Monday, May 21, 2012

#Iraq #Afghanistan : #NATO Vets ' I'm Sorry'

#Syria: Four #NATO Lies #NONATO

For eight months, Western leaders and some public media have been agitating for a war in Syria. The extremely serious accusations leveled against Assad intimidate those who question the justification for a new military intervention. But not everyone, because - on the initiative of Voltaire Network - some came to Syria to investigate for themselves and were able to measure the extent of NATO’s propaganda. Thierry Meyssan reports on the state of the media more

#Tripoli: #Nato #& #America BOMB Civilians - Cynthia McKinney from Tripoli with truth !

#Libya:#Putin - Who Gave #NATO The Right To Kill Gaddafi ?

#Libya: Ron Paul - #NATO & #America Murdering Babies - WARNING GRAPHIC

Friday, May 18, 2012

#Russia #China : #NATO Strengthens It's Position Against Russia And China!

NATO is strengthening its positions in Central Asia, for the first time inviting Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to its Chicago summit on May 20 and 21 in hopes of expanding partnerships with the countries. Now, NATO has only cargo transit deals in the region but is eyeing new military bases to compete with Russia and China.

The summit will deal with the alliance’s new policy on Central Asia. The above-mentioned countries were invited to the Afghanistan meeting as they provide transit for alliance forces in the country.

NATO openly speaks about its plans to deploy its troops in Central Asia and the invited countries are perfectly aware of it. Now they are thinking of how to get the most out of this situation, says political analyst and chief editor of web portal, Daniil Kislov:

"NATO’s so-called Northern Distribution Network involves mainly Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. I think those countries will be discussing the cost and benefits they can get from NATO in exchange for their transit services."

Formally, NATO invited the countries’ Presidents – Nursultan Nazarbayev, Almazbek Atambayev, Emomalii Rahmon and Islam Karimov - to Chicago, but they are sending their foreign minister instead. This is a certain political strategy. On the one hand, the US will not be blamed for cooperating with “dictators” while the presidents will not take part in a summit arranged by the alliance - a competitor, as the Central Asian nations are part of the CSTO [Collective Treaty Security Organization] and SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization] .

NATO’s aspirations may cause negative reactions from Moscow and Beijing, as they venture into traditional Russian and Chinese zones of influence, says the head of the Center for Strategic Forecast Sergey Grinyaev:

"NATO showed its interest in Central Asia already 10 year ago by deploying its bases in the region, and now plans to make this cooperation more formal to pave the way for Central Asian countries’ membership."

NATO seems to be irritated with the latest CSTO summit as it conflicts with its interests.

Experts believe that NATO’s intentions are not just security in Central Asia but also deterring Russia's and Chin's growing influence in the region. So let’s wait and see how Central Asia will react to Brussels’ proposals.

#Syria: EXCLUSIVE - Video #Assad On The West's Media War On Syria.

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

#Bahrain: #Panorama #BBC Report From 1956 (Video)

Published on 15 May 2012 by

مقابلة بانوراما مع المناضل عبدالعزيز الشملان ممثل هيئة الاتحاد الوطني بالبحرين سنة 1956م

BBC Panorama report on Bahrain and an interview with Abdulaziz Al-Shamlan member of the National Union Committee in 1956. There is also an appearance of Charles Belgrave at the end exemplifying what an imperious moron is like.
Thanks to Adam Curtis check his blog post and more background info:

#Syria #Damascus:Three terrorists, two Tunisians and a Libyan, say they have infiltrated Syria to trigger terrorist attacks (16.05.2012)

Damascus / Three terrorists, a Libyan and two Tunisian, admitted that they have infiltrated from the Turkish border to Syria to trigger attacks in coordination with the organization of al-Qaeda and the militia of the so-called "  free army ".

In a confession broadcast on Syrian television, the terrorist, Fahed Abdel Karim Saleh al-Freites, born in 1991 in Libya, confirmed their participation in "the Libyan revolution" and joined the brigade led by Abu Salim Bou Dajaneh, an
element of al-Qaeda.He stressed have been following the news of Arab revolutions broadcast by television, including Syrian, noting that he had found after following the chain of al-Jazeera and other religious channels that the Syrian regime is "an atheist regime and kills its people, "and that, as Muslims, to cope.He added: "one of my friends, named Mohammad and belonging to al-Qaeda, contacted me to go to Syria and fight with the Muslims there against the Syrian regime. After I went to Istanbul Turkey where I have contacted a person named Mohammad Abi then to enter illegally into Syria. "He said he arrived at Latakia and stayed two weeks, and "there I met Abi Mohammad who told me he is one of the elements of the free army and that it will be the link between us and the organization of al-Qaeda, "he is noted.For its part, the terrorist Osama Hazli Mukhtar, born in Tunisia in 1990, confessed to having participated in "the revolution in Libya", stressing that there were associations on the border between Libya and Tunisia who engage in the fighters to Libya.He said he followed what is happening in Syria, "which is why I liked to participate in the revolution in this country. Then I returned to Libya to work where my friend, Rida, contacted me to go with him to Syria, "he said. "After I took the road to Turkey where I contacted Abu Ahmad, who had secured our entry to Syria and had a relationship with a person named Abu Talha who drives a jihadi group in Syria and has linked al-Qaeda, "he said.He did note that he entered Syria through the mountains to go then to the city of Latakia "where Abi Ahmad will lead us to Abi Talha or army free in order to go to the city of Idleb, "he said.For its part, the terrorist al-Majdi Ben al-Ayachi Iyari, born in 1985 in Tunisia, spoke about his participation in "the Libyan revolution" and his desire to go to Syria to participate in "the revolution".He said he went one day to pray in the mosque of al-Nour located near his house and "after prayer Aba Sheikh Issa who gave lectures in mosques spoke of solidarity with the Syria attending a tragic situation. ""After the end of that conference I told Aba Sheikh Issa I'm willing to go to Syria to join the  free army. Then Aba Sheikh Issa  ontacted Ahmad Aba and asked me to go to Turkey to meet in order to enter Syria through the mountains, "he said.He added: "I went to a house in Latakia where there were other people in Tunisia, the first is named Mohammad al-Yaaqoubi, the second Bin Mohammad Thabet, and the third al-Suheil Saqasli" stressing "that Abu Ahmad came to the house and asked us to join the next day at a moudjahids brigade to fight with it, "he concluded.A. Chatta / R. Bittar

Comment : If any of this is true ,America and the West are behind it. We know through Wikileaks released documents the yanks have been trying  for regime change in Syria since 2006.

#Bahrain : Documentary - Shouting In The Dark.

Uploaded by on 4 Aug 2011

The story of the Arab revolution that was abandoned by the Arabs, forsaken by the West and forgotten by the world.

#Bahrain : LIVE Coverage - The Tortured Neurosurgeon.

Monday, May 14, 2012

#Iran War: #AIPAC Resolution Demanding War With Iran On House Floor Tomorrow

By M.J. Rosenberg

May 14, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- On Tuesday, the House of Representatives is slated to vote on a resolution designed to tie the president’s hands on Iran policy. The resolution, which is coming up under an expedited House procedure, was the centerpiece of AIPAC’s recent conference. In fact, 13,000 AIPAC delegates were dispatched to Capitol Hill, on the last day of the conference, with instructions to tell the senators and representatives whom they met that supporting this resolution was #1 on AIPAC’s election year agenda.

 Accordingly, it is not particularly surprising that the resolution is being rushed to the House floor for a vote, nor that it is expected to pass with very little opposition. Those voting “no” on this one will pay a price in campaign contributions (the ones they won’t receive) and, very likely, will be smeared as “anti-Israel.” That is how it works.

 Most of the language in H. Res.568 is unremarkable, the usual boilerplate (some of it factual) denouncing the Islamic Republic of Iran as a “state sponsor of terrorism” that is on the road to nuclear weapons capability.

The resolution’s overarching message is that Iran must be deterred from developing weapons, a position the White House (and our allies share). That is why the sanctions regime is in place and also why negotiations with Iran have resumed (the next session is May 23).

But the resolution does not stop with urging the president to use his authority to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. If it did, the resolution would be uncontroversial .

But there is also this: The House “urges the President to reaffirm the unacceptability of an Iran with nuclear-weapons capability and opposition to any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.”

Think about that.

The resolution, which almost surely will pass on Tuesday, is telling the president that he may not “rely on containment” in response to “the Iranian nuclear threat.”

Since the resolution, and U.S. policy itself defines Iranian possession of nuclear weapons as, ipso facto, a threat, Congress would be telling the president that any U.S. response to that threat other than war is unacceptable. In fact, it goes farther than that, not only ruling out containment of a nuclear armed Iran but also containment of an Iran that has a “nuclear weapons capability.”

That means that the only acceptable response to a nuclear armed or nuclear capable Iran is not containment but its opposite: war.

Any doubt that this is the intention of the backers of this approach was removed back in March, when the Senate was considering new Iran sanctions. Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Bob Casey (D-PA) offered their own “no containment” language to the sanctions bill and the Senate moved to quickly to accept it.

However, amending a bill once it is already on the Senate floor requires unanimous consent and one, and only one, senator objected. Rand Paul (R-KY) said that he would oppose the containment clause unless a provision was added specifying that “nothing in the Act shall be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of the use of force against Iran…”
That did it.

Neither the Democratic or Republican leadership would accept that (knowing that AIPAC wouldn’t) and Paul’s objection killed the bill, for the time being. In other words, the purpose of “no containment” language is precisely to make war virtually automatic. Because Paul’s provision would thwart that goal, it was unacceptable.

 So now it’s the House’s turn.

On the substance, the “no containment” idea is absurd and reckless.

Imagine if President Kennedy had been told by the Congress back in 1962 that if the Soviet Union placed missiles in Cuba, he would have no choice but to attack Cuba or the USSR. If it had, it is likely none of us would be around today.

Presidents need latitude to make decisions affecting matters of national security and, until now, all presidents have been afforded it, as provided for in the United States Constitution. But, in the case of Iran, the cheerleaders for war are trying to change the rules. They are doing that because they understand that after almost a decade of war, the last thing Americans want is another one.

No president is going to ask Congress to declare war, or even to authorize it. Making war against Iran automatic would eliminate that problem. (That is precisely Sen. Paul’s objection; he believes that backing into war is unconstitutional. He recalls the Gulf of Tonkin resolution of 1964 which led to ten years of war in Vietnam and 50,000 American dead without a declaration of war or even a specific authorization for war).

So why would the House vote for a resolution like this? The main reason is AIPAC. It may be the only lobby pushing for war with Iran but it also, by far, the most powerful foreign policy lobby and also the one that sees to it that those who play ball with it are rewarded and those who don’t are punished. AIPAC has been pushing war with Iran for a decade; it won’t stop until the missiles fly.

The other reason is that the resolution is non-binding. Voting for it is good politics but does not affect policy.

Believing that is a mistake. An overwhelming vote for “no containment” may not tie the president’s hands legally, but it does go a long way to tying his hands politically. After all, Congress will be expressing its clear (bipartisan) intent. A president cannot easily ignore that.

Moreover, the lobby is unlikely to stop with a non-binding resolution. Once the House and Senate have passed that, the lobby will look for an opportunity to make it binding. The goal is to take the president’s discretion away from him because this president is unlikely to choose war when there are other options available.

It is those options that the lobby is determined to block. It remains hell-bent for war.

POSTSCRIPT: It can’t hurt to call your House member at 202 225 3131 to tell him that you know about the vote on the AIPAC resolution and will be watching. Assuming the House does not duck for cover by passing this by voice vote, I will post the names of the brave representatives who vote “no.”

M.J. Rosenberg served as a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow with Media Matters Action Network, and prior to that worked on Capitol Hill for various Democratic members of the House and Senate for 15 years. He was also a Clinton political appointee at USAID. In the early 1980s, he was editor of AIPACs weekly newsletter Near East Report. From 1998-2009, he was director of policy at Israel Policy Forum.

Saturday, May 12, 2012

#Libya : Poison Prisons - Thousands jailed & tortured by Lybian rebels.

Published on 12 May 2012 by

Thousands of supporters of former dictator Muammar Gaddafi are still being held in Libyan prisons, with many of them tortured - according to a UN report. Many jails are secret and under the control of armed rebels who refuse to comply with the country's new government.

Lawrence Freeman from the Executive Intelligence Review Magazine talks to RT. He says that there's no sign Libya is getting closer to democracy.

Subscribe to RT!

Like us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter

RT (Russia Today) is a global news network broadcasting from Moscow and Washington studios. RT is the first news channel to break the 500 million YouTube views benchmark.

#IRAQ :#KualaLumpur - Bush Found Guilty Of War Crimes

By Yvonne Ridley

May 11, 2012 "
Information Clearing House" -- Kuala Lumpur -- IT’S OFFICIAL - George W Bush is a war criminal.

In what is the first ever conviction of its kind anywhere in the world, the former US President and seven key members of his administration were today (Friday) found guilty of war crimes.

Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia.

The trial held in Kuala Lumpur heard harrowing witness accounts from victims of torture who suffered at the hands of US soldiers and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They included testimony from British man Moazzam Begg, an ex-Guantanamo detainee and Iraqi woman Jameelah Abbas Hameedi who was tortured in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.

At the end of the week-long hearing, the five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered guilty verdicts against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their key legal advisors who were all convicted as war criminals for torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.

Full transcripts of the charges, witness statements and other relevant material will now be sent to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission is also asking that the names of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Yoo, Bybee, Addington and Haynes be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals for public record.

The tribunal is the initiative of Malaysia's retired Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who staunchly opposed the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

He sat through the entire hearing as it took personal statements and testimonies of three witnesses namely Abbas Abid, Moazzam Begg and Jameelah Hameedi. The tribunal also heard two other Statutory Declarations of Iraqi citizen Ali Shalal and Rahul Ahmed, another British citizen.

After the guilty verdict reached by five senior judges was delivered, Mahathir Mohamad said: “Powerful countries are getting away with murder.”

War crimes expert and lawyer Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law in America, was part of the prosecution team.

After the case he said: “This is the first conviction of these people anywhere in the world.”

While the hearing is regarded by some as being purely symbolic, human rights activist Boyle said he was hopeful that Bush and Co could soon find themselves facing similar trials elsewhere in the world.

“We tried three times to get Bush in Canada but were thwarted by the Canadian Government, then we scared Bush out of going to Switzerland. The Spanish attempt failed because of the government there and the same happened in Germany.”

Boyle then referenced the Nuremberg Charter which was used as the format for the tribunal when asked about the credibility of the initiative in Malaysia. He quoted: “Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit war crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any person in execution of such a plan.”

The US is subject to customary international law and to the Principles of the Nuremberg Charter said Boyle who also believes the week-long trial was “almost certainly” being monitored closely by both Pentagon and White House officials.

Professor Gurdial Singh Nijar, who headed the prosecution said: “The tribunal was very careful to adhere scrupulously to the regulations drawn up by the Nuremberg courts and the International Criminal Courts”.

He added that he was optimistic the tribunal would be followed up elsewhere in the world where “countries have a duty to try war criminals” and he cited the case of the former Chilean dictator Augustine Pinochet who was arrested in Britain to be extradited to Spain on charges of war crimes.

“Pinochet was only eight years out of his presidency when that happened.”

The Pinochet case was the first time that several European judges applied the principle of universal jurisdiction, declaring themselves competent to judge crimes committed by former heads of state, despite local amnesty laws.

Throughout the week the tribunal was packed with legal experts and law students as witnesses gave testimony and then cross examination by the defence led by lawyer Jason Kay Kit Leon.

The court heard how
· Abbas Abid, a 48-year-old engineer from Fallujah in Iraq had his fingernails removed by pliers.
· Ali Shalal was attached with bare electrical wires and electrocuted and hung from a wall.
· Moazzam Begg was beaten, hooded and put in solitary confinement.
· Jameelah was stripped and humiliated, and was used as a human shield whilst being transported by helicopter.

The witnesses also detailed how they have residual injuries till today.

Moazzam Begg, now working as a director for the London-based human rights group Cageprisoners said he was delighted with the verdict, but added: “When people talk about Nuremberg you have to remember those tried were all prosecuted after the war.

“Right now Guantanamo is still open, people are still being held there and are still being tortured there.”

In response to questions about the difference between the Bush and Obama Administrations, he added: “If President Bush was the President of extra-judicial torture then US President Barak Obama is the President of extra judicial killing through drone strikes. Our work has only just begun.”

The prosecution case rested on proving how the decision-makers at the highest level President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld, aided and abetted by the lawyers and the other commanders and CIA officials – all acted in concert. Torture was systematically applied and became an accepted norm.

According to the prosecution, the testimony of all the witnesses exposed a sustained perpetration of brutal, barbaric, cruel and dehumanising course of conduct against them.
These acts of crimes were applied cumulatively to inflict the worst possible pain and suffering, said lawyers.

The president of the tribunal Tan Sri Dato Lamin bin Haji Mohd Yunus Lamin, found that the prosecution had established beyond a “reasonable doubt that the accused persons, former President George Bush and his co-conspirators engaged in a web of instructions, memos, directives, legal advice and action that established a common plan and purpose, joint enterprise and/or conspiracy to commit the crimes of Torture and War Crimes, including and not limited to a common plan and purpose to commit the following crimes in relation to the “War on Terror” and the wars launched by the U.S. and others in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

President Lamin told a packed courtroom: “As a tribunal of conscience, the Tribunal is fully aware that its verdict is merely declaratory in nature. The tribunal has no power of enforcement, no power to impose any custodial sentence on any one or more of the 8 convicted persons. What we can do, under Article 31 of Chapter VI of Part 2 of the Charter is to recommend to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission to submit this finding of conviction by the Tribunal, together with a record of these proceedings, to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

“The Tribunal also recommends to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission that the names of all the 8 convicted persons be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and be publicised accordingly.

“The Tribunal recommends to the War Crimes Commission to give the widest international publicity to this conviction and grant of reparations, as these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon nations to institute prosecutions if any of these Accused persons may enter their jurisdictions”.

British journalist Yvonne Ridley is also a patron of Cageprisoners

Thursday, May 10, 2012

#CIA : #Zubaydah - CIA Destroyed Videos Showed US Torture Victim ‘Vomiting and Screaming’

92 Hours of Secret Video 'Very Disturbing'

by Jason Ditz, May 09, 2012
New information on the torture of detainees in custody at CIA “black sites” has come to light, revealing that the videotaped torture of Abu Zubaydah, tapes destroyed in 2005 by the CIA, showed Zubaydah “vomiting and screaming” after being stripped naked and waterboarded.

CIA legal counsel John Rizzo termed the videos “very disturbing” but insisted that all of the torture was “legal” at the time and that the videos were “extraordinarily hard to watch.”

Jose Rodriguez, the author of a new book defending the torture of suspects as a proud moment in American history, insisted that he was perfectly within his rights to order all of the videos of the torture to be destroyed. He insisted that the destruction was vital because the “heat from destroying the tapes is nothing compared to what it would be if the tapes got into the public domain.”

Bush Administration officials repeatedly defended the torture, insisting that secret memos agreed that the policy was legal. The Obama Administration has refused to investigate the abuse.

Saturday, May 5, 2012

#MEXICO :Nine bodies found hanged from bridge and 14 heads decapitated and dumped along U.S. border in Mexico


The bodies of 23 people have been found hanging from a bridge or decapitated and dumped along the border city of Nuevo Laredo, where drug cartels are fighting a bloody and escalating turf war.

Authorities found nine of the victims, including four women, hanging from an overpass leading to a main highway, said a Tamaulipas state official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to provide information on the case.
Hours later, police found 14 human heads inside coolers outside city hall along with a threatening note. The 14 bodies were found in black plastic bags inside a car abandoned near an international bridge, the official said.
Gruesome: Nine bodies have been found hanging from a bridge in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, which borders Texas. The four women and five men are suspected members of Los Zetas drugs cartel
Gruesome: Nine bodies have been found hanging from a bridge in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, which borders Texas. The four women and five men are suspected members of Los Zetas drugs cartel
The official didn't release the contents of the note, or give a motive for the killings.
But the city across the border from Laredo, Texas has recently been torn by a renewed turf war between the Zetas cartel, a gang of former Mexican special-forces soldiers, and the powerful Sinaloa cartel, which has joined forces with the Gulf cartel, former allies of the Zetas.


Local media published photos of the nine bloodied bodies, some with duct tape wrapped around their faces, hanging from the overpass along with a message threatening the Gulf cartel.
Interior Secretary Alejandro Poire met with Tamaulipas Gov. Egidio Torre Cantu on Friday and agreed to send more federal forces to the state, according to a statement from Poire's office.
Horrifying: The bodies showed signs of beating and torture. Authorities also found 14 decapitated heads nearby
Horrifying: The bodies showed signs of beating and torture. Authorities also found 14 decapitated heads nearby

Nuevo Laredo was the site of a 2003 dispute between the Sinaloa and Gulf cartels that set off a wave of violence that has left thousands dead and spread brutal violence across Mexico.
That year, then-Gulf cartel leader Osiel Cardenas was arrested and accused drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, sensing weakness , tried to move in on Nuevo Laredo, unleashing a bloody battle.

The city of tree-covered plazas and hacienda-style restaurants was transformed as the Zetas, then working as enforcers for the Gulf cartel, and Sinaloa cartel fighters waged battles with guns and grenades in broad daylight.

Killings and police corruption became so brazen that then President Vicente Fox was forced to send in hundreds of troops and federal agents, and the only man brave enough to take the job of police chief was gunned down hours after he was sworn in.
The Zetas won that fight and have since ruled the city with fear, threatening police, reporters and city officials and extorting money from businesses.
They broke off their alliance with the Gulf cartel in 2010, worsening the violence across northeast Mexico.

But last month, 14 mutilated bodies were found in a vehicle left in the city center.
Some media outlets reported that the Sinaloa cartel took responsibility for those bodies and in a message allegedly signed by its leader, Guzman, said the group was now back in Nuevo Laredo 'to clean' the city.
More than 50,000 people have been killed since the Mexican government began a crackdown on narco-trafficking in 2006.

Read more:

#Russia #Putin 's Speech #Censored In Some Western Countries WHY ? Vladimir Putin Exposed The Illuminati / NWO, Naming the UN, NATO, EU and USA


#Canada : The Canadian #Holocaust - This video” Winds of Change” is dedicated to the passing of William Combes who fought for justice for Aboriginal Children and all First Nations people across North America alongside Kevin Annett.

#Canada : The Canadian #Holocaust - Hidden From History - Native Genocide

#Libya #France :Corrupt #Sarkozy Is The Architect Of French Decline And Humiliation

Nicolas Sarkozy of France, Tony Blair of England, John Howard of Australia, and Stephen Harper of Canada were all faithful followers of Bush. Tony Blair and John Howard have joined Bush in the dustbin of history. Harper had a change of heart and has knelt on his knees before China and apologized for his past arrogant attitude and deeds. This can help Canada in the most difficult period for the West.

By Dr. Sawraj Singh

Nicolas Sarkozy, the sitting president of France, has lost the first round of the presidential elections, and is trailing behind Francois Hollande as the presidential election now goes into the final stage. Sarkozy has already lost moral and ethical credibility by the recent exposure of having accepted a £42 million pounds bribe from Muammar Gaddafi to fund his 2007 presidential campaign.

Sarkozy is the last player of the reactionary, racist, arrogant, and opportunist gang of Bush, which now seems ready to fall and join his comrades in the garbage can of history. Sarkozy is the worst of the lot because he has tarnished the image of France more than anyone else in the gang. He completely reversed the historical course of France.

France can be called the conscience of Europe. It was the first country in Europe to oppose and resist the American domination of Europe. Charles de Gaulle stood up to the American arrogance and hegemony. He was the architect and advocate of the “Europe for Europeans” policy. France has been the seat of the slogan “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite” (Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity). However, Sarkozy gave the new slogan of “American slavery, racism, discrimination, opportunism, and exploitation.”
Why did Sarkozy reverse the historical and traditional role of France? I feel there can be two reasons for this. The first, just like Bush, he is a man of below average intelligence. The second, he hails from East Europe, a region notorious for developing a slavish mentality and adulation for America. East Europe, for all practical purposes, became a neo-colony of America.

Besides being a boot-licker of America and promoter of racist, anti-Islamic and anti-Third world policies, Sarkozy actively joined America’s aggressive wars in countries like Libya and Syria. Sarkozy actively worked to make this world more unfair, more unjust, and more unequal. By licking American shoes, he tried to glorify the slavish mentality.

Sarkozy’s defeat will not only help to remove an ugly stain from France’s face, but may also help France to regain its lost glory and prestige. It may also help to unite Europe against the jingoist, chauvinistic, and arrogant American policies which are responsible for bringing the world closer to a most destructive Third World War. His defeat may help Europe to bring sanity and restraint into the western alliance. Traditionally, France has helped to moderate the arrogant, aggressive, rash and crude American policies.

The European leaders like de Gaulle and European thinkers like Bertrand Russell believed that America lacked the culture and refineness of Europe. Therefore, eventually American leadership could lead the West to disaster and America needs to be restrained. President Bush represented the height of American arrogance and ignorance, racism, jingoism, and adventurism. His peons Tony Blair, John Howard, Stephen Harper, and Sarkozy glorified his crudeness and rusticity. Stephen Harper, by practically breaking away from the gang, did the right thing for himself and Canada.

We sincerely hope that the French people send Sarkozy to the garbage can and the dust bin of history where Bush, Blair, and Howard are eagerly awaiting him. This will not only be good for France, but also for Europe and the whole world.

Dr. Sawraj Singh, MD F.I.C.S. is the Chairman of the Washington State Network for Human Rights and Chairman of the Central Washington Coalition for Social Justice. He can be reached at

#France - #Lybia Nuclear Cooperation Memo (FR-LY)


#France - #Lybia Nuclear Cooperation Memo (FR-LY)


Friday, May 4, 2012

#KBR #Guantanamo :UK Police State - Fourteen rival consortiums are bidding for the contracts offered by the West Midlands and Surrey forces

Dozens of people involved in Britain's biggest private-sector policing contract have been ordered to sign "anti-corruption" agreements amid concerns about senior officers retiring and then immediately rejoining on lucrative deals with security firms.
Surrey Chief Constable Lynne Owens – the head of one of the forces involved in the £1.5bn tender – said she found it "quite distasteful" that officers could retire and shift to similar jobs in the private sector almost overnight, but that she was unable to prevent it.

Fourteen rival consortiums are bidding for the contracts offered by the West Midlands and Surrey forces. They include some of the world's biggest security companies, including the huge US multinational KBR which helped to build the Guantanamo Bay detention centre.

Previous multimillion-pound deals with Cleveland Police have seen officers who were involved in planning the project move to the private sector company that won the bidding.

The forces say they want any private sector involvement to transform the way the police does its business, but it has prompted protests from rank-and-file officers and public sector unions because of concerns over accountability and job cuts.
Officers and officials working on the huge bids have had to sign documents detailing the business interests and investments of both themselves and their families.

"I can't stop someone retiring from the police service and choosing to move employment somewhere else," Ms Owens told The Independent. "What I can do is deal with existing relationships." Her comments come amid concern about potential conflicts of interest as private sector companies look to ex-police officers for help in securing contracts as forces grapple with the problem of 20 per cent budget cuts.

Stuart Lister, a senior lecturer in criminal justice at Leeds University, said the private security industry had a tradition of recruiting from the ranks of retired police. "This is about enhancing the credibility of private security companies but also about accessing the very wide portfolio of contacts that these senior police officers will have."

Surrey declined to say who had expressed interest in bidding, but they are likely to include companies such as G4S and Steria which attended a bidders' conference in March and already have contracts with other forces.

The British arm of KBR – which said it already supplied support services to UK police forces – is the only company so far to publicly declare it has joined the bidding process.