antonio demonstrated it had the networks and infrastructure to become a national center for cyber security, Hutchison said.
Hutchison said she would work with Congress, the Air Force and San Antonio leaders to “ensure a smooth and efficient transition process so we can stand up this critical new command as quickly as possible.”
At his daughter's formal debate on foreign policy towards Iran Cheney claims Iran has nuclear weapons -- despite his lack of security clearance -- and encourages building U.S. credibility, implying that in this area he clearly succeeded where the new administration is failing, while giving political cover to President Obama by criticizing him.
"We fail to recognize the fact that we're alone out there in terms of trying to achieve the objective of forcing the Iranians to give up their nuclear weapons," Cheney said.
Buy a used war? Same old excuse resurrected as was used against Saddam Hussein. Too bad our children can't be resurrected. Now Cheney, among other RINOs, is covering for Obama by roundly criticizing him on many issues. But if you keep a close watch you'll find the current administration mirrors the stance of the last on these same issues and others including Iran. Iran has gone above and beyond their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and offered 20 unannounced inspections per day anywhere within Iran. The chief of the IAEA, who has threatened to quit if Iran is attacked, says that Iran has provided "unprecedented access." A.Q. Khan, the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, who the CIA asked the Dutch to release twice when caught distributnig nuclear plans and materials to various allegedly rogue nations under the pretext of tracking his contacts according to former Dutch Prime Minister, Ruud Lubbers. Some of the uranium centrifuges A.Q. Khan sold to Iran had traces of highly enriched uranium, detected in 2003, causing Iran to voluntarily suspend enrichment until the issue was resolved with the IAEA. Under the 1976 Symington Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act the U.S. is prohibited from giving foreign aid to those countries which traffic in nuclear enrichment equipment or technology for any purpose outside of international control or treaty. Israel fits this definition as it has never signed the NPT and refuses to admit it owns hundreds of nuclear weapons. Yet the U.S. fails to take advantage of its right as signatory under Article 4 of the NPT to supervise and assist Iran to produce nuclear power. But then the power-hungry war profiteers like Cheney, who continues to receive millions per year for life from Halliburton, would have no one with whom to fuss. Fortunately, the technology isn't available to make a uranium enrichment centrifuge that has a switch like a blender to go from the grate setting (low enrichment for fuel grade) to the whip setting (highly enriched weapons grade) or else you bet A.Q. Khan to have sold as many as he could to Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, North Korea, and whoever else might have the money to buy them on the black market.
Click here for Cheney's video confession to war crimes from Countdown with Keith Olbermann.
Cheney in Manhattan: 'A giant conspiracy' on Iran
By Ben Smith, Politico (categories: Middle East), May 12, 2009
Former Vice President Dick Cheney swung quietly through New York City Tuesday night to watch his daughter, Elizabeth, a former State Department official, argue the conservative side in a debate over American policy toward Iran, and to express his own skepticism of President Obama's promised negotiations.
"We fail to recognize the fact that we're alone out there in terms of trying to achieve the objective of forcing the Iranians to give up their nuclear weapons," Cheney said at a dinner following the Intelligence Squared debate, in which Elizabeth Cheney and former Coalition Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senor debated former diplomat Nicholas Burns and Mideast scholar Ken Pollack on the topic of negotiations with Iran.
The former Vice President characterized the Iranian goal in negotiations on ending that country's nuclear program as mere stalling for time, and the Europeans as trying to "restrain the U.S." from military action.
"Everybody's in a giant conspiracy to achieve a different objective than the one we want to achieve," Cheney said.
The negotiations are "bound to fail unless we are perceived as very credible" in threatening military action against Iran, he said.
"Most of the other nations out there are willing to live with a nuclear-armed Iran" he said, citing France, Germany and the United Kingdom in particular.
Cheney was echoing his daughter's comments during the formal debate at Rockefeller University on Manhattan's East Side.
"If they believe the threat of military force is on the table that’s frankly the only thing I’ve seen that convinces them they’d better get serious about sanctions," Elizabeth Cheney, the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, said of U.S. allies at the formal, Oxford-style debate, sponsored by the Rosenkranz Foundation.
"You negotiated for weak sanctions," she told Burns.
"No I didn’t," he replied, at one point noting that it seemed as if he and Ms. Cheney "live in alternate universes."
"We ought to have the courage to see it and the courage to admit it," Burns said, "What President Obama is trying to do is to create a new type of diplomacy," which he described as "tough-minded."
Cheney and Senor, he said, are "leaving [Obama] with one option -- and that is war."
Liz Cheney noted that she was "somewhere to the right of many people in the audience tonight, with one or two notable exceptions," indicating her father, but the former Vice President was in fact quite well-received on the hostile Manhattan terrain: He received a round of applause, and a lone hiss, when introduced, and he signed autographs after the event.
Buy a used war? Same old excuse resurrected as was used against Saddam Hussein. Too bad our children can't be resurrected. Now Cheney, among other RINOs, is covering for Obama by roundly criticizing him on many issues. But if you keep a close watch you'll find the current administration mirrors the stance of the last on these same issues and others including Iran. Iran has gone above and beyond their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and offered 20 unannounced inspections per day anywhere within Iran. The chief of the IAEA, who has threatened to quit if Iran is attacked, says that Iran has provided "unprecedented access." A.Q. Khan, the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, who the CIA asked the Dutch to release twice when caught distributnig nuclear plans and materials to various allegedly rogue nations under the pretext of tracking his contacts according to former Dutch Prime Minister, Ruud Lubbers. Some of the uranium centrifuges A.Q. Khan sold to Iran had traces of highly enriched uranium, detected in 2003, causing Iran to voluntarily suspend enrichment until the issue was resolved with the IAEA. Under the 1976 Symington Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act the U.S. is prohibited from giving foreign aid to those countries which traffic in nuclear enrichment equipment or technology for any purpose outside of international control or treaty. Israel fits this definition as it has never signed the NPT and refuses to admit it owns hundreds of nuclear weapons. Yet the U.S. fails to take advantage of its right as signatory under Article 4 of the NPT to supervise and assist Iran to produce nuclear power. But then the power-hungry war profiteers like Cheney, who continues to receive millions per year for life from Halliburton, would have no one with whom to fuss. Fortunately, the technology isn't available to make a uranium enrichment centrifuge that has a switch like a blender to go from the grate setting (low enrichment for fuel grade) to the whip setting (highly enriched weapons grade) or else you bet A.Q. Khan to have sold as many as he could to Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, North Korea, and whoever else might have the money to buy them on the black market.
Click here for Cheney's video confession to war crimes from Countdown with Keith Olbermann.
Cheney in Manhattan: 'A giant conspiracy' on Iran
By Ben Smith, Politico (categories: Middle East), May 12, 2009
Former Vice President Dick Cheney swung quietly through New York City Tuesday night to watch his daughter, Elizabeth, a former State Department official, argue the conservative side in a debate over American policy toward Iran, and to express his own skepticism of President Obama's promised negotiations.
"We fail to recognize the fact that we're alone out there in terms of trying to achieve the objective of forcing the Iranians to give up their nuclear weapons," Cheney said at a dinner following the Intelligence Squared debate, in which Elizabeth Cheney and former Coalition Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senor debated former diplomat Nicholas Burns and Mideast scholar Ken Pollack on the topic of negotiations with Iran.
The former Vice President characterized the Iranian goal in negotiations on ending that country's nuclear program as mere stalling for time, and the Europeans as trying to "restrain the U.S." from military action.
"Everybody's in a giant conspiracy to achieve a different objective than the one we want to achieve," Cheney said.
The negotiations are "bound to fail unless we are perceived as very credible" in threatening military action against Iran, he said.
"Most of the other nations out there are willing to live with a nuclear-armed Iran" he said, citing France, Germany and the United Kingdom in particular.
Cheney was echoing his daughter's comments during the formal debate at Rockefeller University on Manhattan's East Side.
"If they believe the threat of military force is on the table that’s frankly the only thing I’ve seen that convinces them they’d better get serious about sanctions," Elizabeth Cheney, the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, said of U.S. allies at the formal, Oxford-style debate, sponsored by the Rosenkranz Foundation.
"You negotiated for weak sanctions," she told Burns.
"No I didn’t," he replied, at one point noting that it seemed as if he and Ms. Cheney "live in alternate universes."
"We ought to have the courage to see it and the courage to admit it," Burns said, "What President Obama is trying to do is to create a new type of diplomacy," which he described as "tough-minded."
Cheney and Senor, he said, are "leaving [Obama] with one option -- and that is war."
Liz Cheney noted that she was "somewhere to the right of many people in the audience tonight, with one or two notable exceptions," indicating her father, but the former Vice President was in fact quite well-received on the hostile Manhattan terrain: He received a round of applause, and a lone hiss, when introduced, and he signed autographs after the event.
|
“Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail." - Barack Obama, Cairo, Egypt, June 4, 2009. Obama ♥ Ziggy B (Zbigniew Brzezinski), co-founder of the Trilateral Commission who has repeatedly boastfully admitted that, as National Security Advisor to President Carter, he helped enable the communist butcher despots, Pol Pot and Khmer Rouge, who committed many masacres in Cambodia and also the Mujahadeen which became Al Qaeda, an Arabic term which loosely translates to, "to base," or "the toilet," but as Ziggy B. has written, he created it as a database of U.S. assets in the middle east. Would any self-respecting terrorist organization want to be confused with a commode? Or is more likely a big joke being played on us all? |
░▒▓►flashback◄▓▒░
RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
By Michael Smith, London Daily Times, May 29, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war, new evidence has shown. The attacks were intensified from May, six months before the United Nations resolution that Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, argued gave the coalition the legal basis for war. By the end of August the raids had become a full air offensive.
The details follow the leak to The Sunday Times of minutes of a key meeting in July 2002 at which Blair and his war cabinet discussed how to make “regime change” in Iraq legal.
Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, told the meeting that “the US had already begun ‘spikes of activity’ to put pressure on the regime”.
The new information, obtained by the Liberal Democrats, shows that the allies dropped twice as many bombs on Iraq in the second half of 2002 as they did during the whole of 2001, and that the RAF increased their attacks even more quickly than the Americans did.
During 2000, RAF aircraft patrolling the southern no-fly zone over Iraq dropped 20.5 tons of bombs from a total of 155 tons dropped by the coalition, a mere 13%. During 2001 that figure rose slightly to 25 tons out of 107, or 23%.
However, between May 2002 and the second week in November, when the UN Security Council passed resolution 1441, which Goldsmith said made the war legal, British aircraft dropped 46 tons of bombs a month out of a total of 126.1 tons, or 36%.
By October, with the UN vote still two weeks away, RAF aircraft were dropping 64% of bombs falling on the southern no-fly zone.
Tommy Franks, the allied commander, has since admitted this operation was designed to “degrade” Iraqi air defences in the same way as the air attacks that began the 1991 Gulf war.
It was not until November 8 that the UN security council passed resolution 1441, which threatened Iraq with “serious consequences” for failing to co-operate with the weapons inspectors.
The briefing paper prepared for the July meeting — the same document that revealed the prime minister’s agreement during a summit with President George W Bush in April 2002 to back military action to bring about regime change — laid out the American war plans.
They opted on August 5 for a “hybrid plan” in which a continuous air offensive and special forces operations would begin while the main ground force built up in Kuwait ready for a full-scale invasion.
The Ministry of Defence figures, provided in response to a question from Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, show that despite the lack of an Iraqi reaction, the air war began anyway in September with a 100-plane raid.
The systematic targeting of Iraqi air defences appears to contradict Foreign Office legal guidance appended to the leaked briefing paper which said that the allied aircraft were only “entitled to use force in self-defence where such a use of force is a necessary and proportionate response to actual or imminent attack from Iraqi ground systems”.
Related Links:
By Michael Smith, London Daily Times, May 29, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war, new evidence has shown. The attacks were intensified from May, six months before the United Nations resolution that Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, argued gave the coalition the legal basis for war. By the end of August the raids had become a full air offensive.
The details follow the leak to The Sunday Times of minutes of a key meeting in July 2002 at which Blair and his war cabinet discussed how to make “regime change” in Iraq legal.
Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, told the meeting that “the US had already begun ‘spikes of activity’ to put pressure on the regime”.
The new information, obtained by the Liberal Democrats, shows that the allies dropped twice as many bombs on Iraq in the second half of 2002 as they did during the whole of 2001, and that the RAF increased their attacks even more quickly than the Americans did.
During 2000, RAF aircraft patrolling the southern no-fly zone over Iraq dropped 20.5 tons of bombs from a total of 155 tons dropped by the coalition, a mere 13%. During 2001 that figure rose slightly to 25 tons out of 107, or 23%.
However, between May 2002 and the second week in November, when the UN Security Council passed resolution 1441, which Goldsmith said made the war legal, British aircraft dropped 46 tons of bombs a month out of a total of 126.1 tons, or 36%.
By October, with the UN vote still two weeks away, RAF aircraft were dropping 64% of bombs falling on the southern no-fly zone.
Tommy Franks, the allied commander, has since admitted this operation was designed to “degrade” Iraqi air defences in the same way as the air attacks that began the 1991 Gulf war.
It was not until November 8 that the UN security council passed resolution 1441, which threatened Iraq with “serious consequences” for failing to co-operate with the weapons inspectors.
The briefing paper prepared for the July meeting — the same document that revealed the prime minister’s agreement during a summit with President George W Bush in April 2002 to back military action to bring about regime change — laid out the American war plans.
They opted on August 5 for a “hybrid plan” in which a continuous air offensive and special forces operations would begin while the main ground force built up in Kuwait ready for a full-scale invasion.
The Ministry of Defence figures, provided in response to a question from Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, show that despite the lack of an Iraqi reaction, the air war began anyway in September with a 100-plane raid.
The systematic targeting of Iraqi air defences appears to contradict Foreign Office legal guidance appended to the leaked briefing paper which said that the allied aircraft were only “entitled to use force in self-defence where such a use of force is a necessary and proportionate response to actual or imminent attack from Iraqi ground systems”.
Related Links:
