Amnesty International is US State Department Propaganda

InfoWars
Tony Cartalucci

                       From Amnesty International USA’s website, “Free Pussy Riot.”
                       “Help Amnesty International send a truckload of balaclavas to Putin.”
                       This childish stunt smacks of US State Department-funded
                       Gene Sharp antics – and meshes directly with the US State Department’s goal                        of undermining the Russian government via its 
                       troupe of US-funded “opposition activists”
                       including “Pussy Riot.” That Amnesty is supporting the US State Department’s
                       agenda should be no surprise, it is run literally by the
                       US State Department’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for
                       International Organizations, Suzanne Nossel.

Mistakenly considered by many as the final word on human rights worldwide, it might surprise people to know that Amnesty International is in fact one of the greatest obstacles to real human rights advocacy on Earth. In its most recent 2012 annual report (page 4, .pdf), Amnesty reiterates one of the biggest lies it routinely tells:

“Amnesty International is funded mainly by its membership and public donations. No funds are sought or accepted from governments for investigating and campaigning against human rights abuses. Amnesty International is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion.”

This is categorically false. Amnesty international is indeed funded and run by not only governments, but also immense corporate-financier interests, and is not only absolutely entwined with political ideology and economic interests, it is an essential tool used for perpetuating just such interests.

Amnesty International’s Funding

Finding financial information on Amnesty International’s website is made purposefully difficult – specifically to protect the myth that the organization is “independent.” Like any organized criminal operation, Amnesty separates compromising financial ties through a series of legal maneuvers and shell organizations. Upon Amnesty’s website it states:

“The work carried out through Amnesty International’s International Secretariat is organised into two legal entities, in compliance with United Kingdom law.  These are Amnesty International Limited (“AIL”) and Amnesty International Charity Limited (“AICL”). Amnesty International Limited undertakes charitable activities on behalf of Amnesty International Charity Limited, a registered charity.”

And it is there, at Amnesty International Limited, where ties to both governments and corporate-financier interests are kept. On page 11 of Amnesty International Limited’s 2011 Report and Financial Statement (.pdf) it states (emphasis added):

“The Directors are pleased to acknowledge the support of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Oak Foundation, Open Society Georgia Foundation, the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Programme, Mauro Tunes and American Jewish World Service. The UK Department for International Development(Governance and Transparency Fund) continued to fund a four year human rights education project in Africa. The European Commission (EuropeAid) generously awarded a multi-year grant towards Amnesty International’s human rights education work in Europe.”

Clearly then, Amnesty does take money from both governments and corporate-financier interests, one of the most notorious of which, Open Society, is headed by convicted financial criminal George Soros. In March, 2012, it was reported that a Bloomberg’s report, “Soros Loses Case Against French Insider-Trading Conviction,” indicated that an appeal based on a “human rights” violation against Wall Street speculator George Soros had been rejected by the “European Court of Human Rights.”

Soros, whose Open Society also funds Human Rights Watch and a myriad of other “human rights” advocates, literally attempted to use the West’s human rights racket to defend himself against charges of financial fraud in perhaps the most transparent illustration of just how this racket operates.

Soros, who was convicted and fined for insider trading in 2002 regarding French bank Société Générale shares he bought in 1988, has built an empire out of obfuscating global criminal activity with the cause of “human rights.” His support, as well as that of the British and European governments, of Amnesty International aims solely at expanding this obfuscating.

Amnesty International’s Leadership

Amnesty’s leadership is also telling of its true agenda. Suzanne Nossel, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, for instance was drawn directly from the US State Department – again, utterly contradicting Amnesty’s claims of being “independent” of governments and corporate interests. Nossel continued promoting US foreign policy, but simply behind a podium with a new logo, Amnesty International’s logo, attached to it. Amnesty International’s website specifically mentions Nossel’s role behind US State Department-backed UN resolutions regarding Iran, Syria, Libya, and Cote d’Ivoire.

Image: Same lies, different podium. Suzanne Nossel previously of the US State Department, is now executive director of Amnesty International USA. Her primary function of dressing up aspirations of corporate-financier global hegemony as “human rights advocacy” has not changed.

….

It has been documented at great length how these issues revolve around a decades long plan devised by corporate-financier interests to divide, destroy and despoil these nations who are seen as obstacles to US global hegemony. In the case of Syria specifically, it was revealed that the current “human rights” catastrophe stems back to a malicious 2007 conspiracy documented by “New Yorker” journalist Seymour Hersh, between the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia which sought to purposefully fund, arm, and deploy sectarian extremists to undermine and overthrow the Syrian government – this knowing full well the human tragedy that would unfold.

Nossel’s “contributions” then are simply to dress up naked military aggression and the pursuit of global corporate-financier hegemony with the pretense of “human rights” advocacy.

A glance at AmnestyUSA.org reveals that each and every front the US State Department is currently working on and has prioritized is also coincidentally prioritized by Amnesty International. This includes rallies and campaigns to support US State Department-funded Russian opposition groups(currently fixated on “Pussy Riot“), undermining the Syrian government, toppling the government of Belarus, and supporting the Wall Street-London created Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar (still called by its British Imperial nomenclature of “Burma” by Suu Kyi herself).

Amnesty International Betrays Real Human Rights Advocacy

Amnesty does indeed cover issues that are critical of US foreign policy, toward the bottom of their websites and at the back of their reports. Likewise, the corporate-media selectively reports issues that coincide with their interests while other issues are either under-reported or not reported at all. And it is precisely because Amnesty covers all issues, but selectively emphasizes those that are conducive to the interests of immense corporate-financiers that makes Amnesty one of the greatest impediments to genuine human rights advocacy on Earth.

Images: Manufacturing Dissent. “Free Pussy Riot” (above). Ironically, FIDH is directly funded by the US State Department via the Neo-Con lined US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as well as George Soros’ Open Society. “Russia: Stop Arms Transfer to Syria!” (below). If the US State Department wants it, be sure that US State Department-run Amnesty International will stage a demonstration for it – and regardless of size or legitimacy of the demonstration, expect the corporate-media to make it headline news.

….

Ordinary people are given the false impression that “someone is watching out” for human rights abuses, when in reality, all Amnesty and other organizations like it are doing, is managing public perception selectively of global human rights abuses, fabricating and/or manipulating many cases specifically to suit the agenda of large corporate-financier interests. This can be seen when entire reports out of Amnesty or Human Rights Watch consist solely of “witness reports” compiled from accounts of US-backed opposition groups.

In the rare instance that a report includes references to actual photographic, video, or documented evidence, such as Human Rights Watch’s 2011 “Descent into Chaos” (.pdf) report, deceptive language is intentionally included along with throwaway passages to enable selective reporting and spinning by not only the Western corporate media, but by a myriad of faux-NGOs funded and run by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch’s sponsors and affiliates. The Descent into Chaos report, regarding Thailand, was promply and amply spun and manipulated by US State Department-funded faux-NGO and “rights advocate” Prachatai.

When people erroneously believe that credible organizations are handling “rights advocacy” they will not only become complacent, they will become negligent of their own responsibilities to objectively examine potential abuses and speak out against them. Wall Street and London’s corporate-financier interests have filled a void -  that should be occupied by their greatest opponents – instead with a large advocacy racket of their own creation. Not only are they given a free pass to abuse human rights globally, they’ve actually used their controlled opposition to attack their opponents.

It is clear that Amnesty International is by no means an “advocate” of human rights, but rather an affront to human rights advocacy. It goes without saying that it should be boycotted out of existence and at the very least, identified as illegitimate and fraudulent – from its funding to its compromised leadership.

Additionally, we the people must tackle real violations of each others rights at the grassroots – because it is absolute folly to believe that global spanning organizations, funded by corporate-financiers, echoing the agenda of governments driven by special interests has our best interests and rights in mind.

"Orwellian Ramifications" Begin to Unfold in Syria

Global Research
Ismail Salami

There is speculation that the Western supported insurgents in Syria may have seized hold of chemical weapons.

Apart from the unthinkable havoc the rebels can wreak in Syria and in the region with WMDs in their possession, the rhetorical question which remains is how these weapons of mass destruction have fallen into the hands of the insurgents who are chiefly composed of Wahhabi al-Qaeda mercenaries of different nationalities including Afghans, Iraqis, Turkish, Yemenis, Jordanians, Pakistanis, and Saudis.

The situation in Syria is assuming Orwellian ramifications and the possibility to clearly understand or dissect the situation in the country is not an easy task.

In addition to the active role the Saudi-backed Wahhabis, CIA and some western intelligence organizations are playing in Syria, there is one entity, namely Israel which is stealthily espying every single development in Syria.

For the first time, an Israeli spy official clearly stated that Israel supports regime change in Syria and that it really demands an end to the government of President Bashar Assad.

“I hope it will happen, even though I don’t know when or how,” Intelligence Agencies Minister Dan Meridor said on Tuesday.

The top spy chief implicated why Assad should go and how it would damage the Islamic Republic of Iran.

“I am not going to try to calculate when Assad’s end will come, but when it happens, Iran’s biggest ally will be gone.”

Taking it for granted that Assad is doomed to go, he said, “I hope the new Syria will understand that joining Iran is a mistake that brings isolation from the Western world.”

Such a feeble perception of the Syrian situation is indicative of one who is either too optimistic or one who is well aware of what is going on behind the scene and that which is not visible to the ordinary people with no intelligence savvy.

Furthermore, Dan Meridor does not seem to understand that the situation in Israel is spiraling out of control with people protesting against social injustice almost on a daily basis. Since last month, four Israelis have set themselves ablaze from an extremity of despair.

On August 5, John McCain and Lindsey O. Graham, both Republicans, who represent Arizona and South Carolina in the Senate, respectively and Joseph I. Lieberman, an independent, who represents Connecticut in the Senate advised the US government to directly and openly provide assistance, including weapons, intelligence and training, to the insurgents in Syria as they claim President’s Assad’s ‘brutality’ is no longer to be tolerated.

“It is not too late for the United States to shift course. First, we can and should directly and openly provide robust assistance to the armed opposition, including weapons, intelligence and training. Whatever the risks of our doing so, they are far outweighed by the risks of continuing to sit on our hands, hoping for the best.”

Another part of this sabotage axis against Syria is Turkey which plays a very treacherous role in snowballing the Syrian crisis. Turkey has supplied the rebels with dozens of man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).

According to NBC, the missile supplies might have been provided by Turkey, Saudi Kingdom and Qatar monarchy, the three countries which have made strenuous and costly efforts to overthrow the government of Bashar Assad.

In a press conference at the United Nations in New York City, a Syrian UN representative announced that Turkey shipped US-made Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to rebels via Turkey, saying that Turkey was pleased with Kofi Annan’s resignation because Ankara and Washington were initially opposed to his six point peace plan.

In fact, Turkey should be grateful to Syria what it has done for it in the past. It is acknowledged by many pundits that it was Bashar’s father Hafiz Assad who made peace between Turkey and the Kurds living on both sides of the country, thereby vaccinating Turkey for years against any attacks on the part of the Kurds.

The antagonistic policies of Turkey have left President Bashar Assad with no choice but to grant autonomy to the Kurds in Syria who can foment dilemma for the Ankara government and get Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan into hot water.

The ongoing Kurdish insurgency has reportedly claimed the lives of at least 48000 over the past two decades.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is sharply aware of what a deep impact this decision can exercise on the security of Turkey.

He claimed the two groups had built a “structure in northern Syria” that for Turkey means “a structure of terror.”

Turkey is making a tactical mistake by supporting terrorism in Syria and supplying them with weapons, military training and human resources. Turkey will certainly fall into the pitfall it has dug for Syria and the insecurity it envisages for Syria will ultimately recoil against the government itself.

As for Washington and NATO, they are making a selfsame mistake.

The two are fondling terrorism and extremism by throwing support behind the insurgents in Syria. They know that a popular uprising in the true sense of the word is not clearly discernible in Syria and that what has been taking place in Syria is a string of militancy and terrorist operations funded by the Saudis and the Qataris and some western countries who are waiting to reap the benefits of their atrocities in case Bashar Assad’s government collapses. Such a day, if it comes, will open a new chapter of horror in the Middle East with no end in sight.

The unfurling reality is that the hostile states and powers antagonizing Bashar Assad are gradually getting caught up in the labyrinthine Orwellian pitfall of their own folly and that they are consciously or unconsciously working in the best interests of the Zionist regime.

Amnesty International: An Instrument of War Propaganda?

Global Research
Felicity Arbuthnot

Amnesty International has released satellite pictures of "craters" in Syria, citing : "an increased use of heavy weaponry, including near residential areas".

The BBC reports, quoting Amnesty: "Images from Anadan revealed more than 600 probable artillery impact craters from heavy fighting between Syrian armed forces and armed opposition groups." (My emphasis.)

Further: "Turning Syria's most populous city into a battlefield will have devastating consequences for civilians. The atrocities in Syria are mounting already," warned Christoph Koettl, emergency response manager for Amnesty International USA, without acknowedging that the killings of civlians are committed by the US-NATO Free Syrian Army (FSA) rather than the government. 

Digital Globe via Amnesty International "More than 600 probable artillery impact craters,
represented here with yellow dots, were identified in Anadan, in the vicinity of Aleppo, according to Amnesty International."

"The Syrian military and the opposition fighters must both adhere to international humanitarian law, which strictly forbids the use of tactics and weapons that fail to distinguish between military and civilian targets", he added.

Amnesty's record on impartiality suffered a fatal blow when they stated in 1991 that Iraqi soldiers had torn babies from their incubators in Kuwait and left them to die on the floor of the hospital's neo-natal unit. Arguably this sealed the 1991 onslaught on Iraq. The story that the Kuwaiti government rewarded Amnesty with $500,000 for endorsing this pack of lies has not gone away - and as far as I am aware, to date, has not been denied.

Amnesty suffered another own goal by organising a demonstration last year, outside the London Syrian Embassy, with CAABU (Council for Arab British Understanding) calling for the overthrow of the sovereign Syrian government. A plan which was outlined by the US Embassy in Damascus in December 2005. This action arguably falls under the definition of incitement to terrorism, set out by the UN Security Council on 4th May 2012. (SC/10636.) 

The Syrian government is doing what any nation would do to defend its country when attacked by terrorists, many from outside and many also with British accents, according to recently escaped, kidnapped British and Dutch journalists.

However, back to your 600 craters. The insurgents also seemingly have rocket propelled grenades and have also boasted of capturing tanks with heavy weaponry. However many craters or not, they will certainly be responsible for many and will not have clean hands.

Further, I do not seem to remember Amnesty blasting the British and Americans soldiers for killing, raping, murdering whole families of Iraqis and Afghans, also illegally invaded, who simply wanted their countries back, or were totally innocent victims.  
  

No doubt the all is now directed by your new US Head, former top aide to Hilary Clinton who seems to hate most of the world's non Western population, especially those of the Middle East, or of predominantly Muslim heritage.

Video: NATO’s Syria Terrorists Savagely Executes Berrie Family Leader And His Men

Alexander Higgins
NATO’s  ‘loving, peaceful democracy activists’ in Aleppo on video collect people from their homes and savagely executing them.

These are Hillary Clinton’s “loving, peaceful democracy activists” in Aleppo, collecting people from their homes and savagely murdering them. This is because Aleppo never supported their CIA-revolution.

There will be consequences for this crime. 40,000 clan members in Aleppo have volunteered to clear the streets from these savage filth.

The brutality in this video is unheard of in Syria and even in any part of the jungles of Africa. Truly, Islam in 2012 has become worse than any religion imaginable, with these chants of “Allahu Akbar”

Source: Live Leak

But all of this OKAY because:

Al-Qaeda Is Now Our Ally As The ‘War On Terror’ Changes

US military chief Leon Panetta has blood on his hands for helping Syria’s rebels prepare the the Aleppo false flag that he tells the media will be ‘the final nail in President Assad’s coffin’.

Read more…

Obama, NATO To Blame For Murder Of 1000s Of Civilians In Syria

Michael Chossudovsky details how Obama and NATO terrorists are really to blame for murder of thousands of civilians in Syria being blamed on the government.

Read more…

Russia Accuses US Of State Sponsored Terrorism in Syria

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has accused the United States of committing state sponsored terrorism in Syria.

Read more…

False Flags In Syria: An Operation 50 Years In the Making

Examining historical evidence which suggests the false flag operations going on in Syria is a U.S. government operation that is over 50 years in the making.

Read more…

Dispatches From Cairo: Ms. Clinton, Kindly Butt Out

TruthDig
Lauren Unger-Geoffroy

A protester in Cairo’s Tahrir Square in May displays
a shoe sole covered with pictures of Egyptian and Israeli
and other foreign officials or former officials, including
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

CAIRO—Since Tuesday, Egypt has suffered a hot spell that produced a record number of heatstroke victims, including me and two friends. But the weather has not stopped supporters of the two presidential election “winners” from holding victory celebrations. Nor has it stopped Egyptians from wondering whether the ousted President Hosni Mubarak is clinically dead, fully dead, alive and conscious, or alive but unconscious, and whether he had a heart attack or a stroke or had fallen in a bathtub. The volleys of bullshit have been heavy as journalists rush back and forth in pursuit of the stories.

Lots of jokes have hit the social networks. A couple of examples:

—“Egypt has two living presidents, no parliament, one dictator, one invalid constitution, and one president both dead and alive.”

—“All Egyptians are happy today. Those who are for [presidential candidate Mohamed] Morsi are happy because he has won. Those who are for [presidential candidate Ahmed] Shafiq are happy because he won. Those who hated Mubarak are happy because he is dead. Those who loved Mubarak are happy because he is alive.”

Music blared and cars victory-honked Friday night as huge numbers flocked again to Tahrir Square to demonstrate against the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, and to celebrate hints that the SCAF might agree to allow the presidency to go to the opposition candidate, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Morsi.

Good, Alhamdulillah, if that happens, for such a decision by the SCAF would probably avoid a military massacre of thousands stemming from massive public protests. The people will not accept Shafiq as president, nor will they believe any vote count that has him as winner of last weekend’s election.

A pro-Morsi chant heard in Tahrir Square since last Tuesday night: “If [the SCAF] want to be Syria, we’ll give them Libya!” The ominous meaning is that civil war will sweep Egypt if the SCAF’s candidate is awarded the presidency in the face of a challenged vote and that the regime will be swept away.

Khairat el-Shater, the leading strategist of the Muslim Brotherhood, warned before the final round of the presidential election: “Egypt can make its transition to a new order the easy way, or the hard way.” Despite the regime-run national media’s relentless psychological warfare against the Muslim Brotherhood, it is now nearly impossible for the military to take the presidency.

In a statement issued Friday, the SCAF warned against failure to implement court decisions and confirmed the constitutional declaration that it issued earlier in a bid to restrict presidential power. Key words in the new statement were “legitimacy,” “law,” “legal” and “constitutional.” Well played, very well played.

I took in all this information through a haze of dizziness caused by 105-degree heat. I tried not to faint, which was difficult after I read about U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seeming to assert a right to insinuate the United States into the Egyptian election and its outcome. The military must transfer power to the true winner of the election, Clinton said Wednesday. “We think that it is imperative that the military fulfill its promise to the Egyptian people to turn power over to the legitimate winner,” she said in Washington, D.C. She went on to call the developments in Egypt “clearly troubling.”

“The military has to assume an appropriate role which is not to interfere with, dominate or try to subvert the constitutional authority,” Clinton said. It was a warning.

The obvious wrongdoings of the SCAF notwithstanding, the U.S. must not tell Egypt how it should conduct its affairs. Whatever became of the notion of national sovereignty?

Syria says it shot down Turkish air force

Guardian

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — Syria said Friday it shot down a Turkish military plane that entered Syrian air space, and Turkey vowed to "determinedly take necessary steps" in response.

It was the most clear and dramatic escalation in tensions between the two countries, which used to be allies before the Syrian revolt began in March 2011. Turkey has become one of the strongest critics of the Syrian regime's brutal response to the country's uprising.

Late Friday, Syria's state-run news agency, SANA, said the military spotted an "unidentified aerial target" that was flying at a low altitude and at a high speed.

"The Syrian anti-air defenses counteracted with anti-aircraft artillery, hitting it directly," SANA said. "The target turned out to be a Turkish military plane that entered Syrian airspace and was dealt with according to laws observed in such cases."

Turkey issued a statement Friday night following a two-hour security meeting led by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, saying Syrian forces downed the plane and that the two Turkish pilots remain missing.

It said Turkey "will determinedly take necessary steps" in response, without saying what those actions would be.

"Following the evaluation of data provided by our related institutions and the findings of the joint search and rescue efforts with Syria, it is understood that our plane was downed by Syria," the statement said, without providing other details.

Relations between Turkey and Syria were already tense before the downing of the F4 plane on Friday.

Turkey has joined nations such as the U.S. in saying that Syrian President Bashar Assad should step down because of the regime's brutal suppression of the uprising in his country. Turkey also has set up refugee camps on its border for more than 32,000 Syrians who have fled the fighting.

Syria and Turkey have expelled each other's ambassadors and Syria has accused Turkey of supporting Syrian opposition and even allowing Syrian rebels to operate out of Turkish soil. Turkey strongly denies the allegations.

Webster Tarpley: Ban Ki-moon Should Be Impeached for Role in Syria Campaign

Hillary Clinton aide at the helm of Amnesty International USA

Voltaire Network

Suzanne Nossel, former assistant to Richard Holbrooke in his capacity as UN Ambassador and currently Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Assistant for International Organization Affairs, has been selected as the new Executive Director of Amnesty International USA. In the discharge of her duties at the State Department, she diligently exploited human rights to benefit imperial ambitions.

Ms. Nossel had previously worked for Human Rights Watch, as well as for Bertelsmann Media Worldwide and the Wall Street Journal as Vice President of Strategy and Operations.

The AI-USA Board of Directors deemed that Suzanne Nossel’s commitment to the Clinton and Obama administrations was sufficient proof of her competence and decided not to hold a grudge against her for the crimes committed in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, etc.

Ms. Nossel has launched several campaigns against Iran, Libya and Syria. In recent months she made a name for herself by misinforming the Human Rights Council in Geneva with a view to getting the resolution authorizing the war on Libya adopted by the Security Council. Ms. Nossel’s allegations have since been debunked.

Obama Scrambles to Avoid Embarrassment Over UN Palestine Vote

NewsMax
Jim Meyers

The Obama administration is making a last-ditch effort to head off a major diplomatic embarrassment over the looming Palestinian request for recognition of its statehood at the United Nations.

The U.S. is applying diplomatic pressure on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to persuade them to reopen negotiations before the United Nations can take action.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has said he will take the request for full recognition as a state to the U.N. Security Council in the coming week.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has sent special envoys David Hale and Dennis Ross to the region to hold talks with Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Guardian reported.

And State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said on Tuesday that Washington would “leave no stone unturned” to avoid a U.N. vote and get the Israelis back into peace talks, according to The Telegraph.

“Washington is keen to avoid carrying out a threat to veto a Palestinian request for full membership of the U.N., a move likely to further damage America’s already battered reputation in the Middle East, particularly following its strong backing for moves toward self-determination in the region this year,” the Guardian observed.

Two of the other four Security Council members with veto power, Russia and China, back the Palestinian effort. But some European and Arab nations are urging Abbas to take his request to the U.S. General Assembly, which can offer only observer status to the Palestinians, to save the U.S. the embarrassment of having to wield its veto.

The Palestinians insist that their U.N. effort does not preclude resuming negotiations later.

The Financial Times reported on Thursday that Netanyahu plans to address the U.N. General Assembly on the same day that Abbas delivers a speech calling for Palestinian statehood.

“The General Assembly is not a place where Israel usually receives a fair hearing,” Netanyahu said. “But I still decided to tell the truth before anyone who would like to hear it.”

According to the Times, “the announcement suggests that the Israeli government now has little faith in the last-ditch effort by U.S. and European negotiators to stop the Palestinian drive for statehood at the U.N.”

But hardline Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman warned on Wednesday that there would be “harsh and grave” consequences if the Palestinians go ahead with their plan to seek statehood, although he did not specify what those consequences might be.

In the past he has called for Israel to cut off all relations with the Abbas administration if it goes forward with its U.N. bid, according to The Telegraph.

Some Israeli ministers are calling for Israel to annex parts of the West Bank if the Palestinians proceed with their statehood request. Other threats include abandoning the Oslo accords, under which the Palestinian Authority was given control of parts of the West Bank and Gaza, and withholding tax revenues that Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority, the Guardian disclosed.

And the U.S. Congress has threatened to cut off financial aid to the Palestinians.

Libyan rebel group sells first oil to U.S.

Activist Post

Washington (CNN) -- The rebel government in control of the eastern part of Libya has made its first sale of oil from territory it controls, the State Department confirmed Wednesday.

Tesoro, a U.S. oil refiner, entered into a deal May 25 with the Transitional National Council based in Benghazi, Libya for 1.2 million barrels of Libyan crude oil, the State Department said in a written statement. The shipment was scheduled to arrive aboard the MT Equator, a Liberian-flagged tanker, at the Single Point Mooring in Hawaii on Wednesday. The dollar value of the deal is not known.
U.S. support for additional oil sales with the TNC will continue as a means to support additional revenue streams for the Libyan people, the statement said.

The sale was made possible following an April announcement by the Office of Foreign Assets Control at the Treasury Department that established a new licensing policy with Libya. That action was taken to ease barriers to certain oil related transactions with the TNC, in place because of wider U.S. sanctions on Libya.

The announcement came the same day Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in the United Arab Emirates for a meeting with the Libya Contact Group, a coalition of various countries and international organizations that seek to build support for the TNC while preparing for Libya's future after the presumed end of Moammar Gadhafi's regime. This is the third meeting of the group.

France, Italy and Qatar are among the small number of countries who have officially recognized the TNC as the legitimate government of Libya. While the United States has yet to take that step, President Barack Obama "has invited them to open an office in Washington," a senior administration official told reporters traveling with Clinton.

"We are still considering it but there's no final decision as of right now," the official said of U.S. efforts to offer formal recognition to the TNC.

Jeffrey Feltman, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, traveled to Benghazi last month for two days.

Osama bin Laden death: Pakistan PM orders inquiry

Guardian

Pakistani security forces cordon off a street leading to the last hideout
of Osama bin Laden. Photograph: Aamir Qureshi/AFP/Getty Images

Yousaf Raza Gilani denies Pakistan helped al-Qaida, orders army to answer MPs' questions and warns US over future raids

Pakistan's prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, has ordered the army to investigate how Osama bin Laden managed to hide in the country for up to eight years, and has called on the military leadership to answer questions before parliament.

Addressing criticism from US officials, including President Barack Obama, Gilani told parliament it was "disingenuous" to blame Pakistan or accuse its intelligence services of being "in cahoots" with al-Qaida.

"Allegations of complicity or incompetence are absurd," he said. "We didn't invite Osama bin Laden to Pakistan." He also warned Washington that future unilateral strikes could be met with "full force".
The speech came a day after Obama said Islamabad had questions to answer about Bin Laden's "support network" in the country, including possible help from government officials. Gilani retorted that Bin Laden's sanctuary was a "failure of the world" and defended the role of the military's Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency, which has come under sharp attack at home and abroad.
"The ISI is a national asset and has the full support of the government. We are proud of its considerable contribution to the anti-terror campaign," he said.

The forthright speech was an attempt to rally Pakistan's civilian and military leadership in the face of mounting international criticism following the dramatic raid on the compound at Abbottabad, 35 miles north of the capital, Islamabad, that killed the al-Qaida chief.

The ISI had passed "key leads to the CIA" that ultimately led to Bin Laden and helped capture many senior al-Qaida lieutenants since 2001, including 248 in one operation alone, Gilani said.

He paid lip service to the alliance with America and welcomed a forthcoming visit from the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. But he pointedly paid tribute to help from China, "a source of inspiration for the people of Pakistan", he said.

Left unsaid was Pakistan longstanding military and nuclear co-operation with China, which is believed to have boosted Pakistan's nuclear programme in the 1990s.

The investigation into the Bin Laden raid is to be carried out by the army's adjutant general, Lieutenant-General Javed Iqbal, Gilani said. The army leadership will address a closed session of parliament on Friday and answer questions on the issue, he said.

Echoing Obama's words one week ago, Gilani said the death of Bin Laden was "justice done" but added: "We are not naive enough to declare victory."

Afterwards jeering broke out among the opposition benches before Chaudhry Nisar Ali, leader of the opposition in parliament, stood up to speak, saying: "I have not heard a single word that addresses the deep discontent of the Pakistani people."

US: Hamas Leader’s bin Laden Remarks 'Outrageous'

Voice of America

The United States has expressed outrage at remarks by Palestinian Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh condemning the U.S. killing of Osama bin Laden. The U.S. comments Tuesday came on the eve of an expected reconciliation deal between the militant Hamas and the mainstream Palestinian Fatah movement.

The comments by Haniyeh, who is prime minister of the Hamas administration in Gaza, only underscored U.S. concerns about an impending Hamas-Fatah reconciliation deal that could force an end to U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority.

Speaking in Gaza Monday, the Hamas chief said his organization condemns any killing of a Muslim 'holy warrior.' He said the operation in Pakistan was part of a U.S. policy of murder and repression.

Hamas, like al-Qaida, is listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization. At a news briefing, State Department Acting Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner said Haniyeh’s remarks on bin Laden were an outrage.

"They’re outrageous. It goes without saying bin Laden was a murderer and terrorist," he said. "He ordered the killings of thousands of innocent men, women and children... many of whom were Muslim. He did not die a martyr. He died hiding in a mansion, or a compound, far away from the violence that was carried out in his name."

Hamas and Fatah are expected to sign an Egyptian-brokered reconciliation accord in Cairo Wednesday, aimed at ending the split in Palestinian ranks that began in 2007 when Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip.

The United States has since provided hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority of President Mahmoud Abbas based in the West Bank.

A 2006 act of Congress conditions U.S. aid on a requirement that Palestinian recipients renounce violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist. Lawmakers of both parties in Washington are calling for an aid cut-off to a Fatah-Hamas unity government.

Spokesman Toner said the Obama administration is awaiting developments in Cairo. He said that to be part of regional peacemaking, Hamas must accept terms set down in 2003 by the international Middle East Quartet.

"If Hamas wants to play a role in the political process, then it needs to abide by the Quartet principles," he said. "And those have been quite clear. It needs to accept those principles, which are renouncing violent and terrorism, recognizing Israel’s right to exist, and abiding by previous diplomatic agreements."

Toner said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed the impending deal in telephone calls Monday with Mr. Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Officials here noted that previous attempts at Fatah-Hamas reconciliation have broken down.

Reports from Cairo say that to stave off an aid ban, the two parties may form a cabinet of technocrats without affiliation with either faction that would run the Palestinian Authority until new elections.

Talks on U.S. Presence in Afghanistan After Pullout Unnerve Region

No Sunglasses
by Rod Nordland

KABUL, Afghanistan — First, American officials were talking about July 2011 as the date to begin the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Then, the Americans and their NATO allies began to talk about transition, gradually handing over control of the war to the Afghans until finally pulling out in 2014. Now, however, the talk is all about what happens after 2014.

American soldiers played video games at Kandahar Airfield. The United States will begin drawing down its forces in July.

Afghanistan and the United States are in the midst of negotiating what they are calling a Strategic Partnership Declaration for beyond 2014.

Critics, including many of Afghanistan’s neighbors, call it the Permanent Bases Agreement — or, in a more cynical vein, Great Game 3.0, drawing a comparison with the ill-fated British and Russian rivalry in the region during the 19th and 20th centuries.

It is without doubt a delicate process, and one that comes at a critical time. Afghan officials have expressed concern that the negotiations could scuttle peace talks with the Taliban, now in their early stages, because the insurgents have insisted that foreign forces must leave the country before they will deal. That they are already talking is an indication they are willing to compromise on the timing of a withdrawal — but it is hard to imagine Taliban acceptance of a lasting American presence here.
Formal talks on a long-term agreement began last month under Marc Grossman, the official who has replaced Richard C. Holbrooke, the diplomat who died in December, as the Obama administration’s envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and a delegation visited Kabul under the direction of Frank Ruggiero, a State Department official who ran the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team until last year.

The reaction regionally was immediate. The Iranian interior minister made a rushed visit to Kabul, followed shortly by the national security advisers of India and Russia.

The Russians, though generally supportive of NATO’s role in Afghanistan, were alarmed at the prospect of a long-term Western presence.

“The Russian side supports the development of Afghanistan by its own forces in all areas — security, economic, political — only by its own forces, especially after 2014,” said Stepan Anikeev, a political adviser at the Russian Embassy here. “How is transition possible with these bases?”

American officials have hastened to assure Russia and other neighbors about their intentions after 2014. Mr. Grossman made a visit late last month to Moscow to do so. And officials from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on down have insisted that any presence after 2014 would not mean permanent bases.

It is a “long-term framework for our bilateral cooperation,” Mrs. Clinton said in a speech to the Asia Society on Feb. 18.

“In no way should our enduring commitment be misunderstood as a desire by America or our allies to occupy Afghanistan against the will of its people,” Mrs. Clinton said, adding, “We do not seek any permanent American military bases in their country.”

The Russians, however, have complained that any talk of a foreign troop presence in Afghanistan after 2014 violates international understandings, including one made in a joint statement by President Obama and President Dmitri A. Medvedev on June 24 supporting a neutral status for Afghanistan.
Afghan officials have acknowledged, however, that the talks do countenance some sort of long-term bases after 2014, if only for the purpose of continued training of Afghan troops. “What we’re discussing is a long-term strategic framework agreement,” said Ashraf Ghani, an adviser to President Hamid Karzai who is one of the Afghan negotiators. “The U.S. has many 10- to 25-year-long agreements, a wide range of agreements.”

“The important thing now is that the sense of abandonment that was in the air last year is gone now,” he said.

One person’s long-term base is another’s permanent base, however — and in the region many people took Mrs. Clinton’s assurances as proof that the United States was not leaving, whatever the bases are called.

“A 10- or 20-years agreement can be prolonged at any time,” Mr. Anikeev said. “And we have no guarantee they’re not permanent.”

“The Americans have not been honest about this, even among themselves,” said Mullah Attullah Lodin, deputy chairman of the High Peace Council of Afghanistan, which is charged with leading reconciliation efforts with the Taliban. “One says we are not building bases, another says we are building them, and it’s very confusing.”

The big concern, he said, was that if any such agreement were reached, it would make it that much harder to enter into serious peace talks with the Taliban. “That is the first thing the Taliban demand is the withdrawal of foreign troops,” Mullah Lodin said.

Rangin Dadfar Spanta, the national security adviser to Mr. Karzai, disagreed. “Reconciliation and a strategic relationship, they are not contradictory to one another. We have the same goals, peace and stability in Afghanistan, and elimination of sanctuaries and bases for terrorism, that is for the common good.”

Despite such worries, American and Afghan officials are negotiating on an accelerated timetable, with the Americans hoping to come to an agreement by July, when the first withdrawals of some American troops are to start, diplomats say.

“The Afghans are very worried about after 2014,” said a European diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of diplomatic delicacies. “They’re trying to extract from the West as much as they can now.”

Mr. Ghani said that Afghan officials were hoping to win agreement on the transfer of Provincial Reconstruction Teams, which dispense aid from the United States and NATO countries directly to projects in the Afghan countryside, to Afghan government control. In general, the Afghans want to see more aid money funneled through their government, and they also want to see a reduced presence of the United Nations.

Then there is the issue of how the Afghans will be able to pay for their greatly enlarged police and military, which by some estimates will require $10 billion a year to sustain come 2014 — 10 times the Afghan government’s annual tax revenues.

“The whole mindset is to get as much as possible in the course of the next couple years,” the European diplomat said. “They really understand that they won’t get as much as they used to get, and they’re desperate to get as much as they can.”

One regional diplomat, speaking on the condition of anonymity for similar reasons, said the Americans were equally concerned to keep a long-term or permanent foothold in Afghanistan for their own interests as well.

“There was a time when the Americans were struggling to find one base in Central Asia,” he said. “Here is a place where they can have all the bases they want, and Afghanistan is a place between two potential nuclear Islamic powers, Iran and Pakistan.”

“There are forces of reaction who are itching to fire the starting gun on Great Game 3.0, and the insurgents will try to exploit this,” said Mark Sedwill, the NATO senior civilian representative in Afghanistan, in a recent speech.

Reaching accord among the diplomats on a Strategic Partnership Declaration will only be a first step. Mr. Karzai has already said any such agreement would have to be put to a nationwide loya jirga, a tribal assembly that acts as referendum on important issues.

“In general, people in Afghanistan are against foreign forces,” Mullah Lodin, the negotiator, said. “I don’t think the loya jirga will ever support foreign forces in the country.”

Mr. Spanta recognized the difficulty. “We have to convince the Afghan people there is something for us in this,” he said.

Obama's letter to Lula exposes US dishonesty with Iran

Campaign Against Sanctions and
Military Intervention in Iran

Washington supported mediation by Brazil and Turkey when it did not expect them to succeed and turned its back when they accomplished exactly what the Obama administration said it sought from Iran.

The full text of a letter sent by President Obama on April 20, 2010 to President Lula da Silva regarding Brazil's and Turkey's negotiations is now available and we reproduce it here. In the letter, the White House strongly encouraged the intermediaries to negotiate with Iran for a single purpose, namely to persuade the Islamic Republic to send 1200 kg of its low enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for fuel rods for the Tehran Research Reactor. Brazil’s respected daily O Estado de S. Paulo yesterday quoted Turkish prime minister Erdogan revealing that he, too, had received a (presumably similar) letter from Obama.

This initial US stance completely contradicted Washington’s hostile response three weeks later to the Tehran Declaration, in which Iran agreed to precisely such an exchange. On May 18, a day after the Declaration was issued, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton dismissed the Brazil-Iran-Turkey offer and announced instead a draft UN Security Council resolution to impose a new round of sanctions on Iran. The punitive escalation, she said, was "as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken by Tehran over the last few days as any we could have taken."

This was predictable. Washington grew visibly nervous as signs emerged that Brazil and Turkey might achieve peacefully what threats and sanctions from major powers had not accomplished in Iran. Hours before the prime minister of Turkey and president of Brazil left for Tehran, Clinton told a Washington news conference their mission was doomed.

U.S. hostility to the Tehran Declaration contradicts also what Washington insisted it wanted last October, when the White House supported a UN-sponsored nuclear fuel swap that was essentially identical to what Iran is now offering.

Even if one disregards that background, the main point in the May 17 Tehran Declaration is precisely what Obama had asked for in his letter as a satisfactory step forward for Iran to prove its goodwill. To quote from Obama's letter, "For us, Iran’s agreement to transfer 1,200 kg of Iran’s low enriched uranium (LEU) out of the country would build confidence and reduce regional tensions by substantially reducing Iran’s LEU stockpile. I want to underscore that this element is of fundamental importance for the United States. For Iran, it would receive the nuclear fuel requested to ensure continued operation of the TRR to produce needed medical isotopes and, by using its own material, Iran would begin to demonstrate peaceful nuclear intent."

The contradiction between President Obama's letter to President Lula and the US response to the Brazil-Iran-Turkey offer is the latest evidence that the US does not intend to negotiate with Iran in good faith and has hidden motives. Under pressure from the same neoconservatives and Israel lobby that pushed the Bush Administration to invade Iraq illegally, the Obama Administration is inventing excuses to avoid a peaceful resolution to the stand-off with Iran.

But as Obama initially agreed in his letter, the nuclear fuel swap agreed to by Iran is actually an historic breakthrough. A new round of sanctions on Iran that the US is now seeking would surely sabotage this historic opportunity. It is therefore imperative that the world public opinion, the international peace and justice movement, and all non-aligned countries exert pressure on UN Security Council members to defeat the US-led draft sanctions resolution. Washington needs to demonstrate it is sincere by negotiating with Iran on the basis of the Tehran declaration.

For more information or to contact CASMII please visit http://www.campaigniran.org