Posts
Welcome to 9-11 Movies
-
The idea behind this site is to present the most rudimentary, simplified,
common-sense information about the anomalies that fuel our doubts about the
offic...
Showing posts with label Illegal Wars. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Illegal Wars. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Iraq: War Crimes, Lies and Statistics
Global Research
Felicity Arbuthnot
Recently a contradictory, but in important areas, remarkably sunny opinion poll on “progress” in Iraq, conducted in April, was released. (i)
It was, it has to be said, a divide and rule sort of survey as it split respondents in to Shia, Sunni, Kurdish – the Shia, obviously were largely supportive of Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki, from the Iranian backed Dawa Party.
However, for those in the West wishing a phoenix to rise from Iraq’s ashes - the illegal invasion, occupation, destruction, resultant mass graves of maybe one and a half million beings, the million orphans, the over four million displaced, the unimaginable, near industrial scale, often daily carnage, nearly a decade on – incredibly, things are looking up.
Around half the respondents thought Iraq was going in the right direction and that Nuri al Maliki was OK at the steering wheel. (Don’t mention torture, secret prisons, hasty swathes of executions and a largely more than questionable judiciary.)
Near three quarter polled said it: “... was more important to have a strong leader to keep Iraq stable, even if it meant giving up some freedoms.”
Arguably then they would have done better with President Saddam Hussein. He even managed to keep the lights and water on for longer, the streets safe and grenade and car bomb free (with the exception of the occasional car bombs, allegedly courtesy of CIA-backed, former post-invasion, interim, allegedly British passport holding “Prime Minister” Iyad Allawi’s Iraq National Accord’s handiwork.)
Seemingly, if an election were held immediately, al Maliki’s Dawa Party would be a popular choice. An unasked question was whether that would be because of the cited fraud, death threats, confiscation of the life-line ration cards until people voted the “right way”, as in previous “free and fair”, post-invasion elections.
In questions on key issues, fifty nine percent opined that security had improved and - fifty percent that basic services had. Both starkly contradict reality.
Here is the current British Foreign and Commonwealth overview on security in Iraq (ii):
Felicity Arbuthnot
“A rock,
Breathing with the lungs of a lunatic,
That is it,
This is the twentieth century.” (A Mirror for the Twentieth Century: Adonis –
Ali Ahmad Said, 1930)
It was, it has to be said, a divide and rule sort of survey as it split respondents in to Shia, Sunni, Kurdish – the Shia, obviously were largely supportive of Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki, from the Iranian backed Dawa Party.
However, for those in the West wishing a phoenix to rise from Iraq’s ashes - the illegal invasion, occupation, destruction, resultant mass graves of maybe one and a half million beings, the million orphans, the over four million displaced, the unimaginable, near industrial scale, often daily carnage, nearly a decade on – incredibly, things are looking up.
Around half the respondents thought Iraq was going in the right direction and that Nuri al Maliki was OK at the steering wheel. (Don’t mention torture, secret prisons, hasty swathes of executions and a largely more than questionable judiciary.)
Near three quarter polled said it: “... was more important to have a strong leader to keep Iraq stable, even if it meant giving up some freedoms.”
Arguably then they would have done better with President Saddam Hussein. He even managed to keep the lights and water on for longer, the streets safe and grenade and car bomb free (with the exception of the occasional car bombs, allegedly courtesy of CIA-backed, former post-invasion, interim, allegedly British passport holding “Prime Minister” Iyad Allawi’s Iraq National Accord’s handiwork.)
Seemingly, if an election were held immediately, al Maliki’s Dawa Party would be a popular choice. An unasked question was whether that would be because of the cited fraud, death threats, confiscation of the life-line ration cards until people voted the “right way”, as in previous “free and fair”, post-invasion elections.
In questions on key issues, fifty nine percent opined that security had improved and - fifty percent that basic services had. Both starkly contradict reality.
Here is the current British Foreign and Commonwealth overview on security in Iraq (ii):
Saturday, May 26, 2012
US envoy’s report on Iran
Russia Today
Top Israeli officials have refused to meet the US envoy to the P5+1 group, who arrived in Jerusalem with a report on recent talks with Iran. The diplomatic démarche comes as relations between the two countries strain over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman arrived in Israel on May 25, a day after the group of six (Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States plus Germany) ended their unsuccessful negotiations in Baghdad.
She had intended to brief Israeli officials about negotiations between Iran and the P5+1. But both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak became unexpectedly unavailable to meet her.
Sherman then delivered her report about the fruitless talks to National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror and Foreign Ministry Director-General Rafi Barak instead, the Debka news agency reported.
No agreement was reached between the world powers and Iran during the talks in Baghdad on May 23-24 because Tehran refused to meet their demands. The P5+1 wanted Iran to suspend its 20 percent uranium enrichment program, which the group sees as vital to the negotiations process.
Tehran labelled the Western proposal ‘unbalanced’, rejecting it over what it called "unfair demands" which offer little in return.
Even though both sides still hope to hammer out the agreement at a newly-scheduled round of talks in Moscow next month, Israel remains less optimistic about the negotiations.
On the first day of discussions in Baghdad, on May, 23, Defence Minister Ehud Barak said the negotiations only allow Iran to buy time and drive a wedge between Washington and Tel Aviv.
Relations between Israel and United States have become more tense lately, with both countries having different solutions to the conflict with Iran.
While the US prefers warnings and sanctions to pressure Iran away from any suspected atomic weapon development, Israel threatens military action.
On the talks’ opening day, Ehud Barak reaffirmed Israel’s position, saying a military strike against Iranian facilities is not out of the question.
What’s more, a day later, a source in Washington DC said the Israeli leadership had backtracked on a promise not to attack Iran before America’s November presidential election, according to the Debka report.
The possible use of force against Iran has been discussed by Israel and its western allies for months. Israel insists on the right to strike if and when it sees fit, saying it will not seek anyone’s consent.
There is a fear that, if such an attack happens, Iran would retaliate against any forces it sees as enemies, which could result in a major regional war, dragging in other countries as well.
Israel will only accept Iran developing its civilian nuclear industry is if it shuts down all its uranium enrichment sites and uses imported fuel, Barak said. Essentially, that is what the P5+1 group offered Iran this time. But Tehran still insisted it did not intend to create a nuclear bomb and, as "proof", agreed on the eve of negotiations to the resumption of UN nuclear monitoring at Iran’s sites, including Parchin.
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman arrived in Israel on May 25, a day after the group of six (Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States plus Germany) ended their unsuccessful negotiations in Baghdad.
She had intended to brief Israeli officials about negotiations between Iran and the P5+1. But both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak became unexpectedly unavailable to meet her.
Sherman then delivered her report about the fruitless talks to National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror and Foreign Ministry Director-General Rafi Barak instead, the Debka news agency reported.
No agreement was reached between the world powers and Iran during the talks in Baghdad on May 23-24 because Tehran refused to meet their demands. The P5+1 wanted Iran to suspend its 20 percent uranium enrichment program, which the group sees as vital to the negotiations process.
Tehran labelled the Western proposal ‘unbalanced’, rejecting it over what it called "unfair demands" which offer little in return.
Even though both sides still hope to hammer out the agreement at a newly-scheduled round of talks in Moscow next month, Israel remains less optimistic about the negotiations.
On the first day of discussions in Baghdad, on May, 23, Defence Minister Ehud Barak said the negotiations only allow Iran to buy time and drive a wedge between Washington and Tel Aviv.
Relations between Israel and United States have become more tense lately, with both countries having different solutions to the conflict with Iran.
While the US prefers warnings and sanctions to pressure Iran away from any suspected atomic weapon development, Israel threatens military action.
On the talks’ opening day, Ehud Barak reaffirmed Israel’s position, saying a military strike against Iranian facilities is not out of the question.
What’s more, a day later, a source in Washington DC said the Israeli leadership had backtracked on a promise not to attack Iran before America’s November presidential election, according to the Debka report.
The possible use of force against Iran has been discussed by Israel and its western allies for months. Israel insists on the right to strike if and when it sees fit, saying it will not seek anyone’s consent.
There is a fear that, if such an attack happens, Iran would retaliate against any forces it sees as enemies, which could result in a major regional war, dragging in other countries as well.
Israel will only accept Iran developing its civilian nuclear industry is if it shuts down all its uranium enrichment sites and uses imported fuel, Barak said. Essentially, that is what the P5+1 group offered Iran this time. But Tehran still insisted it did not intend to create a nuclear bomb and, as "proof", agreed on the eve of negotiations to the resumption of UN nuclear monitoring at Iran’s sites, including Parchin.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Islamophobia: Washington’s "New Colonialism"
Global Research
Dr. Ismail Salami
Western media however reduced the number of the killers to one.
The bodies were reportedly wrapped in blankets and were set on fire.
US President Barack Obama said he was deeply saddened, "I offer my condolences to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives, and to the people of Afghanistan, who have endured too much violence and suffering. This incident ... does not represent the exceptional character of our military and the respect that the United States has for the people of Afghanistan."
As contradictory as these words seem, the very 'exceptional character' of the US military had earlier urged them to burn copies of the Holy Quran, an incident which saddened the hearts of Muslims all across the world.
These and earlier incidents are not coincidental and well attest to a prevailing mindset in the US military and a dominant policy in Washington. It is clear that the US government has commenced a large-scale campaign against Islam with the express intention of debilitating the Muslim community.
In fact, the war on Islam started in 2001 when the then US president George Bush made a crass reference to his so-called war on terror as ‘crusade’. He warned Americans that "this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile." Bush’s politically untoward remark rang alarm bells in Europe and the Muslim world although it went barely noticed in the American community who took the word for its sound rather than for its meaning.
Gradually, Washington instilled a sensation of anti-Islamism in America and Europe by attributing the nine-eleven tragedy and ensuing terrorist operations to the Muslims. Soheib Bensheikh, Grand Mufti of the mosque in Marseille, France said Bush’s use of the word ‘crusade’ was most unfortunate and that “It recalled the barbarous and unjust military operations against the Muslim world" by Christian knights.
A delusional man who was overwhelmed with the idea of a messianic mission, George Bush wittingly or unwittingly dragged the world to the margins where a clash of civilizations was imminent.
The legacy of hatred which was started by George Bush was later continued in the form of classes and organized trainings.
In line with this Islamophobic policy funded by Washington and the powerful Zionist groups in the country, the US military has long been involved in fomenting anger and hatred against the Muslims by teaching its future leaders that a “total war” against the Muslims would be necessary to protect America.
Dr. Ismail Salami
 |
| Relatives sat in shock in a van carrying the bodies of their kin wrapped in blankets |
The bodies were reportedly wrapped in blankets and were set on fire.
US President Barack Obama said he was deeply saddened, "I offer my condolences to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives, and to the people of Afghanistan, who have endured too much violence and suffering. This incident ... does not represent the exceptional character of our military and the respect that the United States has for the people of Afghanistan."
As contradictory as these words seem, the very 'exceptional character' of the US military had earlier urged them to burn copies of the Holy Quran, an incident which saddened the hearts of Muslims all across the world.
These and earlier incidents are not coincidental and well attest to a prevailing mindset in the US military and a dominant policy in Washington. It is clear that the US government has commenced a large-scale campaign against Islam with the express intention of debilitating the Muslim community.
In fact, the war on Islam started in 2001 when the then US president George Bush made a crass reference to his so-called war on terror as ‘crusade’. He warned Americans that "this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile." Bush’s politically untoward remark rang alarm bells in Europe and the Muslim world although it went barely noticed in the American community who took the word for its sound rather than for its meaning.
Gradually, Washington instilled a sensation of anti-Islamism in America and Europe by attributing the nine-eleven tragedy and ensuing terrorist operations to the Muslims. Soheib Bensheikh, Grand Mufti of the mosque in Marseille, France said Bush’s use of the word ‘crusade’ was most unfortunate and that “It recalled the barbarous and unjust military operations against the Muslim world" by Christian knights.
A delusional man who was overwhelmed with the idea of a messianic mission, George Bush wittingly or unwittingly dragged the world to the margins where a clash of civilizations was imminent.
The legacy of hatred which was started by George Bush was later continued in the form of classes and organized trainings.
In line with this Islamophobic policy funded by Washington and the powerful Zionist groups in the country, the US military has long been involved in fomenting anger and hatred against the Muslims by teaching its future leaders that a “total war” against the Muslims would be necessary to protect America.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Afghan parliament committees reject partnership pact with US
PressTV
Qorban-Ali Erfani said Tuesday that the agreement is being considered by various committees of the assembly and has already been rejected by two of them including the judicial committee for being against the national interests of Afghanistan.
US President Barack Obama and his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement in Kabul on May 1, which extends the US presence in Afghanistan to another decade beyond 2014.
The agreement is yet to be approved by the 249-member Afghan Parliament.
Meanwhile, an informed source says that the Afghan government and US Embassy in Kabul are lobbying Afghan lawmakers to encourage them to support the agreement, including by promising financial assistance and US Green Cards to Afghan parliamentarians.
Referring to the recent NATO summit meeting in Chicago on May 20-21, Erfani said the meeting was completely useless.
He stated that although participants talked about the withdrawal of their forces from Afghanistan, ceding responsibility for security affairs to Afghan forces and training them, “such remarks will only be useful when they are followed in practice, which does not seem to be the case.”
The lawmaker said the United States has paid no attention to rebuilding the Afghan army in the past 11 years and has so far avoided providing it with advanced weaponry, including modern planes and helicopters.
All these propaganda, he said, is aimed at influencing the public opinion, but the United States does not aim to make the Afghan army completely self-sufficient.
A member of the National Assembly of Afghanistan says the recent strategic partnership agreement signed between the US and Afghanistan has so far been rejected by two parliamentary committees.
Qorban-Ali Erfani said Tuesday that the agreement is being considered by various committees of the assembly and has already been rejected by two of them including the judicial committee for being against the national interests of Afghanistan.
US President Barack Obama and his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement in Kabul on May 1, which extends the US presence in Afghanistan to another decade beyond 2014.
The agreement is yet to be approved by the 249-member Afghan Parliament.
Meanwhile, an informed source says that the Afghan government and US Embassy in Kabul are lobbying Afghan lawmakers to encourage them to support the agreement, including by promising financial assistance and US Green Cards to Afghan parliamentarians.
Referring to the recent NATO summit meeting in Chicago on May 20-21, Erfani said the meeting was completely useless.
He stated that although participants talked about the withdrawal of their forces from Afghanistan, ceding responsibility for security affairs to Afghan forces and training them, “such remarks will only be useful when they are followed in practice, which does not seem to be the case.”
The lawmaker said the United States has paid no attention to rebuilding the Afghan army in the past 11 years and has so far avoided providing it with advanced weaponry, including modern planes and helicopters.
All these propaganda, he said, is aimed at influencing the public opinion, but the United States does not aim to make the Afghan army completely self-sufficient.
Friday, May 18, 2012
Netanyahu Government On Lockdown As Chance to Attack Iran's Nuclear Facilities Is Running Out Fast
Business Insider
The mood in Jerusalem is hardening as Israel is running out of time to decide whether or not to launch an attack on Iran's nuclear sites, reports Michael Stott of Reuters.
Despite heavy international pressure, Iran continues to enrich uranium for what it says are peaceful purposes while Israel and the West worry that Tehran is trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Experts told Reuters that most of Iran's nuclear program — which Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu considers an existential threat to the state of Israel — will be buried deep underground within a few months, thereby making a strike even riskier and more difficult than it already is.
Consequently, Netanyahu's government is on lockdown — recent public pronouncements are no longer warning of a strike but instead are reiterating President Barack Obama's position that diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions should be given time to work.
But Netanyahu has also been making moves to consolidate power: last week he reached a deal to join forces with the opposition Kadima party and its Iranian-born leader Gen. Shaul Mofaz, which gives the coalition 94 out of 120 in the Knesset (i.e. Israel's house of representatives).
The move concerns American officials who were expecting Israeli elections in September because now there is little to stop Netanyahu from ordering an attack.
Despite heavy international pressure, Iran continues to enrich uranium for what it says are peaceful purposes while Israel and the West worry that Tehran is trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Experts told Reuters that most of Iran's nuclear program — which Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu considers an existential threat to the state of Israel — will be buried deep underground within a few months, thereby making a strike even riskier and more difficult than it already is.
Consequently, Netanyahu's government is on lockdown — recent public pronouncements are no longer warning of a strike but instead are reiterating President Barack Obama's position that diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions should be given time to work.
But Netanyahu has also been making moves to consolidate power: last week he reached a deal to join forces with the opposition Kadima party and its Iranian-born leader Gen. Shaul Mofaz, which gives the coalition 94 out of 120 in the Knesset (i.e. Israel's house of representatives).
The move concerns American officials who were expecting Israeli elections in September because now there is little to stop Netanyahu from ordering an attack.
THE IRAN WAR PATH HAS RESUMED: With Another ‘Colin Powell Moment’?
Global Research
Finian Cunningham
You know when Western powers are getting trigger happy towards Iran again because the mainstream media propaganda machine starts cranking out lurid scare stories.
The latest wheeze is based on “computer-generated drawings” allegedly depicting a nuclear explosion blast chamber that Iran has allegedly been using to test mini nukes. The drawings were provided “exclusively” to the Associated Press news agency by an unnamed official from “a country tracking Iran's nuclear program, who said it proves [sic] the structure exists”.
Don’t you just love the way “unnamed sources” are quoted, who go on to “prove” their own unverifiable claims?
The AP story has since been picked up, predictably, by all and sundry Western media [1].
Not only are the stories illustrated with computerised images of the alleged blast chamber, there are also mathematical details of chamber dimensions, design and structure.
A good rule-of-thumb is that when western media and unnamed “diplomats” assiduously provide “details” on suspect installations, then it is a sure sign of desperation to convince the wider public about otherwise dubious claims.
The template for this kind of disinformation stunt was the presentation by former US Secretary of State Colin Powell in February 2003 before the United Nations Security Council. Then, in a contrived performance that smacked of sheer theatre, Powell presented audio recordings and satellite images to testify that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. This was a piece with then British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s hysterical assertion that Iraq had the capability of launching such weapons “within 45 seconds”.
In sonorous tones, Powell declared to the world: “My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”
All of the supposed “solid sources” claimed by Powell (and Blair and George W Bush) were later shown to be fabrications or spurious. Powell for one lied through his teeth. But based on his performance, the US and Britain launched a nine-year war of aggression on Iraq that claimed over one million lives and bequeathed that country with a heinous legacy of ongoing internecine violence, poverty, destruction and widespread cancer-causing depleted-uranium contamination.
Incredibly, far from being shamed over committing war crimes and being complicit in war crimes, Western governments and media continue to repeat the same cynical charade of weapons of mass destruction on Iran.
Less than three years after Colin Powell’s disgraceful moment of mendacity before the eyes of the world, the New York Times ran a story alleging that Iran had nuclear warheads. The claim was based on images obtained by unnamed American intelligence officials allegedly from a stolen Iranian laptop. That story was later exposed by investigative journalist Gareth Porter to be a ludicrous fabrication because the images were actually of redundant North Korean missiles.
It is with this kind of track record of war crimes and blatant fabrication that the latest “exclusive” story of a secret Iranian nuclear blast chamber must be assessed – a story based on computer drawings supplied yet again by ubiquitous unnamed sources. Debunking such disinformation is not enough. Given the seriousness of consequences from publishing this disinformation, Iran or some international citizen body should be filing a legal case against Western mainstream media for inciting illegal wars.
It should be noted that the latest nuclear allegation against Iran comes only days ahead of the second round of the P5 + 1 negotiations set to take place on 23 May in Baghdad. Ominously, it is being mooted in the Western media that if Iran does not make a major concession, that is stop its legally entitled civilian nuclear energy programme (a highly unlikely concession), then the Western powers or their Israeli subcontractor of terror will move to a military option. In this context, of concern is the recent build-up of military forces by the US and its proxy autocratic monarchy states in the Persian Gulf.
The move this week by Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states to form a closer military union – citing Iran as a regional threat – can be seen as an American closing of ranks in advance of a possible attack.
The dissemination by Western media of “evidence” of Iranian nuclear weaponisation takes on an even more sinister purpose, with shadows of the “Colin Powell moment”.
Finian Cunningham is Global Research’s Middle East and East Africa Correspondent
cunninghamfinian@gmail.com
Notes
[1] http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/05/13/drawing-may-provide-insight-into-iran-nuclear-intentions/
Finian Cunningham
 |
| Must be true. Here's the cartoon |
The latest wheeze is based on “computer-generated drawings” allegedly depicting a nuclear explosion blast chamber that Iran has allegedly been using to test mini nukes. The drawings were provided “exclusively” to the Associated Press news agency by an unnamed official from “a country tracking Iran's nuclear program, who said it proves [sic] the structure exists”.
Don’t you just love the way “unnamed sources” are quoted, who go on to “prove” their own unverifiable claims?
The AP story has since been picked up, predictably, by all and sundry Western media [1].
Not only are the stories illustrated with computerised images of the alleged blast chamber, there are also mathematical details of chamber dimensions, design and structure.
A good rule-of-thumb is that when western media and unnamed “diplomats” assiduously provide “details” on suspect installations, then it is a sure sign of desperation to convince the wider public about otherwise dubious claims.
The template for this kind of disinformation stunt was the presentation by former US Secretary of State Colin Powell in February 2003 before the United Nations Security Council. Then, in a contrived performance that smacked of sheer theatre, Powell presented audio recordings and satellite images to testify that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. This was a piece with then British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s hysterical assertion that Iraq had the capability of launching such weapons “within 45 seconds”.
In sonorous tones, Powell declared to the world: “My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”
All of the supposed “solid sources” claimed by Powell (and Blair and George W Bush) were later shown to be fabrications or spurious. Powell for one lied through his teeth. But based on his performance, the US and Britain launched a nine-year war of aggression on Iraq that claimed over one million lives and bequeathed that country with a heinous legacy of ongoing internecine violence, poverty, destruction and widespread cancer-causing depleted-uranium contamination.
Incredibly, far from being shamed over committing war crimes and being complicit in war crimes, Western governments and media continue to repeat the same cynical charade of weapons of mass destruction on Iran.
Less than three years after Colin Powell’s disgraceful moment of mendacity before the eyes of the world, the New York Times ran a story alleging that Iran had nuclear warheads. The claim was based on images obtained by unnamed American intelligence officials allegedly from a stolen Iranian laptop. That story was later exposed by investigative journalist Gareth Porter to be a ludicrous fabrication because the images were actually of redundant North Korean missiles.
It is with this kind of track record of war crimes and blatant fabrication that the latest “exclusive” story of a secret Iranian nuclear blast chamber must be assessed – a story based on computer drawings supplied yet again by ubiquitous unnamed sources. Debunking such disinformation is not enough. Given the seriousness of consequences from publishing this disinformation, Iran or some international citizen body should be filing a legal case against Western mainstream media for inciting illegal wars.
It should be noted that the latest nuclear allegation against Iran comes only days ahead of the second round of the P5 + 1 negotiations set to take place on 23 May in Baghdad. Ominously, it is being mooted in the Western media that if Iran does not make a major concession, that is stop its legally entitled civilian nuclear energy programme (a highly unlikely concession), then the Western powers or their Israeli subcontractor of terror will move to a military option. In this context, of concern is the recent build-up of military forces by the US and its proxy autocratic monarchy states in the Persian Gulf.
The move this week by Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states to form a closer military union – citing Iran as a regional threat – can be seen as an American closing of ranks in advance of a possible attack.
The dissemination by Western media of “evidence” of Iranian nuclear weaponisation takes on an even more sinister purpose, with shadows of the “Colin Powell moment”.
Finian Cunningham is Global Research’s Middle East and East Africa Correspondent
cunninghamfinian@gmail.com
Notes
[1] http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/05/13/drawing-may-provide-insight-into-iran-nuclear-intentions/
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Blogger Shines Light on U.S. Shadow War in East Africa
Wired
David Axe
An innocuous-seeming U.S. Air Force press release. A serendipitous satellite image in Google Earth. Snapshots from a photographer on assignment at a Spanish air base. The crash of an Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle fighter-bomber in the United Arab Emirates. These are some of the fragments of information that Italian aviation blogger David Cenciotti has assembled to reveal the best picture yet of the Pentagon’s secretive war in the Arabian Peninsula and East Africa.
In a series of blog posts over the past two weeks, Cenciotti has described in unprecedented detail the powerful aerial force helping wage Washington’s hush-hush campaign of air strikes, naval bombardments and commando raids along the western edge of the Indian Ocean, including terror hot spots Yemen and Somalia. Cenciotti outlined the deployment of eight F-15Es from their home base in Idaho to the international air and naval outpost at Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti, north of Somalia.
Over the years there have been hints of the F-15s’ presence in East Africa, but “their actual mission remains a (sort-of) mystery,” Cenciotti writes. Based on the evidence, he proposes that the twin-seat fighter-bombers — one of the Air Force’s mainstay weapon systems in Afghanistan — are dropping bombs on al-Qaida-affiliated militants in Yemen. If true, that means the U.S. intervention in the western Indian Ocean is far more forceful, and risky, than previously suggested.
Ten years ago the Air Force openly acknowledged the initial F-15E rotation in Djibouti, but since then the flying branch has released few details. New official information on the Indian Ocean aerial armada has emerged only after airplanes crashed. An accident involving an Air Force MQ-9 Reaper drone in the Seychelles late last year forced the Pentagon to admit it was building a drone base on the island nation. Reporters followed the Seychelles lead to uncover additional Reaper bases in Yemen and Ethiopia. Armed drones operated by the CIA and the military have killed scores of militants in Somalia and Yemen under steadily loosening rules of engagement.
Similarly, the deaths of four American airmen in a crash in Djibouti in February confirmed the involvement of the secretive U-28 spy plane in the escalating intervention.
David Axe
An innocuous-seeming U.S. Air Force press release. A serendipitous satellite image in Google Earth. Snapshots from a photographer on assignment at a Spanish air base. The crash of an Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle fighter-bomber in the United Arab Emirates. These are some of the fragments of information that Italian aviation blogger David Cenciotti has assembled to reveal the best picture yet of the Pentagon’s secretive war in the Arabian Peninsula and East Africa.
In a series of blog posts over the past two weeks, Cenciotti has described in unprecedented detail the powerful aerial force helping wage Washington’s hush-hush campaign of air strikes, naval bombardments and commando raids along the western edge of the Indian Ocean, including terror hot spots Yemen and Somalia. Cenciotti outlined the deployment of eight F-15Es from their home base in Idaho to the international air and naval outpost at Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti, north of Somalia.
Over the years there have been hints of the F-15s’ presence in East Africa, but “their actual mission remains a (sort-of) mystery,” Cenciotti writes. Based on the evidence, he proposes that the twin-seat fighter-bombers — one of the Air Force’s mainstay weapon systems in Afghanistan — are dropping bombs on al-Qaida-affiliated militants in Yemen. If true, that means the U.S. intervention in the western Indian Ocean is far more forceful, and risky, than previously suggested.
Ten years ago the Air Force openly acknowledged the initial F-15E rotation in Djibouti, but since then the flying branch has released few details. New official information on the Indian Ocean aerial armada has emerged only after airplanes crashed. An accident involving an Air Force MQ-9 Reaper drone in the Seychelles late last year forced the Pentagon to admit it was building a drone base on the island nation. Reporters followed the Seychelles lead to uncover additional Reaper bases in Yemen and Ethiopia. Armed drones operated by the CIA and the military have killed scores of militants in Somalia and Yemen under steadily loosening rules of engagement.
Similarly, the deaths of four American airmen in a crash in Djibouti in February confirmed the involvement of the secretive U-28 spy plane in the escalating intervention.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Dennis Kucinich and 'Wackiness'
Common Dreams
Glen Greenwald
Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich was defeated in a Democratic primary by Rep. Marcy Kaptur after re-districting pitted the two long-term incumbents against each other. Kucinich’s fate was basically sealed when the new district contained far more of Kaptur’s district than his. His 18-year stint in the House will come to an end when the next Congress is installed at the beginning of 2013.
Establishment Democrats have long viewed Dennis Kucinich with a mixture of scorn, mockery and condescension. True to form, the establishment liberal journal American Prospect gave Kucinich a little kick on the way out, comparing his political views to the 1960s musical “Hair” (the Ohio loser talked about “Harmony and understanding”!), deriding him as “a favorite among lefty college kids and Birkenstock-wearers around the country,” and pronouncing him “among the wackiest members of Congress.” Yes, I said The American Prospect, not The Weekly Standard.
The Prospect article also praises as “great” a snide, derisive Washington Post piece which purports to “highlight some of the particularly bizarre facts about” Kucinich. Among those is the fact that “he introduced impeachment articles against former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Cheney for their roles in the Iraq war” and “proposed a Cabinet-level agency devoted to peace.” What a weirdo and a loser. Even more predictably, a team of four interns at The New Republic – the magazine that spent years crusading for the attack on Iraq, smearing Israel critics as anti-Semites, and defining its editorial mission as re-making the Democratic Party in the image of Joe Lieberman – denounced the anti-war Kucinich as “ludicrous,” citing most of the same accusations as the Prospect and the Post. [...]
So let’s recap the state of mental health in establishment Democratic circles: the President who claims (and exercises) the power to target American citizens for execution-by-CIA in total secrecy and with no charges — as well as those who dutifully follow him — are sane, sober and Serious, meriting great respect. By contrast, one of the very few members of Congress who stands up and vehemently objects to this most radical power — “The idea that the United States has the ability to summarily execute a US citizen ought to send chills racing up and down the spines of every person of conscience” — is a total wackjob, meriting patronizing mockery.
Both the Prospect and Post recite the trite case demonstrating Kucinich’s supposed weirdness. He’s friends with Shirley McLaine, who believes in reincarnation, and he once (according to McLaine) claimed to have an encounter with a UFO. Is any of that really any more strange than the litany of beliefs which the world’s major religions require? Is Barack Obama “wacky” because he claims to believe that Jesus turned water into wine, rose from the dead and will soon welcome him to heaven? Is Chuck Schumer bizarre because he seems to believe that there’s some big fatherly figure sitting in the sky who spewed fire and brimstone at those who broke the laws he sent down on some stones and now hovers over him judging his every move? Is Harry Reid a weirdo because he apparently venerates as divine the “visions” of a man who had dozens of wives, including some already married to other men?
Neither the Prospect nor the Post would ever dare mock as “wacky” the belief in invisible judgmental father-figures in the sky or that rendition of life-after-death gospel because those belief systems have been deemed acceptable by establishment circles. ”Wacky”, like its close cousin “crazy,” is a term of establishment derision exclusively reserved for those who deviate from such conventions. And that’s the point worth making here: the real reason anyone with D.C. Seriousness, including many establishment liberals, relished mocking Kucinich is because he dissented from the orthodoxies of the two political parties. That, by definition, makes one wacky and weird, even when — as is true for the Obama assassination powers and so many other bipartisan pieties — the actual wacky and crazy beliefs are those orthodoxies themselves (we’ve seen this repeatedly with those who stray from two-party normalcy). In reality, the actual crazies are those who fit comfortably within that two-party mentality and rarely challenge or deviate from it, while those who are sane, by definition, dissent from it (just today, the Super Serious Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, a prime co-sponsor of the indefinite detention bill passed late last year, called for a naval blockade of Iran). [...]
Read the rest of this article including updates here.
Glen Greenwald
Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich was defeated in a Democratic primary by Rep. Marcy Kaptur after re-districting pitted the two long-term incumbents against each other. Kucinich’s fate was basically sealed when the new district contained far more of Kaptur’s district than his. His 18-year stint in the House will come to an end when the next Congress is installed at the beginning of 2013.
The Prospect article also praises as “great” a snide, derisive Washington Post piece which purports to “highlight some of the particularly bizarre facts about” Kucinich. Among those is the fact that “he introduced impeachment articles against former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Cheney for their roles in the Iraq war” and “proposed a Cabinet-level agency devoted to peace.” What a weirdo and a loser. Even more predictably, a team of four interns at The New Republic – the magazine that spent years crusading for the attack on Iraq, smearing Israel critics as anti-Semites, and defining its editorial mission as re-making the Democratic Party in the image of Joe Lieberman – denounced the anti-war Kucinich as “ludicrous,” citing most of the same accusations as the Prospect and the Post. [...]
So let’s recap the state of mental health in establishment Democratic circles: the President who claims (and exercises) the power to target American citizens for execution-by-CIA in total secrecy and with no charges — as well as those who dutifully follow him — are sane, sober and Serious, meriting great respect. By contrast, one of the very few members of Congress who stands up and vehemently objects to this most radical power — “The idea that the United States has the ability to summarily execute a US citizen ought to send chills racing up and down the spines of every person of conscience” — is a total wackjob, meriting patronizing mockery.
Both the Prospect and Post recite the trite case demonstrating Kucinich’s supposed weirdness. He’s friends with Shirley McLaine, who believes in reincarnation, and he once (according to McLaine) claimed to have an encounter with a UFO. Is any of that really any more strange than the litany of beliefs which the world’s major religions require? Is Barack Obama “wacky” because he claims to believe that Jesus turned water into wine, rose from the dead and will soon welcome him to heaven? Is Chuck Schumer bizarre because he seems to believe that there’s some big fatherly figure sitting in the sky who spewed fire and brimstone at those who broke the laws he sent down on some stones and now hovers over him judging his every move? Is Harry Reid a weirdo because he apparently venerates as divine the “visions” of a man who had dozens of wives, including some already married to other men?
Neither the Prospect nor the Post would ever dare mock as “wacky” the belief in invisible judgmental father-figures in the sky or that rendition of life-after-death gospel because those belief systems have been deemed acceptable by establishment circles. ”Wacky”, like its close cousin “crazy,” is a term of establishment derision exclusively reserved for those who deviate from such conventions. And that’s the point worth making here: the real reason anyone with D.C. Seriousness, including many establishment liberals, relished mocking Kucinich is because he dissented from the orthodoxies of the two political parties. That, by definition, makes one wacky and weird, even when — as is true for the Obama assassination powers and so many other bipartisan pieties — the actual wacky and crazy beliefs are those orthodoxies themselves (we’ve seen this repeatedly with those who stray from two-party normalcy). In reality, the actual crazies are those who fit comfortably within that two-party mentality and rarely challenge or deviate from it, while those who are sane, by definition, dissent from it (just today, the Super Serious Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, a prime co-sponsor of the indefinite detention bill passed late last year, called for a naval blockade of Iran). [...]
Read the rest of this article including updates here.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
MT Army National Guard soldiers deploy to Iraq
KRTV
Soldiers assigned to the Montana Army National Guard's Detachment 1 Company C 1-189th General Support Aviation Battalion, an Army Aviation Medevac unit, departed on Tuesday to Iraq in support of Operation New Dawn.
A departure ceremony was held at the Army Aviation Support Facility (AASF) hangar in Helena, with scores of family members and friends on hand.
Approximately half of the 60 Soldiers left on Tuesday morning; the remaining Soldiers are scheduled to leave on Wednesday, June 1st.
Among those departing on Tuesday were brothers Terry and Mike Churchill, who have a unique story of camaraderie and brotherhood.
Their sister, Michelle Golder, has said goodbye to her brothers on several occasions, but never at the same time, as she did on Tuesday in Helena.
"It's been tough every time either one of them have deployed but this time is especially rough because I know they are flying together," said Golder.
Soldiers assigned to the Montana Army National Guard's Detachment 1 Company C 1-189th General Support Aviation Battalion, an Army Aviation Medevac unit, departed on Tuesday to Iraq in support of Operation New Dawn.
A departure ceremony was held at the Army Aviation Support Facility (AASF) hangar in Helena, with scores of family members and friends on hand.
Approximately half of the 60 Soldiers left on Tuesday morning; the remaining Soldiers are scheduled to leave on Wednesday, June 1st.
Among those departing on Tuesday were brothers Terry and Mike Churchill, who have a unique story of camaraderie and brotherhood.
Their sister, Michelle Golder, has said goodbye to her brothers on several occasions, but never at the same time, as she did on Tuesday in Helena.
"It's been tough every time either one of them have deployed but this time is especially rough because I know they are flying together," said Golder.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
NPR Confirms 3,000 Man CIA Army Conducts Operations In Pakistan
NPRAs Mark laid out earlier and earlier than that, there's a lot to pick over in Bob Woodward's new book, Obama's Wars. But while most of the article's describing it (NPR doesn't have a copy yet, or at least I haven't seen one) concentrate on the internal battles among the administration, the part that set off alarm bells for me was this paragraph from the Washington Post piece:
The CIA created, controls and pays for a clandestine 3,000-man paramilitary army of local Afghans, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams. Woodward describes these teams as elite, well-trained units that conduct highly sensitive covert operations into Pakistan as part of a stepped-up campaign against al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens there. (emphasis added)
Now it's been fairly obvious that the Pakistani government is either unwilling or unable to curb the flow of militants from Pakistan into Afghanistan, but this was news to me.
So I wandered over to my old shop at NPR, National Security, and after batting it around for a bit on what they've found out, here's what we've we can say at this point:
When NPR asked a US official familiar with operations in Afghanistan he confirmed the existence of these "Counter-terrorism Pursuit Teams" and said:
"This is one of the best Afghan fighting forces and it's made major contributions to stability and security."
Separately, an advisor to the US military also confirmed the existence of such a paramilitary force and that they were conducting some missions across the border in Pakistan.
Just to be clear, that's two different people speaking on condition of anonymity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
