Archive for February, 2011

US Army to build a Cheetah robot that can run faster than humans… let’s hope it doesn’t get a taste for flesh

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 11:12 AM on 28th February 2011


But despite spending taxpayer millions on the android the Department of Defense officials don’t know what they will use it for

A new robot that can outrun the fastest man on Earth and a Terminator-type android that will work alongside troops is being developed for the US Army.

The speedy robot – called, unsurprisingly, the Cheetah – is being developed by Boston Dynamics, which brought to the world the $18million BigDog robot used to help soldiers carry equipment over tough terrain.

But despite the multi-million dollar contracts awarded by the Department of Defense, army officials still don’t know exactly what the robots will be used for, according to the company’s boss.

Scroll down for a video of the BigDog and Petman robots in action

The Cheetah-bot will be developed by Boston Dynamics and could reach speeds of 70mph. The first prototype is due in 20 monthsThe Cheetah-bot will be developed by Boston Dynamics and could reach speeds of 70mph. The first prototype is due in 20 months

Marc Raibert, lead investigator on the project and president of Boston Dynamics told the Boston Herald the Department of Defense is ‘not so focused on what the ultimate use will be.’

He added: ‘They’re most focused on developing the technology and seeing what uses they can be applied to.’

The four-legged Cheetah will have a flexible spine and articulated head, and, when built, it will be added to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s impressive robot arsenal.

Boston Dynamics boss, Marc Raibert, who will oversee the multi-million project, said the army doesn't know what purpose the Cheetah will haveBoston Dynamics boss, Marc Raibert, who will oversee the multi-million project, said the army doesn’t know what purpose the Cheetah will have

It will be able to sprint, take sharp corners, zigzag and be precise enough to stop on a dime.

The costs have not been revealed, but the multi-million dollar contract is expected to take quite a bite out of the department’s $3.2billion annual budget.

Real Cheetahs – the faster animal on land – can reach speeds of up to 70mph, and the company are hopeful their robot will be able to match them pound for metal.

The company hopes to have a prototype built in 20 months which will hit between 20 and 30mph.

The Atlas robot, which looks not too dissimilar to the androids in Terminator, will be a force to reckon with, the company hopes.

It has a body, two arms and two legs but no head and will be able to walk over rough terrain, fit through tight gaps and crawl on its hands and knees if needed.

The makers hope it will be a more technologically advanced version of its Petman robot, which is used to test out chemical weapons protection suits for the army and is capable of walking at 3mph and remain standing, even when pushed.

BigDog robot
Atlas robot

Robots in disguise: The BigDog, left, was unveiled in 2008 and the Atlas, right, is set to be the newest robot built for the Department of Defense’s Advanced Research Projects Agency alongside the Cheetah

Boston Dynamics hope to recreate the success its BigDog robot had when it was unveiled in 2008.

The BigDog supports American troops by carrying up to four backpacks of equipment over bumpy and rocky ground that wheeled vehicles cannot move over.

The 2ft tall and 3ft long metal beast also comes with high-tech gadgets including laser gyroscopes, video camera sensors and an on-board computer.

It wowed the world in 2008 and the company hopes to eventually sell the dogs to farmers for transporting crops.
Read more:–lets-hope-doesnt-taste-flesh.html#ixzz1FILbujEp


US : Wisconsin Police Have Joined Protest Inside State Capitol

February 27, 2011 at 13:18

Wisconsin Police Have Joined Protest Inside State Capitol
From inside the Wisconsin State Capitol, RAN ally Ryan Harvey reports:

“Hundreds of cops have just marched into the Wisconsin state capitol building to protest the anti-Union bill, to massive applause. They now join up to 600 people who are inside.”

Ryan reported on his Facebook page earlier today:

“Police have just announced to the crowds inside the occupied State Capitol of Wisconsin: ‘We have been ordered by the legislature to kick you all out at 4:00 today. But we know what’s right from wrong. We will not be kicking anyone out, in fact, we will be sleeping here with you!’ Unreal.”

You can find more updates from Ryan Harvey on Twitter @ryanharveysongs and his blog Even If Your Voice Shakes.

UPDATE: This video says it all. It makes me proud of my neighbors. “Let me tell you Mr. Walker, this is not your house, this is all our house.”



Al Qaeda in North Africa Tied to Sarkozy and Netanyahu

February 26, 2011 posted by Veterans Today


Behind Al Qaeda in North Africa there are Sarkozy and Netanyahu, who is in control of the CIA embassy in Tunisia where the fake ‘Al Qaeda videos’ were manufactured with the help of the harkas (traitors) of Algeria

US terror ally Mummar Gadhafi blames same fictitious ‘Al-Qaeda’ organisation for unrest in Libya
The revolution for freedom which started in Tunisia is fast spreading to several other Arab countries, such as Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, Libya, Algeria, Bahrein, and so on. It is not true that those are revolutions for European democracy which is a corrupt, capitalist, militaristic and repressive political system where votes are bought, and is a system based on the manipulation by a Zionist-controlled media. If anything, they are revolutions to dismantle those systems imposed by those corrupt European capitalist democracies and to replace them with a free and fair system appropriate to the peoples of those countries.

YouTube – Veterans Today -

Zionist Muammar Qaddafi speaking the language of his masters in Tel Aviv about fake ‘al Qaeda’ in Libya (official translation). Does it not sound like mad dogs Netanyahu, Clinton, Sarkozy, Cameron and Merkel when they insult Muslims and Islaam ? Make this video goes viral on the internet. Jazakum Allah kheyren

In an attempt to avoid such a revolution in ‘Saudi’ Arabia, the Saudi pro-West European dictators are increasing the salaries of Arabs in the democratic process of buying votes and acceptance of tyranny and corruption. Hence, the term ‘pro-democracy protestors’ is a complete misnomer and merely used for propaganda purposes.

Those revolutions are about freedom, justice, the liberation of Arab countries, including Palestine, the establishment of a pan-Arab economic system much less dependent on West Europeans and a defence force to better defend Arab countries from the aggression and occupation they have been experiencing for nearly a century.

Lockerbie and US terror friendship with Gadhafi
As the predominantly Muslim Arab world reels under its peoples’ will to free themselves from pro-Zionist terror regimes, we hear the same Western and pro-Western European rhetoric of Al-Qaeda to justify the massacres and persecution of Muslims at home and abroad. The uprising against US-supported Gadhafi’s Libyan regime is no surprise.

Gadhafi has been in power for 42 years. At one point, when his policy changed to denounce the US and Israel, he was branded the « mad dog of the Mediterranean ». On 15 April 1986, the US bombed the Libyan Capital Tripoli in an attempt to assassinate Gadhafi. They missed him and murdered his 15-month old adopted daughter Hanna instead. They accused Gadhafi of the Berlin discotheque bombing in 1986 and of supporting freedom movements, such as the IRA which wanted a unified Ireland and the removal of what they regarded as British armed terrorists from Irish soil, which the West Europeans branded as terrorist organisations.

Although there are clear indications that the bombing of the Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, on 21 December 1988 may have been the response of Iranians (and Palestinians) after the US Navy’s guided missile cruiser The USS Vincennes shot down, earlier, an Iranian Air Flight 655 on 3 July 1988 over the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf murdering all the crew and passengers, the US, who originally pointed the finger at Iran, shifted against Gadhafi and Libya for the Lockerbie bombing and even named the suspects they wanted to try.

After years of sanctions and with the intervention of Nelson Mandela, the Libyan leader allowed the two suspects to be released to Scottish custody, tried in the ‘neutral’ Netherlands in 2000. One suspect was freed but Libyan agent Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi was convicted in 2001 on the most doubtful uncorroborated ‘recollection’, 12 years earlier, of the Maltese tailor Tony Gauci who allegedly identified Megrahi buying (in Malta) the clothes allegedly used to conceal the bomb.

So flimsy was this evidence that even many parents and relatives of the victims did not believe Megrahi was the culprit (Ref. Robert Fisk & Mrs Irvine whose brother, Bill Cadman, was killed in the crash).
On 15th Oct 08, the High Court gave Megrahi leave of appeal to the Criminal Appeal Court against his conviction on the ground that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. This appeal, which would have exculpated Magrahi, was never to be heard in 2009 because Megrahi (who is still alive) was, in the meantime, released on compassionate ground because he was terminally ill with prostate cancer.

This saved the justice system a lot of embarrassment and the authorities would have had to look for other suspects. Parallel with Megrahi’s release, British Petroleum had clinched a deal worth billions of dollars to explore oil in Libya, while Gadhafi and the US had become new friends. Gadhafi also benefited many other juicy deals for him and his regime, including a Chair on the United Nations Human Rights Council, which includes the US, the greatest human rights violator of all – how vulgar!

Now, the US want Libya out without stating on what ground Gadhafi’s Libya was admitted in the first place. Surely, if the tyrant Gadhafi is toppled, why should Libya be removed from the HRC? On the contrary Libya should remain as the people are fighting for their rights.

Gadhafi blames Bin Laden and Al Qaeda

Surely, the terror friendship between Gadhafi and US was not destined to last. The Libyan people opted to throw out the pro-US, tyrannical and oppressive Gadhafi regime where no political parties are allowed. The European West never campaigned for the freedom of the Libyans. They armed the regime to repress the people. The same arms, tanks, fighter planes and so on, are being used to murder protesting Libyans in the thousands like Palestinians are murdered by the European Israelis against whom no sanctions have ever been enforced.

To legitimise such genocide, Muammar Gadhafi made out he was fighting Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda just like the US did when they put the blame of the 9/11 sophisticated military-precision attacks on the non-existent organisation. Gadhafi has clearly been well-trained by his masters. In a twist in the whole affair, Gadaffi’s Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil now speaks out against Gadhafi alleging that he had ordered the Pam Am Flight 103 bombing over Lockerbie in a clear European Western strategy to promote him as Gadhafi’s successor.

Stealing assets of the Libyan people

When US President Obama says « By any measure, Muammar Gadhafi’s government has violated international norms and common decency and must be held accountable », he fails to mention Israel and fails to point out that Gadhafi is his agent, bearing in mind that any sanctions will affect the people and not the Libyan regime. Similarly, when Switzerland, Germany, the US and other European countries freeze Gadhafi’s assets, they are effectively stealing the assets of the Libyan people like they did for Iran when the Shah was toppled.

They will subsequently use those illegally frozen assets as a bargaining chip with any new government. This is one aspect which clearly demonstrates how they use the capitalist system and globalisation to subjugate countries. When people denounce capitalism, they are branded as anarchists. The Gadhafi’s story is not over yet? At the same time, people should also ask themselves why the West Europeans have gone so quiet on Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. Why not freeze his assets too? How about freezing the assets of the Saudi dictators and tyrants?

M Rafic Soormally London 26 February 2011


The Conquer of the Americas : Mass Grave Sites Across Canada to be Surveyed by International Tribunal

related >Boarding Schools<  vids :


this Video is crying out :



Matt Taibbi: “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?” (Complete Interview)

found on :

org. Art. with video

Nobody goes to jail,” “writes Matt Taibbi in his the new issue of Rolling Stone magazine. “This is the mantra of the financial-crisis era, one that saw virtually every major bank and financial company on Wall Street embroiled in obscene criminal scandals that impoverished millions and collectively destroyed hundreds of billions, in fact, trillions of dollars of the world’s wealth.” Here is the complete interview from which we played an excerpt on our Feb. 22 show. Taibbi explains how the American people have been defrauded by Wall Street investors and how the financial crisis is connected to the situations in states such as Wisconsin and Ohio.

AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to Matt Taibbi. But before I do, let me read a sentence from a recent paper by Dean Baker, who concludes, “Most of the pension shortfall using the current methodology is attributable to the plunge in the stock market in the years 2007-2009. If pension funds had earned returns just equal to the interest rate on 30-year Treasury bonds in the three years since 2007, their assets would be more than $850 billion greater than they are today.”

And this—he quotes David Cay Johnston of “The average Wisconsin pension is $24,500 a year, which is hardly lavish. But what is stunning is that 15% of the money contributed to the fund each year is going to Wall Street in fees,” which is why we now ask the question, “Why isn’t Wall Street in jail?”

Actually, that’s the title of reporter Matt Taibbi’s new article for Rolling Stone magazine. In the piece, Matt writes, quote, “Nobody goes to jail. This is the mantra of the financial-crisis era, one that saw virtually every major bank and financial company on Wall Street embroiled in obscene criminal scandals that impoverished millions and collectively destroyed hundreds of billions, in fact, trillions of dollars of the world’s wealth.”

Well, I interviewed Matt Taibbi on Sunday about his report, “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?”

AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, Matt Taibbi.

MATT TAIBBI: Thanks for having me back.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re seeing these mass protests in Madison, Wisconsin, and there’s other protests that are happening. We see the working poor, the middle class, under tremendous stress, and yet they’re the ones who are being hit hardest, not Wall Street. Explain what has happened. Why isn’t Wall Street in jail?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, it’s an incredible story. I mean, just to back up and provide some context, I think, for this Wisconsin thing, and especially for the Ohio thing, given what their governor used to do for a living—


MATT TAIBBI: Well, he was an employee for Lehman Brothers, and he was—

AMY GOODMAN: This is Governor Kasich.

MATT TAIBBI: Governor Kasich, yeah, and he was intimately involved with selling—getting the state of Ohio’s pension fund to invest in Lehman Brothers and buy mortgage-backed securities. And of course they lost all that money. And this, broadly, was really what the mortgage bubble and the financial crisis was all about. It was essentially a gigantic criminal fraud scheme where all the banks were taking mismarked mortgage-backed securities, very, very dangerous, toxic subprime loans, they were chopping them up and then packaging them as AAA-rated investments, and then selling them to state pension funds, to insurance companies, to Chinese banks and Dutch banks and Icelandic banks. And, of course, these things were blowing up, and all those funds were going broke. But what they’re doing now is they’re blaming the people who were collecting these pensions—they’re blaming the workers, they’re blaming the firemen, they’re blaming the policemen—whereas, in reality, they were actually the victims of this fraud scheme. And the only reason that people aren’t angrier about this, I think, is because they don’t really understand what happened. If these were car companies that had sold a trillion dollars’ worth of defective cars to the citizens of the United States, there would be riots right now. But these were mortgage-backed securities, it’s complicated, people don’t understand it, and they’re only now, I think, beginning to realize that they were defrauded.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain what the crime is. Who has profited? Who should be on trial?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, you know, again, the broad crime in all of this was just fraud. They were taking—these banks were taking, again, these subprime mortgages, and they would have these billion-dollar pools of mortgages where, in some cases, 70 or 80 percent of the loans were to people who had no identification or no jobs or who had put no money down into the mortgage. And then they were taking these loans and applying this phony baloney, hocus pocus math, these derivative instruments, and turning them into AAA-rated investments. And they were marketing, again, these securities to, say, state pension funds as AAA-rated investments, which means credit risk almost zero. So they took the stuff that they knew was very, very risky and very, very likely to default, and they were going to the state of Wisconsin, the state of Ohio, the state of New York, and saying, “Hey, this is almost as safe as—or in fact, it is as safe as United States Treasury bonds. You should buy this, and you’ll earn a little bit more than you’ll earn if you buy T-bills.” The reality was, they were just taking absolutely worthless stuff and sticking it with these people and then fleeing the scene. This is no different than drug dealers who take a bag of oregano and sell it to you as, you know, a pound of weed. That’s exactly the same scam.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about John Mack and Gary Aguirre.

MATT TAIBBI: This is an amazing story, just because it demonstrates how far above the law these people are. John Mack is one of the most powerful people on Wall Street. Right now he’s the chairman of the board at Morgan Stanley. He used to be their CEO. Way back in 2001, when he was sort of between jobs, he had left Morgan Stanley and was interviewing with Credit Suisse First Boston. He was involved in a case that was investigated by the SEC. A hedge fund called Pequot made a very suspicious investment into a company called Heller Capital, which was about to be acquired by General Electric. This hedge fund bought, you know, an enormous amount of Heller stock three weeks before this acquisition by GE of Heller. Credit Suisse First Boston was Heller’s investment banker. John Mack was interviewing for the job with Credit Suisse a few days before Pequot made its purchases, and he was in direct contact with the hedge fund guy who made those purchases. Under any normal circumstances, he would be targeted for investigation by the SEC.

AMY GOODMAN: And his name was?

MATT TAIBBI: The investigator’s name was Gary Aguirre. And Aguirre—

AMY GOODMAN: And the guy buying up?

MATT TAIBBI: Art Samberg was the name of this hedge fund manager. He was a big star on Wall Street. In fact, there are articles about, you know, how does Art Samberg manage his amazing returns year after year? Well, you know, this was sort of a clue as to how.

Anyway, this SEC investigator named Gary Aguirre wanted permission to go interview John Mack, and his superiors at the SEC told him—they basically told him that he couldn’t, and the reason they said was because Mack has, quote-unquote, “powerful political connections.” At the time, he was a Ranger, one of Bush’s fundraising Rangers. He would later become a major fundraiser for Hillary Clinton. So he played both sides of the fence. This, again, is very typical of Wall Street. And Aguirre, when he pressed the matter, he was fired by the SEC.

AMY GOODMAN: And talk about the high-level people involved, like Mary Jo White.

MATT TAIBBI: Mary Jo White was the former U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. She was basically Rudy Giuliani for a few years. This is the top cop on Wall Street, basically. And she, at the time, was representing Morgan Stanley for the defense firm Debevoise & Plimpton. Again, this is what all these investigators do. When you leave a high-ranking position from the SEC or the U.S. attorney’s office, they all jump to these lucrative partnerships at corporate defense firms, where they make, you know, $2, $3, $4 million a year. So the incentives to really prosecute these guys are all backwards. And they all leave, and they take these jobs. Mary Jo White had left the U.S. attorney’s office. She’s representing Debevoise & Plimpton. She intercedes on behalf of Mack. And one of the SEC officials that she was in contact with, Paul Berger, Aguirre’s superior, ended up working for Debevoise & Plimpton a year later. And this is a very typical situation.

AMY GOODMAN: And Aguirre is fired.

MATT TAIBBI: He’s fired. He was—

AMY GOODMAN: He’s told to investigate, and then he starts to seriously investigate, and he’s fired.

MATT TAIBBI: Right. They gave him—two days after he started work at the SEC, one of his superiors handed him Pequot, just generally. They said, you know, “Look at this company.” Within a year or so, he was onto the Samberg case, and he had targeted Mack as a clear suspect in the case. He had overwhelming evidence. I mean, there were emails, there was documentary evidence. They put Martha Stewart in jail for much, much less than they had on Mack.

AMY GOODMAN: What did they have on Mack?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, again, they had emails demonstrating that Mack had been in touch by telephone with Samberg. They had the fact that Samberg had a personal relationship with Mack. They knew that the company had never had any meetings about this Heller Capital. It was—Aguirre described it to me as though Samberg awoke one morning, and God Himself told him to start buying shares of Heller Capital. And they had the fact that Mack was clearly privy to the inside information. He had had this meeting with Credit Suisse. He would later say that he destroyed his notes of his meeting with Credit Suisse on the way home from Switzerland, after that meeting. But clearly, he was—under any normal circumstances, he would have been targeted, would have been interviewed, but he was not.

AMY GOODMAN: So, Pequot is bought up?

MATT TAIBBI: Right. Well, no, Heller was bought.

AMY GOODMAN: Heller was bought up.

MATT TAIBBI: By GE, of course.

AMY GOODMAN: By GE. And how much does Samberg make? How much does—

MATT TAIBBI: He made—Samberg made $18 million on that trade. Another important part of the story is that Mack—Samberg cut Mack into a different deal that Pequot was doing, and as a result of that deal, Mack made about $10 million. So, all the dots connect. You know, Mack comes back from Switzerland. Samberg starts buying Heller. GE acquires Heller. Samberg makes $18 million. Mack gets cut in for $10 million. This is the outlines of a classic insider trading case.

AMY GOODMAN: So you think Mack should be in jail.

MATT TAIBBI: Well, he should—absolutely he should have been on trial. I mean, you know, it’s not for me to say; I’m not a jury. But clearly, they have prosecuted on far less evidence before.

AMY GOODMAN: Matt Taibbi, talk about Dick Fuld.

MATT TAIBBI: Well, Richard Fuld, whose nickname on Wall Street was “The Gorilla,” he was the head of Lehman Brothers. He was a much feared and ferocious character on Wall Street. And Fuld, again, he oversaw Lehman during this period when it was going through its death spiral, and there were a number of irregularities about Fuld that were extremely interesting.

I talked to a former Lehman Brothers lawyer named Oliver Budde, who was responsible for vetting some of Lehman’s public disclosures, and Budde discovered that Lehman had been hiding about $250 million worth of Fuld’s income from the SEC in its public disclosures. He, too, ended up having to leave his job because he was told that he couldn’t do his job. He protested the way that Lehman was doing its disclosures. He got kicked out. He went to the SEC in 2008, six months before its collapse. He gave them a huge packet of information about what Fuld was doing, and he was completely blown off by the SEC. He tried repeatedly over a period of six months to get them interested in the case. They said no.

When Fuld later testified before Congress, after the company’s collapse, he told Congress that he had only earned somewhere in the region of $350 million during his tenure at Lehman. Budde knew that the real number was more like $520 million. He told the committee members in Congress that Fuld had probably lied while he was testifying. And they weren’t interested in that, either. So here we have a situation where Roger Clemens is being investigated—you know, the state is trying to put Roger Clemens, baseball star, in jail for lying to Congress, but Dick Fuld apparently is not worth going after.

AMY GOODMAN: A man recently named the worst CEO of all time—


AMY GOODMAN:—by Portfolio magazine.

MATT TAIBBI: Absolutely. Again, Fuld presided over Lehman during this period where it was engaged in all sorts of irregularities. I mean, aside from this matter of hiding his own personal income, Lehman, during the last few years of its existence, was engaged in these very, very shady transactions called the “Repo 105″ transactions. This was a kind of Enron-esque accounting where they were essentially borrowing tens of billions of dollars at the end of every quarter and then booking all that money as revenue. So, if you were an investor in Lehman Brothers and you’re looking at their bottom line, you’re thinking, “Hey, they’re making a lot of money. They’re doing great.” In fact, those were all loans, and after the quarter was over they were repaying that money. And it was guys like Fuld who were cashing out while everybody else was staying in.

AMY GOODMAN: Oliver Budde, who was he?

MATT TAIBBI: He was Lehman’s lawyer. He was the guy who uncovered those irregularities about Fuld’s reporting income, and he was the guy who went to the SEC and was told that, you know, they weren’t interested in his story.

AMY GOODMAN: No regulation?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, no. I mean, clearly—you know, the interesting thing about the Fuld case is that Lehman had been taking advantage of a loophole in the SEC’s rules in the early part of the 2000s to misreport Fuld’s income. But they actually caught themselves. They noticed that this practice was very widespread, and they created a new rule specifically to target this kind of income hiding that Fuld was doing. But they created the rule, but they didn’t do anything about it. They had clear cases of this rule being misused, and they chose not to do anything about it. So, even when we do have regulation on Wall Street, the laws are really often meaningless, because you need someone who has the will to prosecute, the will to investigate, to make them real.

AMY GOODMAN: Has anyone gone to jail?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, Bernie Madoff. And clearly, he’s the only person in this whole tableau—

AMY GOODMAN: Always called the greatest swindle of all time.

MATT TAIBBI: Right. But Bernie Madoff, honestly, compared to all these other guys, he’s really small potatoes. He’s also not really representative of what went on on Wall Street during this period. He’s a garden variety Ponzi scheme artist. Of course, he did it on a much bigger scale than most Ponzi scheme artists, but this is a crime that could have happened in the ’20s, the ’30s, the ’40s. It had nothing to do with this incredibly sophisticated, complex criminal fraud scheme involving, you know, the mortgage bubble and the sale of these phony baloney mortgage-backed securities. Madoff had nothing to do with that. He was just a garden variety criminal. And this is exactly the kind of case that the SEC and the Justice Department do prosecute: these outliers, these guys who are not part of the top echelon executives. And they make these cases, and they say, “Here’s evidence we’re doing our job.” The reality is very different.

AMY GOODMAN: So, talk, Matt Taibbi, about what are the repercussions of what happened. What did the 2008 crash mean?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, it was—you know, this was the collapse of a giant bubble scheme. You know, when they did this, when they pumped the whole country full of these defective cars, which were these defective mortgages, it created a very, very dangerous situation for the entire country. They ended up essentially bankrupting or fatally wounding pension funds and insurance companies and banks all over the country. And so, now we’re all paying for those phony scams.

But the other amazing thing that they did is, you know, the banks, when they flooded the market with these phony securities, some of them were smart enough to realize that they were eventually going to blow, so they started betting against them. They went to companies like AIG, and they took out trillions of dollars of credit default swaps and pseudo-insurance policies on these mortgages. When they all blew up, you know, it blew up some of these companies, like AIG. And that’s what the bailout was really all about. The bailout wasn’t really to pay off real losses in these mortgages. It was really to pay off the bets on these mortgages. So, not only did they flood the market with a trillion dollars of defective merchandise, they got the United States taxpayer to pony up $5, $6, $7 trillion worth of bailout money to pay off their bets on all this stuff.

AMY GOODMAN: Which brings in the Obama administration. You talk about a lot of this happening under President Bush, but talk about what the Obama administration, what Geithner—talk about also Alan Greenspan, through the Bush years.

MATT TAIBBI: Right. Well, the most important thing to get from the Obama administration is that its economic policy represented absolute continuity with the policy of the previous administration. Timothy Geithner was the principal architect of Bush’s bailouts, and he was retained. Ben Bernanke, who was the head of the Fed under Bush, stayed on under Obama.

And they essentially continued the same bailout policy, which, again, was essentially to tell Wall Street that we’re going to make you whole again. You know, after they flooded the entire international economy with all these toxic debt instruments, their policy was to get Wall Street well again, and ostensibly they were supposed to reinvest in the economy and put people back to work. But instead, they just kept the money. And, I mean, they literally went from being completely insolvent to, you know, making $150 billion bonus pools every year, and that money is all public money. It’s pure bailout gift from the taxpayer.

AMY GOODMAN: Is Obama doing this because he’s got to raise a billion dollars in 2012 for the presidential race, and he’s going to turn to Wall Street for this?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, clearly. You know, look, Barack Obama’s number one private campaign contributor was Goldman Sachs. He took more money from Wall Street than any other presidential candidate in history. He was heavily influenced by Wall Street guys. When he was elected, he immediately put Citigroup executives in charge of his economic transition team. I remember when I was covering his campaign how he promised never to bring a registered lobbyist into his cabinet. And one of the first things he did was put Mark Patterson, Goldman Sachs’s lobbyist, in the number two job at the Treasury. He’s got a JPMorgan Chase executive, who has $8 million in Chase stock, as the chief of staff right now. He’s been incredibly friendly to Wall Street. These guys have remained the architects of his economic policy.

AMY GOODMAN: And Jeffrey Immelt, head of GE?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, yeah. I mean, obviously he was a key player, as well. Again, its continuity with the previous administration is the key thing to focus on.

AMY GOODMAN: Alan Greenspan?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, Greenspan—I think what people don’t understand about the Fed is what an important role the Fed plays in this entire mess. Going back, you know, 20, 25 years, every time Wall Street gets in a lot of trouble, the Fed has been there to bail them out. They even had a term for it on Wall Street called the “Greenspan Put,” which essentially meant that every time the banks blew up a speculative bubble, they could go back to the Fed and borrow money at zero or one or two percent, and then start the game all over again.

After the crash in 2008, interest rates were slashed to basically nothing. The banks could go to the Fed and get money for free, and then they’re out lending it to us at five, six, seven—I mean, how much is your interest on your credit cards? It’s 15, 20 percent. It’s almost impossible not to make money in banking if your cost of capital is zero. That’s what banking is all about. And that’s what the Fed has done. It’s provided a massive subsidy system for the banks on Wall Street.

AMY GOODMAN: You say in your article that the justice system has actually evolved into a highly effective mechanism for protecting financial criminals, not just not prosecuting them, but protecting them.

MATT TAIBBI: Right. Well, one of the things that I found out when I was interviewing former SEC officials and whistleblowers, people who had been involved in some of these cases, is, you know, when you look at the revolving door situation with all these—the Mary Jo Whites and the Gary Lynches and the Linda Thompsons, these former high-ranking financial cops who leave government service and they go to work in these millionaire partnerships on Wall Street, it creates this collegial atmosphere where it’s just a few—a small group of lawyers who all know each other, and they’re in this constant merry-go-round, from government, back to private service, back to government again, and they’re really in this—it’s far too collegial.

There’s a scene in my story where the current head of the SEC enforcement, Robert Khuzami, is giving a speech to all these lawyers, and he’s saying, you know, “We have a new policy now where if you’re a defendant or if you’re a company that’s being investigated, you can come to the SEC, and we will get you answers as to whether or not the Department of Justice has a criminal interest in your case.” So, essentially, the SEC is now acting as a middleman for these companies, so they can go and find out whether they’re going to be criminally prosecuted. Then, once they get that information, they can make a decision about whether or not to settle financially with the SEC. And they pay a settlement. Nobody gets criminally prosecuted. No individuals ever get fined. They pay these fines, and they almost always have a little section in there that says that they do not admit wrongdoing. So, they don’t even have to say they’re sorry, essentially. These companies go and they pay their fines. No individuals have to suffer at all. And it’s all done in a very collegial way.

AMY GOODMAN: You suggest in your piece that Bernie Madoff went to jail because it was rich people who were the victims.

MATT TAIBBI: Absolutely. Every single former investigator or current investigator that I talked to said the same thing: Madoff went to jail because the wrong people suffered. You know, it was famous actors. It was, you know, the glitterati in New York. If these were teachers and firemen and all the usual suspects—you know, look at the—we have a million people in foreclosure in this country right now, and a lot of them are there because of predatory lending and because of this fraud scheme, but there are no criminal prosecutions. I think that’s the reality now, is that we don’t see anybody being criminally targeted unless their victims were powerful people themselves.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about Lynn Turner, the former chief accountant for the SEC, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

MATT TAIBBI: Yeah, Lynn Turner was the guy that I talked to, the former chief accountant—the chief accountant’s job at the SEC is actually an investigatory position. What they do is they look at disclosure violations, which means, you know, when companies issue their SEC quarterly reports, they have to make sure that everything that they say in those reports are accurate. That’s the chief accountant’s job. And Turner told me that, you know, that was his job, and in his experience, he saw case after case in which they had good evidence against companies that were involved in very shady dealings, and these cases were either slowed down or not pursued at all.

He gave me an example, you know, the Rite Aid case, which of course turned into—there were many cases like Rite Aid, that, you know, they had this case years before the Enron case blew up. They maybe could have done something about Enron if they had proceeded fast enough.

AMY GOODMAN: And the Rite Aid case was?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, Rite Aid was a company that was hiding billions of dollars in losses. It’s similar to the Lehman Brothers situation. They were trying to make their bottom line look better for shareholders, so they created, you know, these little cookie jar companies to hide their losses in. This is very similar to what Enron was doing, very similar to what WorldCom was doing. They had plenty of evidence on this case, but the case went nowhere for seven, eight years. And this is the typical MO of the SEC. They just do not act fast enough.

AMY GOODMAN: You mention that before the corruption starts, the state is at a disadvantage because policing Wall Street requires serious intellectual firepower, and the banks seize a huge advantage from the start by hiring away the top talent.

MATT TAIBBI: Yeah, you know, one lawyer I talked to put it to me this way. He said everybody knows that the top 80 percent of all the graduating classes of all the best law schools, they go to Wall Street. They go to these corporate defense firms where they get the real money-making jobs. The bottom 20 percent, he says, go to the SEC. That’s the way this works. And, you know, the way he described it, he says, “It’s just such a mismatch, it’s not even funny.” And even that 20 percent, of course, they get roped into the revolving door situation, so if any talent rises from that pool into positions of responsibility, they get lured away by the million-dollar partnerships.

So what your left is—you know, not to insult the people who work at the SEC, but clearly, the very best and brightest lawyers are working for these banks, where they continually come up with these very fiendish and almost brilliant defenses for the schemes that their companies are involved with. They always find a way to claim that what we did was legal, and they come up with these elaborate justifications. And some of these lawyers are really overwhelmed by these justifications, and they end up, you know, not having the gumption to prosecute or move forward with cases.

AMY GOODMAN: You think of the thousands of people who have been deported in the last years?

MATT TAIBBI: Three hundred and ninety-three thousand last year.

AMY GOODMAN: You think of the people who have gone to prison and what they’ve gone to prison for.

MATT TAIBBI: Right, right. You know, it’s incredible. I mean, there was a case in Ohio that somebody forwarded to me, where a woman, a single—a black single mother of two children, she lied about where she was living so that her two kids could get into a better school system. And the state of Ohio actually prosecuted her for fraud, and the judge in that case insisted—they sentenced her to, actually, I think it was five years in jail, but they insisted that she actually do 15 days. And the judge’s quote in that case was that if she didn’t do real jail time, that would demean the seriousness of the offense. And so, I mean, the case was ultimately commuted because of the public outcry, but this, to me, is symptomatic of what we’re dealing with here.

You have people in this country who—we have two-and-a-half million people in jail this country, you know, more than a million who are in jail for nonviolent crimes. And yet, we couldn’t find a single person on Wall Street to do even a day in jail for losing 40 percent of the world’s wealth in a criminal fraud scheme? And that tells you that we have—this goes beyond the cliché that rich people have better lawyers and they have an advantage. This is a step beyond that. This is a situation where the system is completely corrupted, and it’s true regulatory capture. The SEC and the Justice Department are essentially subsidiaries of Wall Street.

AMY GOODMAN: Finally, you mentioned Obama’s chief of staff, Bill Daley, newly appointed. What, $20 million he made last year, mainly from Chase.

MATT TAIBBI: Right, right. I mean, it’s—

AMY GOODMAN: What about the media coverage, when people are being appointed, when these deals are made, talking about just basic tenets of good journalism, following the money, talking about who’s profiting where and who’s surrounding those who are making these decisions?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, it’s funny. The general narrative with political journalism in this country—and I know, because I was one of these people for a long time. I covered presidential campaigns and presidential politics. A lot of the reporters who cover the stuff don’t know a whole lot about economics, and so they believe this sort of general notion that the guys on Wall Street are the experts; if you want to have somebody running your economy, you have to go to the experts; so it makes perfect sense that the President would want to surround himself with executives from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase. And I think that their thinking doesn’t really get any more sophisticated than that. And so, a lot of these guys get a pass. Then people don’t really look at what these companies have been up to, what kind of influence they might have over the President’s decision making. And so, I think there isn’t very much coverage. There isn’t enough debate about what these appointments mean.

AMY GOODMAN: If you were president, what would you do right now?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, I would certainly get rid of all those guys, you know, from Wall Street. I think there needs to be a freeze on foreclosures. I mean, there’s all kinds of things that need to be done. But the most important thing is we have to, you know, get the right people into bodies like the SEC and the Justice Department. Everybody I talked to said the same thing. The existing laws we have, you know, they’re not perfect, but they’re probably good enough to do some real good. It’s just that we don’t have the right people in the jobs, and the will isn’t there to do these prosecutions. So, I think we’ve just got to get the right people in the right jobs.

AMY GOODMAN: Matt Taibbi, his latest piece, “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?” It’s in the latest issue of Rolling Stone magazine. Thanks so much.

MATT TAIBBI: Thank you, Amy.

Matt Taibbi, political reporter for Rolling Stone magazine. His new article for Rolling Stone magazine is titled ‘Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?’

Star Wars In Iraq

Filed under: Military/War by iw2010 
February 19, 2011

Al Ghezali reported that he had seen three passengers in a car all dead with their faces and teeth burnt, the body intact, and no sign of projectiles. There were other inexplicable aspects: the terrain where the battle took place was dug up by the American military and replaced with other fresh earth, the bodies that were not hit by projectiles had shrunk to just slightly more than one meter in height.

As in any war, the war in Iraq left us a dreadful gallery of horror, images of mutilations that not even doctors can explain. The witnesses refer to laser weapons, arms with mysterious effects. We do not know what kind of weapons could produce such terrible effects. We tried to learn more about it by asking for interviews to members of companies manufacturing laser and microwave weapons. Yet, the U.S. Defense Department prevented any information from being released to us, they also did not answer, up to the time to almost edited, the questions we have sent them in order to know whether or not experimental weapons had been tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We tracked down the Pentagon press conferences from before the beginning of the second Gulf War to see if they spoke about any new weapons being tested. The words of the Secretary of Defense and General Meyers indicated a willingness to try weapons that had never been used before. And the questions from the press about direct energy and microwave weapons made them visibly uncomfortable.

YEAR: 2006

RUNTIME: 25 min

TORRENT Download



Italian Parliament finger four forgers – Ahmad Chalabi , Francis Brookes, Dewey Clarridge, and Michael Ledeen.

Original french at

July 22, the democratic group of the American Senate held a capital hearing to evaluate the extent of the political implications and of safety caused by the disclosure with the press of the identity of the secret agent Valerie Plame. They also examined the behavior of the White House and president Bush which, while refusing to seek and sanction the persons in charge, worsened the damage.

Hearing was chaired by the deputy Henry Waxman and the senator Byron Dorgan, director of Senate Democratic Policy Committee. For Waxman, the revelation of the identity of Limes constitutes not only “one treason and an affront indefensible in its opposition and towards those which work on the lines of face to protect America”, but also “an indefensible violation of our national safety”. Deputy, which had voted in favour of the invasion of Iraq on the basis of what proved to be lies and half-truths as for the weapons of destruction massive (ADM) Iraqi, clearly implied that the Plame scandal is also a history of lie “Today, says it, we know the truth. I was misled, as the American people were misled, and it is the husband of Valerie Plame, the ambassador Joe Wilson, who contributed to restore the truth.

“Until now, the White House did not provide any credible proof of an agreement of uranium sale between Iraq and Niger”, which however constituted one of the key parts of is saying Iraqi threat nuclear “It seems rather than the advisers of the President launched a smear campaign (…) We have only one partial information on what occurred in the hours and the days which followed [ the publication of the article of Wilson bringing back the conclusions of its mission to Niger ] (…) but we know that a secret memorandum of the State Department exposing the identity of Valerie [ Limes that Karl Rove, to advise nearest of the President, spoke about the identity of Mrs. Wilson with the chronicler Robert Novak and the journalist of the magazine Time Matthew Cooper; and that Lewis Libby, head of cabinet of the office of the vice-president, also spoke about Mrs. Wilson with at least a journalist “According to Waxman, the White House gave a report on eleven escapes on the subject.

Various former analysts of the services of information deposited in front of the senators and all underlined at which point it is serious to reveal the identity of a secret agent. That endangers not only the agent, but all the network of people with whom it is in contact, clandestinely, in foreign countries where the information is collected.

“the consequences are much more serious than I imagined it at the beginning”, declared the deputy John Conyers. Appointed the Louise Slaughter asked the witnesses if they had already intended to say, during their professional life, that the White House had revealed the identity of a secret agent. Larry Johnson, former analyst with the CIA, was categorical: “With large never! It is without precedent. “

The former officer of the military information (DIA) Patrick LANG insisted on the importance of the factor confidence in the recruitment of foreign citizens to become advisors of the CIA In the event of escape, it is all their confidence towards the United States which is blamed “When not only community of the information, but the elected government (…) of the first country in the world decides, deliberately and apparently for transitory political reasons and without interest, to reveal the identity of a secret agent, the new one makes the effect of a shock in the whole world (…)” One cannot make confidence with the Americans”, is said one never does it. “

Larry Johnson contradicted the assertions of the republican Party according to which Plame was not really a clandestine agent since it worked at the HQ of the CIA with Langley, or that it is it which had organized the mission of her husband in Niger. These untrue assertions were repeated by various republican members of Parliament.

For the former treating officer of the CIA Jim Marcinkowski, the refusal of high persons in charge for the government to take their responsabilities following this rupture for confidence, created large a faintness with the power station “They played hide-and-seek with the truth and to semantic plays for more than two years, at the expense of the safety of the American people”, he has said.

While were held these hearings, one learned in the New York Times that the special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald considers the possibility of accusing of perjury Karl Rove and Lewis Libby because of contradictions in their testimonys and of obstruction of justice.

The White House hopelessly tries to bury the business of uranium native of Niger

EIR learned from several sources in Washington that the White House makes its possible to prevent three bodies of press from revealing the origins of the falsified documents of the government native of Niger, intended to make believe that Saddam Hussein sought to obtain significant quantities of uranium native of Niger to produce nuclear weapons. After having taken knowledge of these documents, appeared in Italy at the end of 2001, Dick Cheney asked the information agencies to check information, which was to lead to the mission of the Wilson ambassador in Niger in February 2002.

A news service, a chain of American television and a newspaper have each one surveyed into the origin of the forgeries. Last year, the emission of CBS, “60 minutes”, cancelled at the last minute the diffusion of a special sequence on the business of uranium native of Niger to cover the “scandal” which had just burst concerning the military service of George W Bush. The two other media are about to finish their investigations, and according to our sources, the White House exerts pressures so that they extinguish the business.

In Italy, the Parliament comes to conclude a study on the origins and the consequences from the forgeries, and according to certain sources, the report/ratio mentions among the principal suspects Michael Ledeen, Dewey Clarridge, Ahmed Chalabi and Francis Brookes.

Let us recall that Ledeen works like “consultant” near the service of Italian information SISMI since long years (since the beginning of the Eighties and the bursting of the scandal around the P2 cabin). To December 2001, at the time where the documents natives of Niger were transmitted to the SISMI, it went to Rome in company of Harold Rhode and of Lawrence Franklin of the Pentagon, officially to meet Manucher Ghorbanifar, large protagonist of the Business Iran-Countered. Franklin is at the present time accused to have transmitted secret information to the AIPAC like with a person in charge for the embassy of Israel.

The fact that Clarridge, Chalabi and Brookes (related to Iraqi National Congress (Inc)), are mentioned is particularly interesting. With the end of the year 2001, the tsar of the counter-terrorism of the White House was the General (Cr) Wayne DOWNING. He proposed to take Clarridge for assistant. Brookes came from Rendon Group, a cabinet of “public relations” that the Pentagon engaged to promote Chalabi and the Inc.

Which is the role of the White House in these forgeries? Did the government only exploit the information to arrive to its ends, or a group of néo-conservative around Cheney it took part in their manufacture? No one will not be astonished by the current efforts of the White House to prevent this business from bursting at the great day.


Libya: Is Washington Pushing for Civil War to Justify a US-NATO Military Intervention?;

by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
Global Research, February 25, 2011
- 2011-02-24
One should be opposed to dictatorship, but one should not forget the issue of foreign domination. 

Is Tripoli being set up for a civil war to justify U.S. and NATO military intervention in oil-rich Libya?

Is “manufactured destruction” or “creative destruction” at work?

If Qaddafi is not ousted, are the talks about sanctions a prelude to an Iraq-like intervention?


Something is Rotten in the so-called “Jamahiriya” of Libya

There is no question that Colonel Muammar Al-Gaddafi (Al-Qaddafi) is a dictator. He has been the dictator and so-called “qaid” of Libya for about 42 years. Yet, it appears that tensions are being ratcheted up and the flames of revolt are being fanned inside Libya. This includes earlier statements by the British Foreign Secretary William Hague that Colonel Qaddafi had fled Libya to Venezuela. [1] This statement served to electrify the revolt against Qaddafi and his regime in Libya.

Although all three have dictatorship in common, Qaddafi’s Libya is quite different from Ben Ali’s Tunisia or Mubarak’s Egypt. The Libyan leadership is not outright subservient to the United States and the European Union. Unlike the cases of Tunisia and Egypt, the relationship that exists between Qaddafi and both the U.S. and E.U. is a modus vivendi. Simply put, Qaddafi is an independent Arab dictator and not a “managed dictator” like Ben Ali and Mubarak.

In Tunisia and Egypt the status quo prevails, the military machine and neo-liberalism remain intact; this works for the interests of the United States and the European Union. In Libya, however, upsetting the established order is a U.S. and E.U. objective.

The U.S. and the E.U. now seek to capitalize on the revolt against Qaddafi and his dictatorship with the hopes of building a far stronger position in Libya than ever before. Weapons are also being brought into Libya from its southern borders to promote revolt. The destabilization of Libya would also have significant implications for North Africa, West Africa, and global energy reserves.

Colonel Qaddafi in Brief Summary

Qaddafi’s rise to power started as a Libyan captain amongst a group of military officers who carried out a coup d’état. The 1969 coup was against the young Libyan monarchy of King Idris Al-Sanusi. Under the monarchy Libya was widely seen as being acquiescent to U.S. and Western European interests.

Although he has no official state or government position, Qaddafi has nurtured and deeply rooted a political culture of cronyism, corruption, and privilege in Libya since the 1969 coup. Added to this is the backdrop of the “cult of personality” that he has also enforced in Libya.

Qaddafi has done everything to portray himself as a hero to the masses, specifically the Arabs and Africans. His military adventures in Chad were also tied to leaving his mark in history and creating a client state by carving up Chad. Qaddafi’s so-called “Green Book” has been forcefully portrayed and venerated as being a great feat in political thought and philosophy. Numerous intellectuals have been forced or bribed to praise it.

Over the years, Colonel Qaddafi has tried to cultivate a romantic figure of himself as a simple man of the people. This includes pretending to live in a tent. He has done everything to make himself stand out. His reprimanding of other Arab dictators, such as King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, at Arab League meetings have made headlines and have been welcomed by many Arabs. While on state visits he has deliberately surrounded himself with an entourage of female body guards with the intent of getting heads to turn. Moreover, he has also presented himself as a so-called imam or leader of the Muslims and a man of God, lecturing about Islam in and outside of Libya.

Libya is run by a government under Qaddafi’s edicts. Fear and cronyism have been the keys to keeping so-called “order” in Libya amongst officials and citizens alike. Libyans and foreigners alike have been killed and have gone missing for over four decades. The case of Lebanon’s Musa Al-Sadr, the founder of the Amal Movement, is one of the most famous of these cases and has always been a hindrance to Lebanese-Libyan relations. Qaddafi has had a very negative effect in creating and conditioning an entire hierarchy of corrupt officials in Tripoli. Each one looks out for their own interests at the expense of the Libyan people.

Fractions and Tensions inside the Hierarchy of Qaddafi’s Regime

Because of the nature of Qaddafi’s regime in Tripoli, there are a lot of internal tensions in Libya and within the regime structure itself. One of these sets of tensions is between Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and his father’s circle of older ministers. Libyan ministers are generally divided amongst those that gather around Saif Al-Islam and those that are part of the “old guard.”

There are even tensions between Qaddafi and his sons. In 1999, Mutassim Al-Qaddafi tried to ouster his father while Colonel Qaddafi was outside of Libya. Mutassim Qaddafi holds a Libyan cabinet portfolio as a national security advisor. He is also famously known amongst Libyans for being a playboy who has spent much of his time in Europe and abroad. There is also Khames Gaddafi who runs his own militia of thugs, which are called the Khames militia. He has always been thought of as possible contender for succession too against his other brothers.

There have always been fears in Libya about the issue of succession after Colonel Qaddafi is gone. Over the years, Qaddafi has thoroughly purged Libya of any form of organized opposition to him or prevented anyone else, outside his family, from amassing enough power to challenge his authority.

The Issue of Loyalty and Defection in Libya

Undoubtedly, little loyalty is felt for Qaddafi and his family. It has been fear that has kept Libyans in line. At the level of the Libyan government and the Libyan military it has been both fear and self-interest that has kept officials, good and corrupt alike, in line. That mantle of fear has now been dispelled. Statements and declarations of denunciation against Gaddafi’s regime are being heard from officials, towns, and military barracks across Libya.

Aref Sharif, the head of the Libyan Air Force, has renounced Qaddafi. Interior Minister Abdul Fatah Al-Yunis (Al-Younis), who is from Benghazi (Bengasi) and oversees a branch of the special operations work in Libya, has resigned. Yunis is reported to be Qaddafi’s “number two” or second in charge, but this is incorrect. Abdullah Sanusi, the head of Libyan Internal Intelligence and Qaddafi’s relative through marriage, is the closest thing to a “number two” within the structure of power in Tripoli.

Reports have been made about two Libyan pilots defected to Malt and Libyan naval vessels refusing to attack Benghazi. Defections are snowballing amongst the military and government. Yet, there must be pause to analyze the situation.

The Libyan Opposition

At this point, however, it must be asked who is the “opposition” in Libya. The opposition is not a monolithic body.  The common denominator is the opposition to the rule of Qaddafi and his family. It has to be said that “actions of opposition or resistance against an oppressor” and an “opposition movement” are also two different things. For the most part, the common people and corrupt Libyan officials, who harbour deep-seated hate towards Qaddafi and his family, are now in the same camp, but there are differences.

There is an authentic form of opposition, which is not organized, and a systematic form of opposition, which is either external or led by figures from within the Libyan regime itself.  The authentic people’s internal opposition in Libya is not organized and the people’s “actions of opposition” have been spontaneous. Yet, opposition and revolt has been encouraged and prompted from outside Libya through social media networks, international news stations, and events in the rest of the Arab World. [2]

The leadership of the internal opposition that is emerging in Libya is coming from within the regime itself. Corrupt officials that have rebelled against Gaddafi are not the champions of the people. These opposition figures are not opposed to tyranny; they are merely opposed to the rule of Colonel Qaddafi and his family. Aref Sharif and Al-Yunis are themselves Libyan regime figures.

It has to also be considered that some Libyan officials that have turned against Qaddafi are doing it to save themselves, while others in the future will work to retain or strengthen their positions. Abdel Moneim Al-Honi, the Libyan envoy to the Arab League in Cairo, can be looked at as an example. Al-Honi denounced Qaddafi, but it should be noted that he was one of the members of the group of Libyan officers who executed the coup in 1969 with Qaddafi and that later in 1975 he himself tried to take power in a failed coup. After the failed coup, he would flee Libya and only return in 1990 after Qaddafi pardoned him.

Al-Honi is not the only Libyan diplomat to resign. The Libyan ambassador to India has also done the same. There is an intention on the part of these officials to be members of the power structure in a Libya after the ouster of Qaddafi:

Libyan Ambassador to India Ali al-Essawi told the BBC that he was quitting, opposing his government’s violent crackdown on demonstrators.

Mr. Al-Essawi was reported to be a Minister in Tripoli and could be an important figure in an alternative government, in case Libyan President Muammar Qadhafi steps down.

The second Libyan diplomat to put in his papers was Tripoli’s Permanent Representative to the Arab League Abdel Moneim al-Honi, who said in Cairo that he had quit his job to “join the revolution” in his country.

“I have submitted my resignation in protest against the acts of repression and violence against demonstrators, and I am joining the ranks of the revolution,” said Mr. Al-Honi. The Second Secretary Hussein Sadiq al Musrati, announced his resignation from China, in an interview with Al-Jazeera, and called on the Army to intervene in the uprising. [3]

Again, these revolting officials, like Al-Yunis and Sharif, are from within the regime. They are not mere diplomats, but former ministers. There is also the possibility that these types of “opposition figures” could have or could make arrangements with external powers.

External Forces at Play in Libya

The governments of the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, and Italy all knew very well that Qaddafi was a despot, but this did not stop any of them from making lucrative deals with Tripoli. When the media covers the violence in Libya, they should also ask, where are the weapons being used coming from? The arms sales that the U.S. and the E.U. have made to Libya should be scrutinized. Is this a part of their democracy promotion programs?

Since rapprochement between the U.S. and Libya, the military forces of both countries have moved closer. Libya and the U.S. have had military transactions and since rapprochement Tripoli has been very interested in buying U.S. military hardware. [4] In 2009, a Pentagon spokeswoman, Lieutenant-Colonel Hibner, affirmed this relationship best: “[The U.S.] will consider Libyan requests for defen[c]e equipment that enables [Libya] to build capabilities in areas that serve our mutual interest [or synchronized U.S. and Libyan interests].” [5] The qualifier here is U.S. interests, meaning that the Pentagon will only arm Libya on the basis of U.S. interests.

In what seems to have happened overnight, a whole new arsenal of U.S. military hardware has appeared in Libya. American-made F-16 jets, Apache helicopters, and ground vehicles are being used inside Libya by Qaddafi. [6] This is a shocking revelation, if corroborated. There are no public records about some of this U.S. military hardware in the the arsenal of the Libyan military. In regards to the F-16s, Libyan jets are traditionally French-made Mirages and Russian-made MiGs.

Silvio Berlusconi and the Italian government have also been strong supporters of Qaddafi’s regime. There is information coming out of Libya that Italian pilots are also being used by the Libyan Air Force. [7] Mercenaries from Chad, Sudan, Niger, and Nigeria are also being used. This has been verified through video evidence coming out of Libya. The Libyan regime is also considering contracting American or European security firms (mercenaries). [8]

The Politics of Al Jazeera

The Libyan government has shut down the internet and phone lines and an information war is underway. Although one of the most professional news networks in the world, it has to be cautioned that Al Jazeera is not a neutral actor. It is subordinate to the Emir of Qatar and the Qatari government, which is also an autocracy. By picking and choosing what to report, Al Jazeera’s coverage of Libya is biased. This is evident when one studies Al Jazeera’s coverage of Bahrain, which has been restrained due to political ties between the leaders of Bahrain and Qatar.

Reports by Al Jazeera about Libyan jets firing on protesters in Tripoli and the major cities are unverified and questionable. [9] Hereto, the reports that Libyan jets have been attacking people in the streets have not been verified. No visual evidence of the jet attacks has been shown, while visual confirmation about other events have been coming out of Libya.

Al Jazeera is not alone in its biased reporting from Libya. The Saudi media is also relishing the events in Libya. Asharq Al-Awsat is a Saudi-owned paper that is strictly aligned to U.S. interests in the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region. Its editor-in-chief is now running editorials glorifying the Arab League for their decision to suspend Libya, because of the use of force by Tripoli against Libyans protesters – why were such steps not taken for Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, or Yemen? Inside and outside the Arab World, the mainstream media is now creating the conditions for some sort of intervention in Libya.

The Role of Foreign Interests in Libya

Qaddafi and his sons have run Libya like a private estate. They have squandered its wealth and natural resources. One of Gaddafi’s son’s is known to have paid the American singer Beyoncé Knowles a million or more U.S. dollars for a private music concert. [10] Foreign corporations also play a role in this story.

The positions and actions of foreign corporations, the U.S., and the European Union in regards to Libya should not be ignored.

Questioning the role of foreign governments and corporations in Libya is very important. The Italian and U.S. governments should be questioned about the role that pilots of Italian nationality and newly bought U.S. weaponry are playing in Libya.

It is very clear that democracy is only used as a convenient pretext against dictators and governments that do not bow down and serve U.S. and E.U. interests. All one needs to do is to just look at the way Mutassim Qaddafi was welcomed with open arms in Washington on April 21, 2009 by Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration. Upon their meeting, Secretary Clinton publicly said:

I am very pleased to welcome Minister Gaddafi to the State Department. We deeply value the relationship between the United States and Libya. We have many opportunities to deepen and broaden our cooperation and I am very much looking forward to building on this relationship. So Mr.Minister welcome so much here. [11]

What the U.S. and the E.U. want to do now is maximize their gain in Libya. Civil war seems to be what Brussels and Washington have in mind.

The Balkanization of Libya and the Push to Civil War

Qaddafi’s son Saif Al-Islam has made statements on Libyan television about deviant Taliban-like faith-based organizations taking over Libya or attempting to take it over. Nothing is further from the truth. He has also warned of doom and civil war. This is part of the Qaddafi family’s efforts to retain power over Libya, but a path towards civil war is unfolding in Libya.

Amongst the ranking members of the military, Mahdi Al-Arab, the deputy chief of Libya’s military staff, was said to have renounced Qaddafi. [12] Al-Arab, however, has modified his position by saying that he does not want to see Libya spiral into a civil war that will allow foreign intervention and tutelage. [13] This is why Al-Arab prevented the people of his city, Zawarah, from joining the revolt and going to nearby Tripoli. [14]

The drive towards civil war in Libya is fuelled by two factors. One is the nature of Qaddafi’s regime. The other is an external desire to divide and weaken Libya.

Qaddafi has always worked to keep Libyans divided. For years there have been fears that Qaddafi’s sons would start a civil war amongst themselves or that some other high ranking officials could try to jockey for power once Qaddafi was gone. Civil war on the basis of ethnicity, regionalism, or tribalism is not a big threat. Tribes and regions could be co-opted or allied with, but the people that would spark a civil war are regime figures. The threats of civil war arise from the rivalries amongst regime officials themselves. Yet, it must be understood that these rivalries are delibertly being encouraged to divide Libya.

The flames of revolt are being fanned inside Libya. Chaos in the Arab World has been viewed as beneficial in many strategic circles in Washington, Tel Aviv, London, and NATO Headquarters. If Libya falls into a state of civil war or becomes balkanized this will benefit the U.S. and the E.U. in the long-term and will have serious geo-political implications.

All the neighbouring states in North Africa would be destabilized by the events in Libya. West Africa and Central Africa would also be destabilized. The tribal boundaries running in Libya and Chad extend into countries like Niger, Algeria, and Sudan. The chaos in Libya would also have a significant effect on Europe and global energy. Already the events in Libya are being used to validate the drive to control the Arctic Circle and its energy resources. [15]

What Will Be Qaddafi’s End?

It is very likely that Qaddafi will not have as fortunate an exit from power as Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt. Finding refuge for Qaddafi will not be easy. In general, Qaddafi is considered a liability by other governments. Saudi Arabia, which can be portrayed as a refuge for Arab dictators, will most likely not give Qaddafi refuge. Libya and Saudi Arabia have bad relations. He is also wanted for investigation in Lebanon. Generally, Qaddafi’s relationship with the leaders of the Arab petro-sheikhdoms in the Persian Gulf is tense and negative. He will not be granted refuge anywhere in the Persian Gulf.

In general, Arab governments will also be afraid to host him. In his efforts to present himself as a champion of the people, he has insulted many of his fellow Arab dictators. There is something to be said, however, when Qaddafi’s statements at Arab League meetings or about Palestine and Iraq are far more popular or candid than the rest of the Arab dictators.

It is highly improbable that any Latin American, European, or ex-Soviet countries will give him refuge. A country in sub-Sahara(n) Africa is the mostly likely place Qaddafi could seek refuge.

His options are limited and he is determined to hold on to power. Civil War seems to be looming in the horizon. It is highly unlikely that he will leave Libya peacefully and the U.S. and its allies have no doubt examined this scenario. On February 23-24, 2010, he met with the leaders of the three biggest tribes in Libya (Werfala, Tarhouna, and Wershfana), to secure their support. [16] His own tribe, Qaddafa is supporting him and it seems that the Madarha and Awlad Slieman tribes are also supporting him. [17]

The Threats of NATO Intervention and U.S. and E.U. Control over Libya

Libya has been in the cross-hairs of the Pentagon for years. According to Wesley Clark, the retired general who was the supreme military commander of NATO, Libya was on a Pentagon list of nations to be invaded after Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The list included Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, and lastly Iran. In Clark’s own words:

So I came back to see him [a high ranking military officer in the Pentagon] a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defence’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” [18]

In one way or another all the nations on the list have been attacked directly or indirectly and all of them, but Syria and Iran, have succumbed to the U.S. and its allies. Again, the only exceptions are Iran and its ally Syria. In Lebanon, the U.S. has made partial gains, but it is now receding with the decline of the Hariri-led March 14 Alliance.

Libya started secret negotiations with Washington in 2001 that materialized into formal rapprochement after the fall of Baghdad to British and American troops in 2003. Yet, the U.S. and its allies have always wanted to expand their influence over the Libyan energy sector and to appropriate Libya’s vast wealth. A civil war provides the best cover for this.

Libyans Must Be Aware of the Pretext of Humanitarian Intervention

The Libyan people should be on their high guards. In is clear that the U.S. and the E.U. are supporting both sides. The U.S. and the E.U. are not the allies of the people of the Arab World. In this regard, the U.S. supports Qaddafi on the ground through military hardware, while it also supports the “opposition.” If the so-called Western governments were serious about democracy, they would have cut their business ties to Libya, specifically in the energy sector, before 2011.

Both Washington and the powers in Brussels could co-opt opposition forces. They have supported Gaddafi, but they do not control him or his regime like they controlled Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt. Libya is a very different story. The objectives of Washington and Brussels will be to strengthen their control over Libya either through regime change or civil war.

“Actions of opposition to Gaddafi” are strong, but there is no strong organized “opposition movement.” The two are different. Nor is democracy guaranteed, because of the nature of the coalition opposed to Gaddafi, which includes corrupt regime officials.

There is now talk about a “humanitarian intervention” in Libya, similar to Yugoslavia and Iraq. A “no-fly zone” over Libya has been mentioned, as has NATO military intervention. The aims behind such statements are not humanitarian, but are intended to justify foreign interference, which could potentially lead to an invasion. Should this come to fruition, Libya would become an occupied country. Its resources would be plundered and its assets privatized and controlled by foreign corporations as in the case of Iraq.

Today, in Libya and the Arab World the ghosts of Omar Mukhtar and Saladin are still very much alive and active. Getting rid of Gaddafi and his sons alone is not the solution. The entire corrupt system of governance in Libya and the culture of political corruption must be dismantled. At the same time, however, foreign interference or domination should also not be allowed to take root in Libya. If the Libyan people are mobilized and steadfast, they can fight such schemes.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya specializes in the Middle East and Central Asia. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.


[1] “UK Hague: some information that Qaddafi on way to Venezuela,” Reuters, February 21, 2011.
[2] One is taken back by the proliferation of pre-1969 coup Libyan flags. Where did all these flags come from?
[3] “3 Libyan Diplomats resign,” The Hindu, February 22, 2011.
[4] James Wolf, “U.S. eyes arms sales to Libya,” Reuters, March 6, 2009.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Information from sources in Libya; not publicly confirmed yet.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.; I have been given two explanations for this. The first explanation is that government agents from Libya have been disseminating misinformation to Al Jazeera. This includes reports made to Al Jazeera that jets have been attacking civilians in the streets. Gaddafi has used this to try to discredit Al Jazeera internally in Libya by pointing out to the Libyan people that no jet attacks have occurred and that Al Jazeera is broadcasting misinformation. The second explanation is that Al Jazeera is simply spreading misinformation. Whatever the case, both explanations agree no Libyan jets have attacked protesters yet.
[10] Marine Hyde, “Beyoncé and the $2m gig for Colonel Gaddafi’s son,” The Guardian (U.K.), January 8, 2010; it was Mutassim and not Hannibal Gaddafi that the music concert was for (the article is wrong). The article is not authoritative and has been cited to illustrate that these types of escapades are even vaguely known by the mainstream press in Britain and Western Europe.
[11] U.S. State Department, “Remarks With Libyan National Security Adviser Dr. Mutassim Qadhafi Before Their Meeting,” April 21, 2009: <>.
[12] Information from sources in Libya; not publicly confirmed yet.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] David Ljunggren, “Libya turmoil puts focus on Arctic oil: Greenland,” ed. Robert Wilson, Reuters, February 23, 2011.
[16] Information from sources in Libya; not publicly confirmed yet. I have been told that Qaddafi promised the tribes reform and that he would step down in about one year in time. I was also informed that he claimed that none of his sons would control Libya either.
[17] Ibid.
[18] General (retired) Wesley Clark, “92 Street Y Exclusive Live Interview,” interview by Amy Goodman, Democracy Now, March 2, 2007.

Global Research Articles by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya 


Libya and Imperialism;

by Sara Flounders
Global Research, February 24, 2011


Of all the struggles going on in North Africa and the Middle East right now, the most difficult to unravel is the one in Libya.

What is the character of the opposition to the Gadhafi regime, which reportedly now controls the eastern city of Benghazi?

Is it just coincidence that the rebellion started in Benghazi, which is north of Libya’s richest oil fields as well as close to most of its oil and gas pipelines, refineries and its LNG port? Is there a plan to partition the country?

What is the risk of imperialist military intervention, which poses the gravest danger for the people of the entire region?

Libya is not like Egypt. Its leader, Moammar al-Gadhafi, has not been an imperialist puppet like Hosni Mubarak. For many years, Gadhafi was allied to countries and movements fighting imperialism. On taking power in 1969 through a military coup, he nationalized Libya’s oil and used much of that money to develop the Libyan economy. Conditions of life improved dramatically for the people.

For that, the imperialists were determined to grind Libya down. The U.S. actually launched air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 that killed 60 people, including Gadhafi’s infant daughter – which is rarely mentioned by the corporate media. Devastating sanctions were imposed by both the U.S. and the U.N. to wreck the Libyan economy.

After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 and leveled much of Baghdad with a bombing campaign that the Pentagon exultantly called “shock and awe,” Gadhafi tried to ward off further threatened aggression on Libya by making big political and economic concessions to the imperialists. He opened the economy to foreign banks and corporations; he agreed to IMF demands for “structural adjustment,” privatizing many state-owned enterprises and cutting state subsidies on necessities like food and fuel.

The Libyan people are suffering from the same high prices and unemployment that underlie the rebellions elsewhere and that flow from the worldwide capitalist economic crisis.

There can be no doubt that the struggle sweeping the Arab world for political freedom and economic justice has also struck a chord in Libya. There can be no doubt that discontent with the Gadhafi regime is motivating a significant section of the population.

However, it is important for progressives to know that many of the people being promoted in the West as leaders of the opposition are long-time agents of imperialism. The BBC on Feb. 22 showed footage of crowds in Benghazi pulling down the green flag of the republic and replacing it with the flag of the overthrown monarch King Idris – who had been a puppet of U.S. and British imperialism.

The Western media are basing a great deal of their reporting on supposed facts provided by the exile group National Front for the Salvation of Libya, which was trained and financed by the U.S. CIA. Google the front’s name plus CIA and you will find hundreds of references.

The Wall Street Journal in a Feb. 23 editorial wrote that “The U.S. and Europe should help Libyans overthrow the Gadhafi regime.” There is no talk in the board rooms or the corridors of Washington about intervening to help the people of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or Bahrain overthrow their dictatorial rulers. Even with all the lip service being paid to the mass struggles rocking the region right now, that would be unthinkable. As for Egypt and Tunisia, the imperialists are pulling every string they can to get the masses off the streets.

There was no talk of U.S. intervention to help the Palestinian people of Gaza when thousands died from being blockaded, bombed and invaded by Israel. Just the opposite. The U.S. intervened to prevent condemnation of the Zionist settler state.

Imperialism’s interest in Libya is not hard to find. wrote on Feb. 22 that while Libya is Africa’s third-largest producer of oil, it has the continent’s largest proven reserves – 44.3 billion barrels. It is a country with a relatively small population but the potential to produce huge profits for the giant oil companies. That’s how the super-rich look at it, and that’s what underlies their professed concern for the people’s democratic rights in Libya.

Getting concessions out of Gadhafi is not enough for the imperialist oil barons. They want a government that they can own outright, lock, stock and barrel. They have never forgiven Gadhafi for overthrowing the monarchy and nationalizing the oil. Fidel Castro of Cuba in his column “Reflections” takes note of imperialism’s hunger for oil and warns that the U.S. is laying the basis for military intervention in Libya.

In the U.S., some forces are trying to mobilize a street-level campaign promoting such U.S. intervention. We should oppose this outright and remind any well-intentioned people of the millions killed and displaced by U.S. intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Progressive people are in sympathy with what they see as a popular movement in Libya. We can help such a movement most by supporting its just demands while rejecting imperialist intervention, in whatever form it may take. It is the people of Libya who must decide their future.

Sara Flounders is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Sara Flounders 


The arab revolutions against US and Israel

Israel and the predicament of the American policy / Regimes seek protection via sectarian and tribal divisions / Israeli embassy in Ankara and consulate in Istanbul shut down / Iranian warships cross the Canal of Suez towards Syria / A new lebanese opposition living off deceit / The Bahraini protests threaten the United States’ interests / British training of Arab police elements and selling of arms and ammunition to oppress demonstrators in Bahrain.


23 February 2011 

Beirut (Lebanon)



All the versions of this article:



International affairs

Israel and the predicament of the American policy

A thick wave of PR campaigns and lectures about democracy targeting the Arab public opinion prevailed over the Arab scene amid a heated American-European attempt to continue improving their image, starting with exaggeration at the level of their support to the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions which toppled two major friends for the West and loyal leaders to Washington and to the relations with Israel for which they offered unforgettable services, i.e. Ben Ali and Mubarak.

The American veto was issued against a Palestinian resolution bill presented before the Security Council, while accompanied by threats made by President Barack Obama to the Palestinian authority in case it were to insist on heading to the Security Council to ensure the ratification of a resolution condemning the settlement activities in the West Bank or consecrating the recognition of a Palestinian state which Israel has been refusing to allow to exist at any price. The reality related to the fact that Israel is at the heart of the American and Western strategies in the region resurfaced, thus revealing the duplicity affecting the American and Western rhetoric claiming to want to spread democracy.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon is being used under the banner of these slogans because it serves Israel and because the United States is holding its strings, along with those of the international resolutions that are binding to Israel, starting with resolution 194 which stipulates the right of return and resolutions 242 and 338 that call for for the withdrawal of the Israeli occupation from the West Bank, the Syrian Golan and many other locations, all of which are obstructed by an American order.

The Arab street which rebelled in Tunisia and Egypt and is heralding other actions in other countries is imbued with the culture of rejecting the Israeli occupation of Arab lands but also with the culture of supporting the Palestinian cause. As long as America’s and Europe’s rulers are acting as though Israel is their precious gem, each liberation wave in the region will target the Western political influence and will lead the Arab crowds towards supporting the resistance movements that were able to provide a realistic alternative for decades of waiting for a prohibited settlement that would restore some of the occupied lands and some of the rights denied by the Israelis and the Americans. In the meantime, the European governments seemed pleased with a secondary role and with taking instructions from the American master.

Arab affairs

Editorial : Regimes seek protection via sectarian and tribal divisions

The Arab public opinion was preoccupied with major developments in a number of states due to the transfer of the infection of gatherings and demonstrations to demand urgent political and economic changes. Indeed, Yemen, Jordan, Bahrain and Libya witnessed marches and calls for demonstrations in a clear replication of what happened in Tunisia and Egypt during the last few weeks. Many Arab cities thus witnessed bloody clashes which claimed the lives of dozens of demonstrators and generated many more wounded.

It seemed clear –although on different levels- that there was a determination to oppress these activities with direct support from the United States, a thing which reached a scandalous level in Bahrain where the regime used multinational mercenaries under the command of British and American intelligence officers to protect the regime that is assigned to manage an advanced military and security base on Iran’s waist, for the besieging and depletion of which the United States and Israel have mobilized all the capabilities.

The truth that was revealed by the events is the impact of the vertical divisions in the Arab communities and the inclinations of the existing regimes to barricade themselves behind these divisions by turning any call for change into an internal conflict and direct clashes between sectarian and tribal groups. It is certain that the winding course of change in Egypt and Tunisia will inspire many freedom fighters and will rely on the power of change in these countries, where the remnants of the old rule still occupy an important position in the decision-making equation and where the conflict is clearly evolving between the old and the new powers.

The Arab file

The United States used the veto right on Friday against a resolution bill presented to the Security Council to condemn the Israeli settlement activities in the Palestinian territories, after the Palestinians refused to recant a draft that was drawn up by the Arab countries. The other fourteen members voted in favor of the draft but the US voted against it and toppled it.
Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas had assured that the Arab group at the United Nations was proceeding with the presentation of the Arab resolution bill demanding the condemnation of the settlements before the Security Council. In regard to Palestinian division, he said he will not accept the staging of the next general elections in the West Bank solely, adding: “This is completely unacceptable for us. The elections include the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and this is the only way we will stage them.”
In the meantime, leaders in the Palestinian national factions considered that the measures undertaken by the Palestinian authority – ousting the caretaker government and calling for presidential, legislative and local elections- were preemptive steps to elude real reform.

On Tuesday, the Egyptian army gave a ten-day deadline to the committee it formed to amend the constitution to complete its task. The Egyptian armed forces announced that the continuation of the turmoil and the protests will have ‘disastrous’ repercussions on Egypt. The coalition of the revolution’s youth asked the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to define a deadline not exceeding nine months to implement the demands of the revolution which the statement narrowed down to eleven key demands, stressing that the constitutional amendments will be temporary until the election of a new People’s Assembly.
Millions of Egyptians celebrated “Victory Friday” which was staged one week after President Hosni Mubarak stepped down in Tahrir Square in the center of Cairo and other provinces, reiterating their insistence on the demands that have not been implemented, namely the resignation of the current government which was appointed by the former president before he stepped down, the immediate annulment of the state of emergency and the release of the political prisoners.

Bahrain witnessed demonstrations in which thousands participated to demand political reforms, the release of political prisoners and the discontinuation of “political naturalization”. The protesters thus erected tents on Pearl Square where clashes with the security forces led to the fall of dead and wounded. On the other hand, many marches were staged in the streets of Bahrain in support of the king.
The Wefaq society bloc, which represents the biggest opposition bloc in parliament, announced its withdrawal from the council and called for the resignation of the government after it had suspended its membership in light of the incidents occurring in the country.
Bahraini Monarch King Hamad Ben Issa al-Khalifa delivered a speech in which he announced the formation of an investigation committee into the incidents witnessed in the country, expressing his sorrow for the fall of victims. In the meantime, the United States expressed its deep concerns vis-à-vis the situation, calling on all the sides to show self-restraint.
The GCC states assured they were standing as one in the face of the threats, expressing their support toward Bahrain.

The confrontations in the Yemeni capital continued between demonstrators demanding the toppling of the regime and others supporting it, thus causing the fall of many victims.
In the meantime, Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh stated that he was sick of power, but stressed his determination to complete his term which expires in 2013 and described the opposition as being a revolutionary one. He said that the times of coups had gone for good, accusing certain people of having foreign agendas and of trying to spread chaos all around the region.

Clashes erupted between demonstrators and the Libyan security forces on the eve of the “day of rage” which was called for by activists on the domestic scene and oppositionists abroad through social networking websites. The Libyan security forces thus used tear gas bombs, water hoses and live ammunition, leading to the fall of many dead and wounded. According to Human Rights Watch the number exceeds 105 dead.
The European Union called on the Libyan authorities to allow the anti-governmental demonstrators to protest and to take their demands seriously.

The Israeli file
Israel terrified following threats of Hezbollah’s secretary general. Following the speech of Hezbollah’s secretary general on the anniversary of the martyred leaders in Beirut, Israel, its politicians, press and media were terrified. And while awaiting the reactions of leaders Barak, Ashkenazi and Benny Gantz to whom Sayyed Nasrallah said that Hezbollah’s fighters were ready to liberate Galilee in Northern Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his response.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s statements generated shock on the Israeli domestic arena, one which was quickly seen in the reaction of the Israeli media outlets. Indeed, Haaretz carried a report headlined: “Hezbollah chief tells IDF: Watch your heads” As for The Voice of Israel, it mentioned: “Nasrallah threatens to seek the occupation of Galilee,” while Yediot Aharonot said: “Nasrallah threatens to take over Galilee.”

Israeli embassy in Ankara and consulate in Istanbul shut down
The Israeli papers quoted the Turkish Hurriyet newspaper as saying that the Israeli embassy in Ankara and the consulate in Istanbul were shut down and that the diplomats were carrying out their tasks from their homes. This emerged two days after the Israeli Foreign Ministry announced a state of alertness in Israel’s representation offices around the world to preempt any attacks inspired by Hezbollah.

Iranian warships cross the Canal of Suez towards Syria
The Israeli papers mentioned that Israel and the United States were closely watching the movements of two Iranian warships which Israeli security sources expected to cross the Canal of Suez toward the Middle East and to dock in the Syrian Latakia Port.
The two Iranian navy warships had left Iran several weeks ago on their way to the Mediterranean Sea and had docked in the Saudi Jeddah port after having received an authorization from the Saudi authority for that purpose, a thing which was considered to be unprecedented.

The Lebanese file
Prime Minister of the caretaker government Sa’d al-Hariri said in Biel on the anniversary of February 14 that “the tribunal will sanction the terrorist murders solely and will only charge individuals.” Adding: “We will support the tribunal, its indictment and its sentence and will never say that the accusation is cast against a sect, a party or a faction.” He continued: “We will never be in a confrontation with the Shiite sect,” stressing: “We do not accept the arms or succumb to the arms when they are directed against the Lebanese and are used to blackmail them or to pressure the deputies to do something going against the will of the voters.” He thus announced “We will never allow the arms to continue to be directed toward national life in Lebanon.”
Head of the Lebanese forces Samir Geagea stated: “We will not allow the black coup which was carried out by those wearing the black shirts and was produced by a black and fictive majority to undermine our determination.” On the commemoration of the martyred leaders, i.e. Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi and Hajj Imad Mughniyyeh in the Southern suburb, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said in response to the threats made by the leaders of the Israeli army regarding the reoccupation of Lebanon: “I would like to address Barak, Ashkenazi and Benny Gantz by saying to the fighters of the Islamic resistance: be ready for the day in which the war on Lebanon might force us to ask you to lead the resistance toward the liberation of Galilee in Northern occupied Palestine.” Nasrallah noted: “The remnants of the March 14 forces are determined to go back to the tune of the arms. If your position is settled in regard to the arms of the resistance, should we still head to the dialogue table?” He then cautioned that the situation in the entire region had changed, “and the insistence on engaging in the battle of the arms or on turning it into a headline for the new opposition will be in vain.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded by saying: “Nasrallah announced he will occupy Galilee. But I have news for him: he will not be able to do so.” He added: “No one can question Israel’s strength or our ability to defend ourselves. We have a strong army and we want peace with all our neighbors.”

In the meantime, Prime Minster-designate Najib Mikati proceeded with his consultations in different directions to form the new government. As for the head of the National Struggle Front, Deputy Walid Jumblatt, he expressed his belief in that the March 14 team has made up its mind, adding: “For our part we have made up our mind and any illusion regarding their team’s participation in the government is misplaced.” He added to As-Safir: “To each political choice, there are requirements. The issue is not about the allocation of the seats or about compensations. It is about a choice. Therefore we must be ready to constitute a political team with a unified vision.”

News analysis : A new opposition living off deceit

The political speech of the March 14 forces which announced they had become part of the opposition following the exit of the leader of the Future Movement Saad al-Hariri from the premiership, relies on a series of elements to deceive the people and falsify the facts. This team thus established an operations room which it provided with massive financial capabilities to secure popular mobilization on March 14, while its media outlets launched a wide scale campaign against the new government before it is even formed and against its president which was able to break the walls of instigation.

And while the Maronite Church is preparing to bid Patriarch Sfeir farewell after he turned Bkerki into a faction in the March 14 camp, the Vatican is trying to lead the patriarchate toward a position that is distant from political bias in the heated conflict between the powerful bloc led by General Michel Aoun and his ally Minister Suleiman Franjieh, and the Phalange- Lebanese Forces duo.

Among the paradoxes in the speeches of the March 14 forces was the talk about an artificial link with the Egyptian revolution, while denying the close ties between their leaders and the regime and intelligence apparatuses of President Hosni Mubarak, knowing that Omar Suleiman personally led the operations to support the Future Movement, the Lebanese Forces and the Phalange Party militias in Lebanon.

The speeches also featured the falsification of what happened in the April Understanding by saying that Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri was the one who conducted it, while in reality the late Syrian President Hafiz al-Assad kept the American secretary of state waiting without setting an appointment for him, at a time when he opened the missiles warehouses to Hezbollah which handled the deterrence tasks. However, the secretary of state insisted on meeting President Assad who saw him after he had left him waiting for half an hour at the presidential palace, and led the negotiations which ended with the understanding related to the right of the resistance to deter the Israeli bombing of any civilian targets in Lebanon.

It is clear that the new opposition is determined to engage in the battle against the resistance and its weapons, without any consideration for the past experiences which allowed Israel and its leaders to reach the conclusion that was announced by Tzipi Livni at the end of the July 2006 war regarding the impossibility of disarming Hezbollah. The determination to go through with the experience will cause a shock to this team, especially after Mubarak’s ousting from Egypt and in light of the Saudi position seen in King Abdullah’s anger towards Saad al-Hariri’s conspiracy against the Saudi-Syrian initiative for Lebanon in favor of the American instructions.

The American file

The Bahraini protests threaten the United States’ interests
The American newspapers tackled the Bahraini file while pointing to the dictatorial method adopted by the royal family in the attacks against the demonstrators in Pearl Square. On the other hand, there was talk about false allegations of political democracy and the retreat of the American-Bahraini alliance due to the turmoil in the “Persian Gulf State” and the ongoing threats targeting domestic stability. The Washington Post indicated that all these events and their repercussions were threatening the American interests in the region, pointing to the arrests which targeted a number of Shiite opposition leaders who were accused in accordance with the anti-terrorism law. The paper also pointed to the claims of the ruling family regarding the launching of political reforms before it moved in the opposite direction last year. It thus expressed the intention of the US to stop the oppression and persecution of the Bahraini people and the launching of political and economic reforms in the country, talking about the United States’ concerns toward the measures adopted by the Bahraini security forces against the demonstrators.

The British file

British training of Arab police elements and selling of arms and ammunition to oppress demonstrators in Bahrain
The Independent assured there were strong ties between Britain and a number of Middle Eastern countries, mentioning that during the last two years the British police trained police elements in Libya, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Abu Dhabi emirate in the UAE. It added that Britain should realize that its armament of oppressive and tyrannical regimes abroad was at the end of the day a bad action on all levels.
It mentioned that the current British government was criticized for selling weapons to a number of Arab governments that oppressed protesters demanding democracy by use of violence, leading to the killing of dozens and the injuring of thousands in more than one Arab country during the last few weeks. It stated that ever since it came to power last summer, the British government gave licenses to sell weapons to Bahrain and to other Middle Eastern and North African countries, thus delivering tear gas bombs to Bahrain, ammunition used to control the crowds to Libya, helicopters to Algeria and armored personnel carriers to Saudi Arabia.
The Independent added that the green light to export weapons to the Bahraini government coincided with the elections that witnessed the oppression of Shiite opposition groups by the Bahraini government.



 Source New Orient News (Lebanon)
This author’s articles   



Has the United States Supreme Court just legalized collateral murder?

miércoles, 23 de febrero de 2011 7:39:03

PRO: ‘Thou shalt not kill’

“In a decision handed down yesterday, the  United States Supreme  Court has sold out the American people, violated the Constitution and made a mockery of the rule of law in America by denying parents of a vaccine-damaged child their right to seek redress through the court system.

“In a 6-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court said that parents of vaccine damaged children have no right to sue vaccine manufacturers even if vaccines kill their children!

“This now confirms that vaccine companies have blanket immunity from all lawsuits in the USA, and parents can no longer use the law to seek compensation for their children who are damaged by vaccines.

“The U.S. government, in essence, has legalized medical violence against children.” CLICK HERE for more information from this source.

CON: ‘For the greater good, one death is


“Justice Antonin Scalia said the high court majority agreed with Congress that these side effects were “unavoidable” when a vaccine is given to millions of children.

“By a 6-2 vote, the court upheld a federal law that offers compensation to these victims but closes the courthouse door to lawsuits.”

Fake Al Qaeda;


First they came for the teachers,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a teacher. 

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Bloggers,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Blogger.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Apologies to Pastor Martin Niemoller

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US . . .” – Pierre-Henri Bunel

“Ana raicha Al Qaeda” is colloquial for “I’m going to the toilet”. A very common and widespread use of the word “Al-Qaeda” in different Arab countries in the public language is for the toilet bowl. This name comes from the Arabic verb “Qa’ada” which mean “to sit”, pertinently, on the “Toilet Bowl”. In most Arabs homes there are two kinds of toilets: “Al-Qaeda” also called the “Hamam Franji” or foreign toilet, and “Hamam Arabi” or “Arab toilet” which is a hole in the ground. Lest we forget it, the potty used by small children is called “Ma Qa’adia” or “Little Qaeda”.

So, if you were forming a terrorist group, would you call yourself, “The Toilet”?

The Phony (Mossad) Al Qaeda Cell in Palestine

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon … said that al-Qaeda militants were operating in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. “We know that they are there. We know that they are in Lebanon, working closely with Hezbollah. We know that they are in the region,” he said. [BBC News - 12/5/2002]
Officials from the Palestinian Authority have accused the Israeli spy agency Mossad of setting up a fake al-Qaeda terrorist cell in Gaza. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said that Israel had set up the mock cell in order to justify attacks in Palestinian areas. [BBC News - 12/8/2002] 

Mossad agents arrested by the PA for attempting to set up phony ‘al Qaeda’ cells in the Gaza Strip.

The full story: – Mossad Exposed in Phony ‘Palestinian Al-Qaeda’ Caper – By Way of Deception, by Justin Raimondo – Palestinians arrest al-Qaeda ‘poseurs’

Of the MOSSAD, the Israeli intelligence service, the SAMS officers say: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.” [Washington Times - 9/10/2001]

Adam Yahiye Gadahn: The Fake Terrorist


Images from official FBI wanted poster for terrorist Adam Yahiye Gadahn

The FBI lists Gadahn’s aliases as Abu Suhayb Al-Amriki, Abu Suhayb, Yihya Majadin Adams, Adam Pearlman, and Yayah. 

But Adam Pearlmen is his REAL name! Adam is the grandson of the late Carl K. Pearlman; a prominent Jewish urologist in Orange County. Carl was also a member of the board of directors of the Anti-Defamation League, which was caught spying on Americans for Israel in 1993, much as AIPAC has been caught up in the more recent spy scandal.

Sent in by a reader: I recently saw the article you linked about Adam Pearlman and his brand new feature film in which he plays the character Azzam Al-Amrika. As someone who speaks Arabic, I thought it would be interesting for WRH readers to know a little bit about this particular name. First, Azzam in Arabic means either “determined” or “resolved”. Second, “Al-Amrika” (it’s sometimes spelled “Amerika”) translates back to “America”. Interesting use of words Mr. Pearlman is using for a name, I’d say. But even without having to translate the whole name, no Arab has the last name of Amrika. The name, translated, almost sounds like a Bush soundbite.

And another faker surfaces!

On any given day, log on to and a host of startling images appear:

- The Statue of Liberty, with an ax blade cutting through her side;

- Video mocking the beheading of American journalist Daniel Pearl, entitled “Daniel Pearl I am Happy Your Dead :) “;

- Video of a puppet show lampooning U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq;

- The latest speech from Sheikh Abdullah Faisal, an extremist Muslim cleric convicted in the UK and later deported for soliciting the murder of non-Muslims.

Even more surprising is that isn’t being maintained in some remote safe house in Pakistan. Instead, Yousef al-Khattab, the Web site creator, runs it from his home in the New York City Borough of Queens.

Formerly known as Joseph Cohen, al-Khattab is an American-born Jew who converted to Islam after attending an Orthodox Rabbinical school, which he later described as a “racist cult.”

Abu Tallah Al-Amrikee, the “muslim” who threatened South Park using the above website, is really named Zachary Adam Chesser!

Al-Qaeda cleric exposed as an MI5 double agent

ONE of al-Qaeda’s most dangerous figures has been revealed as a double agent working for MI5, raising criticism from European governments, which repeatedly called for his arrest.Britain ignored warnings – which began before the September 11 attacks – from half a dozen friendly governments about Abu Qatada’s links with terrorist groups and refused to arrest him. Intelligence chiefs hid from European allies their intention to use the cleric as a key informer against Islamic militants in Britain. 

Indignant French officials accused MI5 of helping the cleric to abscond. While he remained on the run, one intelligence chief in Paris was quoted as saying: “British intelligence is saying they have no idea where he is, but we know where he is and, if we know, I’m quite sure they do.”

From a reader:


1. We have MI5 (British CIA) posing as Alqueda.
“Al-Qaeda cleric exposed as an MI5 double agent”,,,1-3-1050175,00.html

2. We have Mossad (Israel CIA) posing as ALqueda in Palestine: fakealqaeda.html

3. We have USA posing as Alqueda:

The FBI lists Gadahn’s aliases as Abu Suhayb Al-Amriki, Abu Suhayb, Yihya Majadin Adams, Adam Pearlman, and Yayah. But Adam Pearlmen is his REAL name! Adam is the grandson of the late Carl K. Pearlman; a prominent Jewish urologist in Orange County. Carl was also a member of the board of directors of the Anti-Defamation League, which was caught spying on Americans for Israel in 1993, much as AIPAC has been caught up in the more recent spy scandal.

3. We have israel posing as alqueda in the phillipines.

The two British operatives, arrested by Basra police and later freed by a British military operation, were identified by the BBC as “members of the SAS elite special forces” ( They were disguised by wigs and Arab dress. Iraqi sources reported that the Iraqi police were watching the two, and when they tried to approach them they shot two policemen and tried to escape the scene. The Iraqi police chased and captured them, to discover large amount of explosives planted in the car, which apparently was planned to be remotely detonated in the busy market of Basra. The SAS involvement in Iraq was discovered on the 30th of January 2005 when an RAF Hercules plane crashed near Baghdad killing then British servicemen after dropping off fifty SAS members north of Baghdad to fight Iraqi guerillas.


CIA + Mossad + MI5 = AlQueada

The greatest false-flag operations conducting in the history on man !!!! In case you weren’t paying attention…

  • When Osama Bin Ladin Was Tim Osman
  • Zbigniew Brzezinski: “Your cause is right, God is on your side.”
  • CIA “Arranged” for Passports for Al Qaeda Terrorists & Brought Them to the USA to Recruit for Jihads
  • Will the CIA Leave Their Saudi Partners in Crime Holding the Bag?
  • “The Farce Goes On – The Hunt for Ayman Zawahiri, Mohammad Omar, & Osama
  • “Moussaoui, Khadr, & Ressam Are “Graduates” of CIA’s Khalden Camp for Afghanistan & Balkans “Jihads”
  • Bin Laden Puppetmasters Smoked Out In Balkans
  • The CIA arranged for HUM guerrillas to fight in Bosnia & Kosovo
  • Bin-Ladin and KLA have a ‘joint’ cash box in the United States
  • The CIA & Bin Laden worked hand-in-glove in KLA operations
  • U.S. Protects Al-Qaeda Terrorists in Kosovo
  • America used Islamists to arm the Bosnian Muslims
  • Bosnia, 1 degree of separation from Al-Qaeda
  • Where was the “Concern” about “al-Qaida Operating in Iran” during the War in Bosnia?
  • Terror mastermind with taste for high life
  • US Has Al Qaida Backers List
  • CIA Told “Malaysian secret police” to “Monitor” Al Qaeda Meeting on Plans to Hit WTC on 9-11-2001
  • The CIA’s “Operation Cyclone” – Stirring the Hornet’s Nest of Islamic Unrest”
  • The Muslim Brotherhood: The Globalists’ Secret Weapon
  • U.S. Armed, Promoted Accused September 11 Terrorist Mastermind
  • CIA Bankrolled System of Madrassas & Training Camps to Brainwash “Jihad” Warriors
  • British Press Gagged on Reporting MI6′s �100,000 bin Laden Payoff
  • Ramzi Yousef was part of a CIA recruitment drive in New York and he did have “ties” to Bin Laden
  • CIA Recruits Terrorist Agents At Guantanamo
  • Oregon group thrives despite al Qaeda ties
  • Sniper link to al Qaeda investigated
  • Who is behind the “Terrorist Network” in Northern Iraq, Baghdad or Washington?
  • The U.S. Military Empire Meets Dictatorship in Bahrain

    found on :

    Hornberger’s Blog
    Friday, February 18, 2010

    REMINDER: The Jacob Hornberger Show every Saturday at 7-8 pm EST. Listen and watch live on the Internet:

    The U.S. Military Empire Meets Dictatorship in Bahrain
    by Jacob G. Hornberger

    The U.S. Empire includes 750-1,000 military bases in more than 130 countries. The reality of that extensive military empire has come to the forefront in Bahrain, where the authoritarian government in that country is cracking down on protestors with round-ups, jail, torture, and even extra-judicial execution.

    Of course, it’s a familiar story, one that is confronting Americans every day. People are risking their lives in the attempt to oust brutal authoritarian dictatorships from power — dictatorships that are partners, allies, friends, and loyal members of the U.S. Empire … and recipients of billions of dollars in U.S. foreign aid that has been used not only to line the personal pockets of the dictators and their henchmen but also to fund the instruments of torture and pay the salaries of the jailers and torturers themselves.

    Now, in Bahrain, we see another factor involved in the U.S. Empire’s support of dictatorship — U.S. foreign military bases — one of the many hundreds all across the world. The dictatorship in Bahrain has permitted the Empire to establish and maintain a base there for the Empire’s Fifth Fleet.

    So, why should it surprise anyone that the U.S. government, especially the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would favor the “order and stability” that comes with dictatorship? Hey, democracy is unpredictable. People might not like the idea that a foreign regime maintains a huge military base within their nation. Look at the people of Okinawa, who are trying their best to end the longtime U.S. military occupation of their land. Wouldn’t most Americans resent it if foreign regimes, including Muslim ones, maintained enormous military bases here in the United States?

    Dictators are easier to deal with when it comes to U.S. military bases, especially when billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money and military armaments (which can be used to suppress dissent) are placed into his hands of the dictatorship by the Empire. It all makes for a cozy relationship. We’ll line your pockets with cash and give you military armaments to maintain your dictatorship, and you’ll let us keep our military base.

    The imperialists say that the Fifth Fleet ensures the flow of oil to the West. That’s inane. It’s sort of like the fly on the automobile wheel that convinces himself that his presence on the wheel is what is propelling the car. Or like the rooster who crows every morning and is convinced that his crowing is bringing up the sun.

    It’s no different with respect to the U.S. Empire and its massive overseas military establishments. The Empire is convinced that its presence in the Middle East is what is ensuring the flow of oil needed by the West (including the U.S. government’s massive military machine that consumes so much of the oil).

    Not so. The world would function quite well without the Empire’s presence. Owners of oil would sell their oil into the marketplace, just like people sell other things throughout the world. People sell things to make money. Venezuela, whose officials hate the U.S. government, nonetheless sells its own to the United States, not because the U.S Navy is forcing it to do so but because Venezuela wants the money.

    Anyway, if owners decide not to sell what they own, that is their right. That’s part of what being an owner is all about — deciding whether to sell and on what terms.

    The widespread protests in the Middle East are bringing the ugly reality of U.S. foreign policy into the consciousness of the American people. While most Americans are sympathizing with the people who are risking their lives in resistance to tyranny, Americans are also having to face the discomforting fact that their very own government is, in large part, responsible for the tyranny that those people are opposing. Through a combination of U.S. foreign aid and U.S. foreign military bases, the U.S. government has been partnering with, cozying up to, training, and supporting the tyrannical regimes that foreign citizens are now rebelling against.

    Shouldn’t all this give pause to Americans and cause them to begin thinking about rejecting the paradigm of empire and intervention that has held our nation in its grip for so long, including an end to all foreign aid, the closure of all foreign military bases, and the bringing of all the troops home from everywhere and discharging them? As the people of the Middle East rise up against the dictatorships that have brutally oppressed them for so long, hasn’t the time arrived for the American people to restore the paradigm of a constitutionally limited republic and non-interventionism on which our nation was founded?

    Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

    Hornberger’s Blog Archives


    Defiant Gaddafi vows to fight on

    found on :

    In televised speech, Libyan leader blames youths inspired by region’s revolutions for unrest and vows to die a “martyr”. 

    February 22, 2011



    Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, has vowed to fight on and die a “martyr”, calling on his supporters to take back the streets from protesters demanding his ouster, shouting and pounding his fist in a furious speech on state TV.

    Gaddafi, clad in brown robes and turban, spoke on Tuesday from a podium set up in the entrance of a bombed-out building that appeared to be his Tripoli residence hit by US air raids in the 1980s and left unrepaired as a monument of defiance.

    “I am a fighter, a revolutionary from tents … I will die as a martyr at the end,” he said.

    “Muammar Gaddafi is the leader of the revolution, I am not a president to step down … This is my country. Muammar is not a president to leave his post.”

    “I have not yet ordered the use of force, not yet ordered one bullet to be fired … when I do, everything will burn.”

    He called on supporters to take to the streets to attack protesters. “You men and women who love Gaddafi …get out of your homes and fill the streets,” he said. “Leave your homes and attack them in their lairs … Starting tomorrow the cordons will be lifted, go out and fight them.”

    Gaddafi said “peaceful protests is one thing, but armed rebellion is another”.

    “From tonight to tomorrow, all the young men should form local committees for popular security,” he said, telling them to wear a green armband to identify themselves. “The Libyan people and the popular revolution will control Libya.”

    The speech, which appeared to have been taped earlier, was aired on a screen to hundreds of supporters massed in Tripoli’s central Green Square.

    At times the camera panned out to show a towering gold-coloured monument in front of the building, showing a fist crushing a fighter jet with an American flag on it – a view that also gave the strange image of Gaddafi speaking alone from behind a podium in the building’s dilapidated lobby, with no audience in front of him.

    Speech highlights

    Shouting in the rambling speech, Gaddafi declared himself “a warrior” and proclaimed: “Libya wants glory, Libya wants to be at the pinnacle, at the pinnacle of the world”.

    Among the other points made by Gaddafi in his speech:

    He called on the people to catch what he called drugged young people and bring them to justice.

    He called on the people to “cleanse Libya house by house” unless protesters on the streets surrendered.

    He warned that instability in Libya “will give al-Qaeda a base”.

    He cited the examples of attack on Russian parliament and China’s crushing of the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising, saying that the international community did not interfere.

    He said he could do the same in Derna and Bayda.

    He offered a new constitution starting from Wednesday, but this would come with dialogue, not by collaboration with the enemy.

    He blamed the uprising on Islamists who wanted to create another Afghanistan, and warned that those in Bayda and Derna had already set up an Islamic Emirate that would reach Benghazi.

    He said that the country’s youth was drugged and did not know anything; they were following the Islamists’ leader and their leaders would be punished with death in accordance with the Libyan law.


    :: Article nr. 75240 sent on 22-feb-2011 19:11 ECT


    “CIA spy” Davis was giving nuclear bomb material to Al-Qaeda, says report

    found on :

    By ANI | ANI – Sun, Feb 20, 2011 12:18 PM IST

    London, Feb 20(ANI): Double murder-accused US official Raymond Davis has been found in possession of top-secret CIA documents, which point to him or the feared American Task Force 373 (TF373) operating in the region, providing Al-Qaeda terrorists with “nuclear fissile material” and “biological agents,” according to a report.

    Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) is warning that the situation on the sub-continent has turned “grave” as it appears that open warfare is about to break out between Pakistan and the United States, The European Union Times reports.

    The SVR warned in its report that the apprehension of 36-year-old Davis, who shot dead two Pakistani men in Lahore last month, had fuelled this crisis.

    According to the report, the combat skills exhibited by Davis, along with documentation taken from him after his arrest, prove that he is a member of US’ TF373 black operations unit currently operating in the Afghan War Theatre and Pakistan’s tribal areas, the paper said.

    While the US insists that Davis is one of their diplomats, and the two men he killed were robbers, Pakistan says that the duo were ISI agents sent to follow him after it was discovered that he had been making contact with al Qaeda, after his cell phone was tracked to the Waziristan tribal area bordering Afghanistan, the paper said.

    The most ominous point in this SVR report is “Pakistan’s ISI stating that top-secret CIA documents found in Davis’s possession point to his, and/or TF373, providing to al Qaeda terrorists “nuclear fissile material” and “biological agents”, which they claim are to be used against the United States itself in order to ignite an all-out war in order to re-establish the West’s hegemony over a Global economy that is warned is just months away from collapse,” the paper added. (ANI)


    %d bloggers like this: