Archive for October 2007
Missing Nukes: Treason of the Highest Order
Missing Nukes: Treason of the Highest Orderby Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya |
|
|
Global Research, October 29, 2007 |
|
|
Missing Nukes on August 29-30, 2007 According to a wide range of reports, several nuclear bombs were “lost” for 36 hours after taking off August 29/30, 2007 on a “cross-country journey” across the U.S., from U.S.A.F Base Minot in North Dakota to U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale in Louisiana. [1] Reportedly, in total there were six W80-1 nuclear warheads armed on AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs) that were “lost.” [2] The story was first reported by the Military Times, after military servicemen leaked the story. It is also worth noting that on August 27, 2007, just days before the “lost” nukes incident, three B-52 Bombers were performing special missions under the direct authorization of General Moseley, the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force. [3] The exercise was reported as being an aerial information and image gathering mission. The base at Minot is also home of the 91st Space Wings, a unit under the command of Air Force Space Command (AFSPC).According to official reports, the U.S. Air Force pilots did not know that they were carrying weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Once in Louisiana, they also left the nuclear weapons unsecured on the runway for several hours. [4] U.S. Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Plans, and Requirements, Major-General Richard Y. Newton III commented on the incident, saying there was an “unprecedented” series of procedural errors, which revealed “an erosion of adherence to weapons-handling standards” [5]These statements are misleading. The lax security was not the result of procedural negligence within the U.S. Air Force, but rather the consequence of a deliberate tampering of these procedures. If a soldier, marine, airman, or sailor were even to be issued a rifle and rifle magazine — weaponry of a far lesser significance, danger, and cost — there is a strict signing and accountability process that involves a chain of command and paperwork. This is part of the set of military checks and balances used by all the services within the U.S. Armed Forces. Military servicemen qualified to speak on the subject will confirm that there is a stringent nuclear weapons handling procedure. There is a rigorous, almost inflexible, chain of command in regards to the handling of nuclear weapons and not just any soldier, sailor, airman, or marine is allowed to handle nuclear weapons. Only servicemen specialized in specific handling and loading procedures, are perm certified to handle, access and load nuclear warheads. Every service personnel that moves or even touches these weapons must sign a tracking paper and has total accountability for their movement. There is good reason for the paperwork behind moving these weapons. The military officers that order the movement of nuclear weapons, including base commanders, must also fill out paper forms.In other words, unauthorized removal of nuclear weapons would be virtually impossible to accomplish unless the chain of command were bypassed, involving, in this case, the deliberate tampering of the paperwork and tracking procedures. The strategic bombers that carried the nuclear weapons also could not fly with their loaded nuclear weaponry without the authorization of senior military officials and the base commander. The go-ahead authorization of senior military officials must be transmitted to the servicemen that upload the nuclear weapons. Without this authorization no flights can take place. In the case of the missing nukes, orders were given and flight permission was granted. Once again, any competent and eligible U.S. Air Force member can certify that this is the standard procedure. There are two important questions to be answered in relation to the “lost” nukes incident: 1. Who gave the order to arm the W80-1 thermonuclear warheads on the AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs)? At what level in the military hierarchy did this order originate? How was the order transmitted down the command chain? 2. If this was not a procedural error, what was the underlying military-political objective sought by those who gave the orders?The Impossibility of “Losing” Nuclear Weapons As Robert Stormer, a former U.S. lieutenant-commander in the U.S. Navy, has commented: “Press reports initially cited the Air Force mistake of flying nuclear weapons over the United States in violation of Air Force standing orders and international treaties, while completely missing the more important major issues, such as how six nuclear cruise missiles got loose to begin with.” [6]Stormer also makes a key point, which is not exactly a secret: “There is a strict chain of custody for all such weapons. Nuclear weapons handling is spelled out in great detail in Air Force regulations, to the credit of that service. Every person who orders the movement of these weapons, handles them, breaks seals or moves any nuclear weapon must sign off for tracking purposes.” [7]Stormer continues:
Stormer unwraps the whole Pentagon cover-up by pointing out some logical facts and military procedures. First he reveals that: “All security forces assigned [to handle and protect nuclear weapons] are authorized to use deadly force to protect the weapons from any threat [including would-be thieves].” [9] He then points out a physical reality that can not be shrugged aside: “Nor does anyone quickly move a 1-ton cruise missile — or forget about six of them, as reported by some news outlets, especially cruise missiles loaded with high explosives.”He further explains another physical and procedural reality about nuclear weapons assembly:“The United States also does not transport nuclear weapons meant for elimination attached to their launch vehicles under the wings of a combat aircraft. The procedure is to separate the warhead from the missile, encase the warhead and transport it by military cargo aircraft to a repository — not an operational bomber base that just happens to be the staging area for Middle Eastern operations.” [10] This last point raises the question of what were the nuclear weapons meant for? In this context, Stomrer puts forth the following list of important questions to which he demands an answer: 1. Why, and for what ostensible purpose, were these nuclear weapons taken to Barksdale? The Nuclear Weapons Surety Program is a joint program between the U.S. Department of Defence and the U.S. Department of Energy. The National Security Agency (NSA) is also involved as well as other U.S. federal government agencies. The Nuclear Weapons System Safety Program is part of this program, which involves a monitoring and safeguards regime for the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The Nuclear Weapons Security Standard falls under the Nuclear Weapons Surety Program and is in place to disallow any “unauthorized access to nuclear weapons; prevent damage or sabotage to nuclear weapons; prevent loss of custody; and prevent, to the maximum extent possible, radiological contamination caused by unauthorized acts.” Under this or these safeguards system there also exists a rigorous control of use scheme, which is tied to the military chain of command and the White House.“Command and Control (C2)” and “Use Control”“Use control” is a set of security measures designed to prevent unauthorized access to nuclear weapons. These measures involve weapons design features, operational procedures, security, and system safety rules. “Command and Control” or “C2” involves the Office of the President of the United States of America. C2 is an established line of command, which is tied to the White House. Without it, nuclear weapons cannot be deployed or armed as they were in U.S.A.F. Base Minot. It is these two control elements that establish the basis of authorization through which “absolute control of nuclear weapons” is maintained “at all times.” In addition to the checks and balances in place in regards to handling nuclear weapons, the Defence Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and its partners manually and electronically inspect and monitor all U.S. nuclear weapons through the Nuclear Weapon Status Information Systems.More Unanswered Questions: What Happened to the Computerized Tracking System? Mysterious Deaths in the United States Air Force: Whitewash and Cover-up Several military personnel died under mysterious circumstances shortly before and after the incident. There are now questions regarding the fate of these individuals in the U.S. Air Force who could have had relationships in one way or another to the incident or possibly have been directly involved. It is also necessary to state that there is no proof that these deaths are linked to the August flight from Minot to Barksdale in question.Citizens for Legitimate Government has pointed towards the involvement of the U.S. Air Force in a cover-up and has linked several deaths of U.S. servicemen to the incident. Lori Price has also stated for Citizens for a Legitimate Government that “you need about fourteen signatures to get an armed nuke on a B-52.”Based on several news sources, including the U.S. military, we provide below a detailed review of these mysterious and untimely deaths of U.S. servicemen. Todd Blue
John Frueh
Captain Frueh belonged to the U.S.A.F. Special Operations Command. U.S.A.F. Special Operations Command has its headquarters in Hurlburt Field, Florida and is one of nine major Air Force commands. It is also the U.S. Air Force’s component of U.S. Special Operations Command, a unified command located at MacDill Air Force Base, which is also in Florida. The force provides special operations forces for worldwide deployment and assignment to regional unified commands, such as CENTCOM. Its missions include conduct of global special operations. These operations — and this is where careful attention should be paid — range from “precision application of firepower, such as nuclear weapons,” to infiltration, exfiltration (the removal of “devices,” supplies, spies, special agents, or units from enemy territory), re-supply and refuelling of special operational elements. In Captain Frueh’s case his death is questionable too. The U.S. Air Force would not let a missing persons’ investigation go forward by the police without conducting its own investigation. Usually the different service branches of the U.S. military would investigate for missing servicemen, to see if these individuals are Absent Without Authorized Leave (AWAL) or have deserted, before an individual’s case is handed over to the police. Clint Huff, Linda Huff, and Weston Kissel Another military weatherman, along with his wife, also died after August 30, 2007. Senior Airman Clint Huff, belonging to the 26th Operational Weather Squadron and his wife Linda Huff died in a motorcycle accident on September 15, 2007. [18] The husband and wife fatality happened on Shreveport-Blanchard Highway, near U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale, when according to the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s Officer a Pontiac Aztec, a medium-sized SUV, initiated a left turn at the same time that the couple attempted to pass on a no passing zone and collided. [19]
Reprimands, Replacements and Reassignments in the U.S.A.F. Chain of Command Senior officers, including three colonels and a lieutenant-colonel, are among seventy personnel that will reportedly be disciplined for negligence and for allowing a B-52H Stratofortress Bomber to fly across the U.S. carrying six nuclear-armed cruise missiles that should never have been loaded under its wings. [23] According to the Military Times, George W. Bush Jr. had been swiftly informed. This is a lockstep procedure. This illustrates the importance tied to the authorization needed for handling nuclear weapons. This is part of a two-way process in regards to authorization from the White House.The commander of the 5th Munitions Squadron and the commander of the 5th Bomb Wing, Colonel Bruce Emig, have been replaced along with a series of other senior officers. This implies that the U.S. Air Force chain of command is directly involved in this event. None of these senior officers have been authorized to speak or make statements, according to U.S. military sources. Will any of these officers receive lucrative departure packages? Have they been reassigned? More generally, the nature of the reprimands directed against senior officers involved has not been fully disclosed. The “memory” of the incident is being erased through a reorganization of the ranks and a purge at U.S.A.F. Base Minot. The streamlining of the chain of command as well as the mysterious deaths of personnel who could have been involved in the incident, raise a series of far-reaching questions. There are several important issues regarding the senior officers’ chain of command at Minot, which will be addressed in this article. Once again, the most important questions in regards to the missing nukes are: Who gave the orders and authorization for the operation and what where the underlying objectives of loading armed nuclear missiles? Other Mysterious Deaths: Was the Missing Nukes Incident connected to US War Plans directed against Iran? Charles D. Riechers
A U.S. Air Force official, Charles D. Riechers, has been found dead on October 14, 2007. [24] Riechers was a retired Air Force officer and master navigator specializing in electronic warfare. He was a member of the Senior Executive Service of the U.S. Air Force, and was the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition and Management. A description of his duties includes “providing sound expert advice and guidance on acquisition and procurement policies, as well as formulating, reviewing and, as assigned, execution of plans, programs and policies relating to organization, function, operation and improvement of the Air Force’s acquisition system.” He apparently killed himself by running his car’s engine inside his suburban garage in Virginia. The death of Charles D. Riechers has been casually linked by The Washington Post to his involvement in fraudulent activities and embezzlement. [25] The Washington Post reported that the Air Force had asked defense contractor, Commonwealth Research Institute (C.R.I.), to give him a job with no known duties while he waited for official clearance for his promoted rank in the Pentagon. Riechers is quoted as saying: “I really didn’t do anything for C.R.I.,” and “I [still] got a paycheck from them.” The question, of course, was whether the contractor might expect favours in return upon his assignment to the Pentagon last January. [26] A mysterious suicide letter expressing shame was subsequently reported; the letter was reportedly from a man who had already admitted without shame that he was receiving money for doing nothing. This was known to the U.S. Senate, which had approved his promotion. In a report featured by Pravda, Russian Intelligence analysts have said that the reported suicide of Charles D. Riechers was a cover-up and that he was murdered because of his involvement in the controversial flight of nuclear weapons over the continental United States. Pravda reports that “Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today that American War Leaders have ‘suicided’ [sic] one of their Top US Air Force Officials Charles D. Riechers as the rift growing between the U.S. War Leaders and their Top Military Officers over a nuclear attack on Iran appears to be nearing open warfare.” [27] According to the Pravda report, the incident was linked to an operation to smuggle nuclear weapons away from the U.S. military in connection to launching a war against Iran.The Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI), a registered non-profit organization is a subsidiary of Concurrent Technologies, which is registered with the IRS as a tax-exempt charity, which is run by Daniel Richard DeVos. Devos is also an associate of John P. Murtha, who was investigated by the F.B.I. for his Saudi links. Certainly the ties of the Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI), a non-profit organization working for the Pentagon, are questionable and the organization could be a front for internal operations that bypass most military personnel. The case appears to be part of an internal operation that was being kept a secret from most of the U.S. military, but what for? Russell E. Dougherty
Military sources have reported that a B-52H Stratofortress was flown to Wichita so that Boeing’s engineers could take a look in order to make adjustments to the war planes for a new military program. [31] Nothing has been reported about any private meetings between President Bush Jr. or any of his presidential staff and the personnel from Minot. However, reports have been made of meetings between military families and the U.S. President in his office on Air Force One.
General Moseley, the Air Force Chief of Staff, had previously visited Minot on March 14-15, 2007, a month before Minot airmen went to Wichita. [32] If a secret mission was being prepared, these events could have played a role in the recruiting phases for an important internal special operation. Following their recruitment, Minot servicemen could have symbolically met General Moseley or White House officials to understand that the mission was being sanctioned by the highest ranks and offices in the United States. Orders had to Come from the Top: Treason of the Highest Order Orders had to come from higher up.The operation would not have been possible without the involvement of more than one individual in the highest ranks of the U.S. Air Force command structure and the Pentagon.The only way to bypass these separate chains of command is “to be above them” (from higher up), as well as have the possibility of directly overseeing their implementation. These orders would then have been communicated to lower levels in the US Air Force command chain in different locations, to allow for a so-called “oversight” to proceed. The alternative to this is “an alternative chain of command,” although this also needs someone in the highest ranks of office to organize and oversee.The post given to Riechers was politically motivated, given his track record in the U.S. Air Force. Riechers had been in a position of responsibility in the U.S. Air Force special operational support activities; something he had in common with Russell Dougherty, the former SAC commander. He would have been one of the best suited individuals for making arrangements in the case of an alternative command structure for a secretive nuclear operation. Moreover, he already had a record of corrupt behaviour through his involvement with the Commonwealth Research Institute. The possible involvement of U.S. Air Force weathermen and special operatives raises many questions as to what exactly was the objective of making the nuclear weapons disappear. [33]The InvestigationThe U.S. Air Force has publicly stated that it has made a “mistake,” which is very unusual and almost unprecedented for a military organization that tries to continually assure the American public of their safety. The fact that seventy or more military personnel have been punished in the case of the “lost” nuclear weapons does not mean, however, that the senior commanding officers responsible for having carried out the special operation will be identified and punished. Quite the opposite. The investigation could indeed result in a camouflage of the chain of command, where lower-ranking military personnel are accused and court-martialed, with a view to ultimately protecting those in high office who have committed an act of treason. The series of deaths mentioned above, may have no ties whatsoever with the the August flight in question from Minot to Barksdale, but the issues of command, monitoring, and authorization cannot be overlooked or ignored. The American people have before them a case of treason that involves the highest offices of government and most probably the offices of the President and the Vice-President.Once again, the “C2” process involves the Office of the President and Commander-in-Chief. It is an established line of command, without which nuclear weapons could not have been deployed or armed as they were in U.S.A.F. Base Minot. It is this command element that establishes the basis of authorization through which “absolute control of nuclear weapons” is maintained “at all times.” What adds intrigue to an understanding of the missing nukes, are the international events and war games taking place just after the “lost” nuclear weapons incident, not to mention the President’s ongoing threats to attack Iran with nuclear weapons and Vice President Cheney’s repeated warnings that a second large scale terrorist attack on America is under preparation, with the support of Iran. In the U.S., under the Vigilant Shield 2008 war games (initiated in September, 2007) and the TOPOFF anti-terrorism exercises, some form of nuclear terrorist attack on American soil had been envisaged. The roles of Russia and China had also been contemplated. The latter would be “a likely scenario” had the U.S. attacked Iran and as a result Russia and China had decided to intervene. [34] Under Vigilant Shield 2007, held in 2006, the possibility of a nuclear war with Iran’s allies, Russia and China, had been contemplated in the war games scenario. The Kremlin has responded by holding its own war games.[35] An unveiled threat to trigger World War Three has been the response of George W. Bush Jr. to Russia’s statements warning that a U.S. sponsored war with Iran, could result in an escalating World War III scenario. The six nuclear warheads were not meant for use in theatre operations against Iran. This is obvious because if they were then they would have been deployed via the proper procedural routes without the need to hide anything. Besides, there are already theatre-level nuclear weapons ready and armed in Europe and the Middle East for any possible Middle Eastern mission. There was something more to the incident. It is also worth noting that the Israelis launched an attack on an alleged Syrian nuclear facility that both Tel Aviv and the White House claim was constructed with the assistance of North Korea. This event has been used, through official statements and media disinformation, to draw a Syria-Iran-North Korea nuclear proliferation axis. [36] In regards to the case of the missing nuclear weapons, weathermen and military personnel with an expertise in space and missile components were involved. The incident took place during a time when the U.S. missile shield projects in Eastern Europe and Eastern Asia, directed against Russia and China, were raising international tensions and alarms. On October 23, 2007, President Bush Jr. stated: “The need for missile defence in Europe is real and I believe it’s urgent.” [37] Nuclear warfare, the militarization of space, and “the missile shield” are interrelated military processes. The overtones of Nuclear Primacy are hanging in the air. One of the goals of the U.S. military has been to effectively shield itself from a potential Russian or potential Russian and Chinese nuclear response to a nuclear “First Strike” from the U.S. military. [38] The militarization of space is also deeply linked to this military project. Like their advanced knowledge about the U.S. missile shield project, Russian and Chinese officials have got wind of these ambitions and are fully aware of what the U.S. intends to do. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is an independent writer based in Ottawa specializing in Middle Eastern affair. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). |
|
Airman 1st Class Todd Blue went on leave days after the nuclear weapons were “lost.” Blue died under questionable timing while on leave, visiting his family in Wytheville, Virginia at the age of 20 on September 10, 2007. He was a response force member assigned to the 5th Security Forces Squadron. What does this mean?Airman Todd Blue occupied a key position in weapons systems security at Minot. [14] At Minot U.S.A.F. Base the 5th Security Forces Squadron to which he belonged was responsible for base entry requirements and a particular section, the Weapons System Security section, was responsible for preventing the unauthorized removal of military property. The latter is responsible for security of all priority resources, meaning the security of nuclear weapons. In other words not only did the 5th Security Forces Squadron keep eyes on what entered and left Minot, but they kept an eye on and monitored the nuclear weapons.
U.S. Air Force Captain John Frueh is another serviceman who could have been indirectly connected to the “lost” nuclear weapons. He was reported as being last seen with a GPS device, camera, and camcorder being carried with him in a backpack. Local police in Oregon and the F.B.I. seemed to be looking for him for days. His family also felt that something bad had happened to him.On September 8, 2007 Captain Frueh was found dead in Washington State, near his abandoned rental car, after the Portland Police Department contacted the Skamania County Sheriff’s Officer. [15] The last time he spoke with his family was August 30, 2007. He had arrived from Florida to attend a wedding that he never showed up at. The Oregonian reported that “Authorities in Portland found no activity on his credit or bank cards since [Frueh] was last seen (…) [and that] the last call from his cell phone was made at 12:28 p.m. [August 30, 2007] from Mill Plain Boulevard and Interstate 205 in Vancouver [Washington State].” [16]His background was in meteorology and the study of the atmosphere and weather. He was also reported to be a U.S. Air Force pararescue officer. [17] He was also a major-select candidate, which means he was selected for a promotion as a U.S. Air Force major, but was not officially promoted.
First-Lieutenant Weston Kissel, a B-52H Stratofortress Bomber pilot, also died in a reported Tennessee motorcycle accident. This was while he was on leave in, less than two months from the nuclear B-52 flights, on July 17, 2007. [20] His death came after another single-vehicle accident by another Minot serviceman, Senior Airman Adam Barrs. [21]Adam Barrs and Stephen Garrett
Senior Airman Barrs died as a passenger in a vehicle being driven by Airman 1st Class Stephen Garrett, also from Minot. Garrett, also belongs to the 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron.The death of Barrs was reported as being part of a single-vehicle car accident. Associated Press reports state that “[Minot] Base officials say 20-year-old Barrs was a passenger in a vehicle that failed to negotiate a curve, hit an approach, hit a tree and started on fire late Tuesday [July 3, 2007] night.” [22] Barrs was pronounced dead on the scene of the accident, while Garrett was taken the hospital with no updates released by the U.S. Air Force. Adam Barrs also belonged to the 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, where he was responsible for the maintenance and securing of the electronic communicational and navigation mission systems aboard the B-52H Stratofortresses on base. The 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron is also one of the units that are responsible for loading and unloading weaponry onto the B-52H Stratofortresses. The deaths of Kissel and Barrs could be dismissed as irrelevant because they occurred prior to the incident. However, Barrs and Kissel could have been in one way or another connected to the advanced planning of the special operation, prior to the incident (special operations are not planned in a few days and may take months and even longer). There is, of course, no proof and only an independent investigation will be able to reveal whether these deaths are connected to the incident. If there was an internal and secretive operation bypassing most military personnel, a few men in key positions would have to have been involved over a period of time prior to the August 29/30, 2007 flight. Senior Airman Barrs, due to his expertise in communication and navigational systems, could potentially have been involved in the preparations that would have allowed the nuclear weapons to escape detection by military surveillance and be ready for takeoff.
More than a month before the death of Riechers, General Russell Elliot Dougherty, a retired flag officer, was also reported to have died on September 7, 2007 at his home in Falcon Landing military retirement community in Potomac Falls located in Arlington, Virginia. [28] He once was one of the most senior individuals responsible for the nuclear arsenal of the U.S. military and also the former commander of Strategic Air Command (SAC) and director of the Joint Strategic Target Planning Staff, which identified nuclear targets worldwide amongst its responsibilities. At Minot next to his obituary was a military information notice on suicide, telling servicepersons what the signs of suicide are. [29] Russell Dougherty in the course of his military career in the U.S. Air Force had dealt with the issues pertaining to Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), full spectrum dominance, how to defeat the enemy and avoid a nuclear war, other uses for nuclear weaponry, Nuclear Primacy for the U.S., and tackling the effects of the wind and weather — due to their unpredictable natures — on the use of nuclear weapons. The fact that the nuclear warheads were attached to the nuclear cruise missiles could mean that someone wanted to take the weapons in one step or to use them right away.
America’s Armageddonites
By : Jon Basil Utley
Utopian fantasies have long transfixed the human race. Yet today a much rarer fantasy has become popular in the United States. Millions of Americans, the richest people in history, have a death wish. They are the new “Armageddonites,” fundamentalist evangelicals who have moved from forecasting Armageddon to actually trying to bring it about.
Most journalists find it difficult to take seriously that tens of millions of Americans, filled with fantasies of revenge and empowerment, long to leave a world they despise. These Armageddonites believe that they alone will get a quick, free pass when they are “raptured” to paradise, no good deeds necessary, not even a day of judgment. Ironically, they share this utopian fantasy with a group that they often castigate, namely fundamentalist Muslims who believe that dying in battle also means direct access to Heaven. For the Armageddonites, however, there are no waiting virgins, but they do agree with Muslims that there will be “no booze, no bars,” in the words of a popular Gaither Singers song.
These end-timers have great influence over the U.S. government’s foreign policy. They are thick with the Republican leadership. At a recent conference in Washington, congressional leader Roy Blunt, for example, has said that their work is “part of God’s plan.” At the same meeting, where speakers promoted attacking Iran, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay glorified “end times.” Indeed the Bush administration often consults with them on Mideast policies. The organizer of the conference, Rev. John Hagee, is often welcomed at the White House, although his ratings are among the lowest on integrity and transparency by Ministry Watch, which rates religious broadcasters. He raises millions of dollars from his campaign supporting Israeli settlements on the West Bank, including much for himself. Erstwhile presidential candidate Gary Bauer is on his Board of Directors. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson also both expressed strong end-times beliefs.
American fundamentalists strongly supported the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. They consistently support Israel’s hard-line policies. And they are beating the drums for war against Iran. Thanks to these end-timers, American foreign policy has turned much of the world against us, including most Muslims, nearly a quarter of the human race.
The Beginning of End Times
The evangelical movement originally was not so “end times” focused. Rather, it was concerned with the “moral” decline inside America. The Armageddon theory started with the writings of a Scottish preacher, John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). His ideas then spread to America with publication in 1917 of the Scofield Reference Bible, foretelling that the return of the Jews to Palestine would bring about the end times. The best-selling book of the 1970s, The Late, Great Planet Earth, further spread this message. The movement did not make a conscious effort to affect foreign policy until Jerry Falwell went to Jerusalem and the Left Behind books became best sellers.
Conservative Christian writer Gary North estimates the number of Armageddonites at about 20 million. Many of them have an ecstatic belief in the cleansing power of apocalyptic violence. They are among the more than 30% of Americans who believe that the world is soon coming to an end. Armageddonites may be a minority of the evangelicals, but they have vocal leaders and control 2,000 mostly fundamentalist religious radio stations.
Although little focused on in America, Armageddonites attract the attention of Muslims abroad. In 2004, for instance, I attended Qatar’s Fifth Conference on Democracy with Muslim leaders from all over the Arabian Gulf. There, the uncle of Jordan’s king devoted his whole speech to warning of the Armageddonites’ power over American foreign policy.
Armageddonite Foreign Policy
The beliefs of the Armageddon Lobby, also known as Dispensationalists, come from the Book of Revelations, which Martin Luther relegated it to an appendix when he translated the Bible because its image of Christ was so contrary to the rest of the Bible. The Armageddonites worship a vengeful, killer-torturer Christ. They also frequently quote a biblical passage that God favors those who favor the Jews. But they only praise Jews who make war, not those who are peacemakers. For example, they vigorously opposed Israel’s murdered premier Yitzhak Rabin, who promoted the Oslo Peace Accords.
Based on this Biblical interpretation, the Armageddonites vehemently argue that America must protect Israel and encourage its settlements on the West Bank in order to help God fulfill His plans. The return of Jews to Palestine is central to the prophetic vision of the Armageddonites, who see it as a critical step toward the final battle, Armageddon, and the victory of the righteous over Satan’s minions. There are a couple internal inconsistencies with this prophecy, such as the presence of Christians already living in the Holy Land and the role of Jews in the final dispensation. In the first case, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and other Religious Right leaders tried to pretend that Christians already in the Holy Land simply didn’t exist. As for Jews, they needed to become “born again” Christians to avoid God’s wrath (or, according to some Armageddonites, a separate Jewish covenant with God will gain them a separate Paradise).
Everyone else — Buddhists, Muslims (of course), Hindus, atheists, and so on – are then slated to die in the Tribulation that comes with Armageddon. As described in the bestselling Left Behind series, this time of human misery ends with Christ then ruling a paradise on earth for a thousand years.
Armageddonites know little about the outside world, which they think of as threatening and awash with Satanic temptations. They are big supporters of Bush’s “go it alone” foreign policies. For example, they love John Bolton. They were prime supporters for attacking Iraq. And, with very few exceptions, they were noticeably quiet about, if not supportive, of torturing prisoners of war (only with a new leadership did the National Association of Evangelicals finally condemn torture in May, 2007). Their support of the Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani shows that they consider aggressively prosecuting Mideast war (to help speed up the apocalypse) more important than the domestic programs of these socially liberal politicians.
On other foreign policy issues, they are violently against the pending Law of the Seas Treaty, indeed any treaty which possibly circumscribes U.S. power to go it alone. They want illegal immigrants expelled and oppose more immigration. They fear China’s growth. They despise Europeans for not being more warlike. The UN figures prominently in their fears, and the Left Behind books present its Secretary General as the Antichrist. Domestically, they strongly support the USA PATRIOT Act and all of President Bush’s actions, legal or illegal.
Armageddonites and Fascism
Author and former New York Times reporter Christopher Hedges argues that worldview and reasoning of the Armageddonites tend toward fascism. In his book American Fascists, Hedges focuses on their obedience to leadership, their feelings of humiliation and victimhood, alienation, their support for authoritarian government, and their disinterestedness in constitutional limits on government power. Theirs was originally a defensive movement against the liberal democratic society, particularly abortion, school desegregation, and now globalization, which they saw as undermining their communities and families, their values, and livelihood. Their fundamentalism is very fulfilling and, Hedges writes, “they are terrified of losing this new, mystical world of signs, wonders and moral certitude, of returning to the old world of despair.”
Hedges, a graduate of Harvard Divinity School, also shows that fundamentalists are quite selective. They don’t take the Bible literally when it comes to justifying slavery or that children who curse a parent are to be executed. The movement is also very masculine, giving poor men a path to re-establish their authority in what they perceive as an overly feminized culture. Images of Jesus often show Him with thick muscles, clutching a sword. Christian men are portrayed as powerful warriors.
The overwhelming power and warmongering of the Armageddonites has inspired some resistance from other fundamentalists, but they are a minority. Theologian Richard Fenn writes, “Silent complicity (by mainline churches) with apocalyptic rhetoric soon becomes collusion with plans for religiously inspired genocide.” Their death-wishing “religion” is actually anti-Christian and should be challenged openly by traditional Christians.
The next election will likely loosen their grip on the White House. However, their growing ties to the military industrial complex will remain. Exposure of their war wanting as a major threat to America and the world may well become as destructive for them as was the famous Scopes trial in the 1920s. But that will only happen if Americans become as concerned as foreign observers about the influence of the Armageddonites.
Jon Basil Utley is associate publisher of The American Conservative. He was a foreign correspondent in South America for the Journal of Commerce and Knight Ridder newspapers and former associate editor of The Times of the Americas. He was for 17 years a contract commentator on third world issues for Voice of America. He is a writer and advisor for Antiwar.com, a chairman of ConservativesForPeace.com, and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus. Link
For more articles in the Religion and Foreign Policy strategic focus, visit http://www.fpif.org/fpifinfo/4590
Vitamin and mineral deficiencies are widespread in Europe
Vitamin and mineral deficiencies
are widespread in Europe
So why is the European Commission planning to ban thousands of supplements when it has already admitted that most of them are safe?
By Paul Anthony Taylor
Evidence increasingly suggests that vitamin and mineral deficiencies are widespread in the European Union. A recent report, for example, suggests that up to 3.6 million people in the UK now suffer from malnutrition. As a result, according to the British Association for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, malnutrition currently costs the UK’s National Health Service more than £7.3bn (€10.8bn / US $14.8bn) a year.
With the estimates suggesting that up to 6 per cent of the UK population could be suffering from serious vitamin and mineral deficiencies, and UK hospital figures showing malnutrition to be found in all age groups, including newborn babies, one has to question the wisdom of an upcoming proposal from the European Commission – the European Union’s executive body – that threatens to ban thousands of vitamin and mineral supplements from being sold in Europe.
After all, it’s not as if the problem of nutritional deficiencies was only confined to the UK.
In 1997, for example, a report by the European Commission into nutrient intake in European Union Member States concluded that “for almost all vitamins, minerals and trace elements, there exist one or more population groups with intakes below nationally recommended levels.” People thought to be particularly at risk included: women; adolescents or children (particularly “picky” ones); the elderly; women during the periconceptual period; people on a diet for losing weight; people on vegetarian diets; people having allergies to foods; persons eating a high proportion of “fast foods” or “junk foods” and others.
The nutrients found to be most often deficient included iron, iodine and vitamins B2, B6 and D; and this despite the fact that in many cases, with the exception of iodine, they were already being added to some foods as mandatory fortificants.
Restrictions on permitted nutrient levels in supplements
Given the widespread nature of nutrient deficiencies in Europe, naturopathic doctors, natural health experts and millions of consumers are currently up in arms over the fact that the European Commission is preparing to propose, before the end of this year, restrictions on the maximum permitted levels of vitamins and minerals in food supplements.
Ignoring independent studies showing that the nutrient content of our food has fallen substantially over the past few decades, as well as an an abundance of knowledge and scientific data on vitamins and nutrition that has been available for 50, 60, 70 even 80 years, it is widely expected that the levels the Commission is planning will be highly restrictive and far below those that are necessary to achieve and maintain optimum health. If these expectations are correct, therefore, the legal enforcement of such levels will result in the enactment of Europe-wide bans upon literally thousands of food supplement products, some of which have been sold and consumed safely for decades.
European Commission admits that most supplements are safe
Not for the first time, however, the European Commission’s plans are openly at odds with some of its previous assurances.
In 2002, for example, during the run-up to the adoption by the European Parliament of the controversial Food Supplements Directive, the then European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection, David Byrne, published a message on the internet, on behalf of the Commission, in which he claimed that “The aim is not to ban food supplements, as some have alleged.”
Byrne’s message was published in response to the large number of letters that the Commission had received from citizens who were concerned about the Directive and who were opposed to its adoption. Notably, therefore, Byrne specifically stated in this message that: “There is no doubt that most of the products marketed today are safe and of the expected quality.”
As such, if the maximum levels for vitamins and minerals that the Commission proposes turn out to be as low as some observers are claiming they will be, many consumers of food supplements will quite reasonably conclude that the Commission knowingly intends to ban products that it considers to be safe.
Perhaps mindful of the large numbers of European citizens who oppose the Food Supplements Directive, Byrne chose to end his message as follows: “I can assure you that your interests and those of consumers in general were at the top of our concerns when we proposed the Directive. I believe that you have every right to have a wide choice of safe and appropriately labelled food supplements available, to buy if you so wish. And I remain convinced that the Directive that will be shortly formally adopted by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers will ensure that.”
When the maximum levels are eventually announced, therefore, European citizens will finally discover whether Byrne and the Commission were telling the truth, or whether – as some have alleged – their real aim was to ban supplements and they were lying all along.
Complexe militaro industriel [vidéo]
Carlyle - Desmarais – power corp - Médias [vidéo]
L’explosion de la bulle immobilière américaine menace directement 150 000 foyers français
L’explosion de la bulle immobilière américaine menace directement 150 000 foyers français
La France des propriétaires a du plomb dans l’aile puisque avec la crise bancaire déclenchée cet été, on est en train de découvrir que la France aussi a ses « subprime ». Selon Libération, 150 000 foyers français ayant emprunté aux taux (variables) les plus bas entre 2003 et 2005 sont directement menacés par la remontée des taux d’intérêts et se retrouvent subitement insolvable.
Mais le mécanisme d’emprunt à taux variable concerne plusieurs centaines de milliers de foyers puisque aujourd’hui, environ 10 % des ménages accédant à la propriété y ont recours. Ce type d’emprunt indexe mécaniquement le taux d’intérêt sur l’indice Euribor, qui est le taux auquel les banques se prêtent l’argent entre elles, au jour le jour. Si depuis 2000 ce taux a été inférieur au taux fixe, il l’a désormais dépassé depuis que l’éclatement de la bulle immobilière outre-atlantique a semé la peur entre les banques, ce qui rend chers les prêts interbancaires.
Si l’indexation d’emprunts à long terme sur un marché au jour le jour est déjà une absurdité, elle illustre le contrôle financier qui s’exerce sur l’économie réelle. Car les mécanismes à taux variable s’étant répandus, ils ont aspiré dans la spirale du crédit des ménages autrement insolvables mais à qui on a ainsi fait miroiter l’accession à la propriété, en dépit de leur incapacité à contracter un emprunt classique. Si l’on ajoute à cela que les prix des logements ont pris 142 % en 10 ans (source Fnaim), nous réalisons que le français moyen voit une partie croissante et non négligeable de ses revenus captée par ce piratage financier, non seulement sur ses dépenses de logement (25 à 30 % du budget des ménages), mais aussi sur l’essence, le fioul et le gaz (les deux tiers du prix d’un baril de pétrole résultant d’une spéculation effréné venant d’acteur strictement financiers) et sur les prix de l’alimentaire (depuis cet été les prix agricoles explosent suite au repli des spéculateurs de l’immobilier vers l’alimentaire). Il s’agit d’une véritable occupation financi&eagrave;re, une taxe spéculative permanente qui par son ampleur se révèle être un racket financier organisé.
Mais est-ce que celui qui a promis aux français dans l’entre deux tours qu’il les protégerait va s’exécuter ?
Lundi 29 Octobre 2007
Solidarité et Progrès
Le Front national de libération de l’Irak est né
Le Front national de libération de l’Irak est né
AUTEUR: Ibrahim EBEID & Hussayn AL KURDI
Traduit par Alexandre Moumbaris, révisé par Fausto Giudice
La plus importante histoire et le secret le mieux gardé des médias occidentaux a été de loin la croissance constante de la Résistance irakienne contre l’occupation conduite par les USA.
Alors que les services d’information US et de leurs complices focalisaient l’attention sur la violence entre les communautés ethniques et religieuses, le Parti Baath socialiste arabe poursuivait une politique d’unification et de coopération entre ceux en Iraq qui se montraient décidés à débarrasser leur pays de l’occupant, à rétablir son indépendance et reprendre son rôle aux avant-postes de la lutte arabe contre l’impérialisme et le sionisme.
L’occupation de Bagdad par les forces US suivie par la déclaration de «victoire» de Bush en 2003, a marqué le commencement de la résistance irakienne conduite par des dirigeants du parti Baath. Saddam Hussein et d’autres dirigeants baathistes, en consultation avec des habitants de Bagdad se sont dispersés à travers l’Iraq dans le but d’engager une guerre de libération nationale et de résistance de longue durée. Ils n’ont pas voulu rester concentrés à Bagdad afin d’éviter sa destruction et pour mieux réussir la transition vers une lutte de guérilla ou de guerre populaire.
Alors que les USA lâchaient leurs escadrons de la mort, composés d’exilés, contre le peuple iraquien, ciblant ceux qui soutenaient le Baath ou qui étaient autrement opposés à l’occupation, le Parti Baath, ses alliés et ses partenaires réalisaient contre l’ennemi,y compris ses pantins et ses hommes de main, des opérations à caractère militaire, en prenant scrupuleusement soin d’éviter de frapper des innocents, tout en encourageant l’unité des Irakiens de toutes les affiliations religieuses, ethniques ou politiques épris de liberté et prêts à défendre la nation.
Malgré diverses tentatives pour coopter, discréditer et diviser le Baath, il est remarquable qu’aucun membre éminent n’a été amené à trahir les principes du parti, la promotion de l’unité arabe, et la lutte pour libérer les terres arabes des occupants US et israéliens, et cela dans la perspective d’une société socialiste au service du bien-être des classes populaires.
Saddam Hussein a émergé comme un dirigeant, grand et résolu, martyr et père fondateur, champion de la cause arabe et de l’Islam dans la tradition de Salah al-Din al Ayyoubi, le fabuleux «Saladin» qui avait chassé les Croisés de Jérusalem et mis en échec leurs efforts pour occuper la Palestine et subjuguer les forces de l’Islam. Les activités de Saddam et son exemple ont contribué de manière incommensurable à la ré-émergence du parti Baath dans le coeur et la tête de la Résistance. Cela reste un secret bien gardé aux USA et en Occident. Même des cercles de gauche et soi-disant «progressistes» qui dans le passé ont soutenu des mouvements de libération nationale tels que celui du Vietnam, ne se sont pas manifestés par des expressions de solidarité similaires pour le cas de l’Irak. Ils disent plutôt que le Baath «est mort avec Saddam», que la Résistance a été écrasée et il ne reste dans leur vision que la «guerre civile» que propage leur presse. La Résistance, pour eux, n’existe simplement pas. Heureusement, non seulement elle existe mais elle se bat en ce moment avec férocité partout dans le pays.
Le «Conseiller à la sécurité nationale» du régime fantoche Mouwafaq Al Roubaie a confirmé lors de sa récente visite à Washington que Saddam avait implanté un «virus incurable» dans les esprits des Irakiens. Ce «virus» était le refus d’accepter l’occupation et son gouvernement fantoche. En même temps, Al Roubaie a affirmé que lui et ses associés avaient «choisi une fois et pour toutes leur allié stratégique, les États-Unis d’Amérique».
Un événement significatif a eu lieu le 26 septembre quand 22 groupes de résistance iraquiens se sont réunis en Congrès d’unification dans une partie libérée de Bagdad. Le Congrès a résolu d’unir tous les groupes présents sur la base de la libération totale de l’Iraq quel que soit le temps qu’il faudra. Le Congrès a aussi décidé que l’adhésion au Front unifié de la Résistance serait ouverte à d’autres groupes ou combattants qui voudraient s’y joindre. Un Commandement suprême du Jihad et de la lutte de libération a été institué et Izzat Ibrahim Al Douri, Secrétaire général du parti Baath et Président de l’Iraq a été élu Commandant suprême du Front.
Izzat Ibrahim Al Douri
Le Commandement suprême a alors tenu une réunion où l’État-major a été créé. Le lieutenant général Amir Muhammad Amis a été nommé Commandant suprême en second, chargé des affaires militaires, alors que le Cheikh Ali Abdallah El Oubaidi a été choisi pour conduire une structure consultative religieuse. Un conseil de sécurité nationale a été formé, dirigé par le général Khalid Sulayman Khalaf. Un conseil des affaires administratives et financières a été créé sous le commandement du lieutenant général Muhammad Salih Alqan et un Bureau d’information et de mobilisation a été créé sous le commandement du général Salah Ad Din Ahmad. Le Dr Kan’an Amin a été nommé porte-parole officiel pour le Jjihad et le commandement de la libération.
Le commandement suprême a déclaré que le Jihad et le Commandement de libération observaient des «principes sacrés» qui ne pouvaient être violés. Aucun parti n’était autorisé à prendre part à des négociations avec l’ennemi US sauf sur la base de ces principes.
Les conditions pour des négociations avec les forces d’occupation étaient clairement stipulées selon les termes suivants:
Reconnaître officiellement la Résistance patriotique et toutes les organisations de résistance patriotiques, nationalistes arabes et islamiques qui en font partie, comme seul représentant légitime du grand peuple iraquien.
Annoncer officiellement le retrait inconditionnel des forces d’occupation, que ce soit immédiatement ou par étapes.
Arrêter toutes les attaques, les poursuites, les assassinats, les destructions, les sabotages, les dépossessions et les expulsions et retirer leurs troupes d’occupation de tous les centres de population.
Libérer tous les prisonniers et détenus sans exception et les dédommager.
Remettre en service l’armée irakienne et les forces de sécurité nationales, et les rétablir selon les règles et les traditions en place avant l’invasion US. Ils doivent aussi être indemnisés pour les dommages subis.
Promettre de compenser l’Iraq pour les pertes et les dommages causés au pays par l’occupation.
Abroger toutes les lois, décrets et autres législations promulguée lors de l’occupation.
Si l’ennemi tient à se retirer de manière à sauver la face, il devrait s’asseoir et parler directement avec la Résistance concernant l’application de ces principes sacrés. Sinon, il ne leur resterait que l’effondrement et la fuite.
Après la préparation d’un programme pour l’application de ces principes, auront lieu des réunions et des dialogues dans le peuple irakien qui permettront au gouvernement intérimaire d’engager des pourparlers avec les États agresseurs en vue de reformuler les relations officielles sur la base de l’égalité et la non-ingérence dans les affaires intérieures, le respect de l’indépendance, de la souveraineté et de l’autodétermination.
Après le commencement du retrait de l’ennemi de notre patrie, les forces de Résistance se rencontreront pour la formation d’un Conseil national (Choura) pour la surveillance de la phase transitoire et pour nommer un gouvernement intérimaire pour une période déterminée, afin de préparer des élections législatives de manière à ce que le peuple puisse élire librement ses dirigeants.
Les 22 groupes représentés à la rencontre étaient les suivants:
L’Armée de la confrérie Naqshbandya
L’Armée des compagnons du Prophète
L’Armée des Mourabitine
L’Armée de Hamza
L’Armée du Message
L’Armée de Ibn Al Walid
Le Commandement unifié des moujahidine (Iraq)
Les Brigades de la libération
L’Armée de l’Unique
L’Armée de libération de l’Iraq
Les Escadrons des Chouhadas (martyrs)
L’Armée des Sabirine (Patients)
Les Brigades du Djihad sur la terre de Mésopotamie
L’Armée du Chevalier (dans la zone «autonome» en kurde)
Les Escadrons du Jihad à Bassora
Les Escadrons du Jihad à Fallouja
Le Front populaire national pour la libération de l’Iraq
Les Escadrons de la Bénédiction de Hussein
Les Compagnies de la libération du sud
L’Armée de la Nostalgie
Les Compagnies de Dyala pour le djihad et la libération
Les Compagnies de la gloire pour la libération de l’Iraq.
F Lire aussi La signification de la Déclaration « Jihad et libération » par Salah Al Mukhtar
Source : http://www.al-moharer.net/
Article original publié en octobre 2007
Alexandre Moumbaris et Fausto Giudice sont membres de Tlaxcala, le réseau de traducteurs pour la diversité linguistique. Cette traduction est libre de reproduction, à condition d’en respecter l’intégrité et d’en mentionner l’auteur, le traducteur, le réviseur et la source.
URL de cet article sur Tlaxcala : http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=4007&lg=fr
____________________________________________
Voir aussi :
Iran : le général Wesley Clark démasque Dick Cheney
Iran : le général Wesley Clark démasque Dick Cheney
L’administration Bush, impulsée par le vice-président Dick Cheney, a redoublé d’efforts pour partir en guerre contre l’Iran, combinant une politique unilatérale de sanctions contre le Corps de la Garde Révolutionnaire Iranienne (les Pasdarans) et une campagne agressive de propagande, menée aussi bien par le vice-président que par le président américain en personne visant à provoquer l’Iran et fournir ainsi un prétexte à la guerre.
En même temps, ceux qui s’opposent à la confrontation, y compris le président de la fédération russe Vladimir Poutine et certaines factions de l’intérieur des institutions américaines, ont réagi de façon parfois hors du commun afin de prévenir une attaque contre l’Iran qui pourrait rapidement dégénérer dans un conflit beaucoup plus vaste.
Le 17 octobre, lors d’une conférence à Washington, l’ancien candidat à l’investiture démocrate, le général à la retraite cinq étoiles Wesley Clark, n’a pas mâché ses mots pour dénoncer la folie qui domine la Maison Blanche. Parlant devant plusieurs centaines de décideurs américains et arabes lors de la seizième conférence annuelle du National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations (NCUSAR), Clark a appelé de ses vœux un vif débat sur la question iranienne conduisant à un nouvel effort de diplomatie à l’égard de Téhéran et a dénoncé avec force la politique de « coup d’état politique » menée par la Maison Blanche depuis les évènements du 11 septembre.
Clark observait que, suite au 11 septembre, un petit groupe de l’administration Bush a imposé une nouvelle stratégie sans aucun débat, sans aucune autorisation préalable de la part du Congrès et sans aucune consultation des alliés des Etats-Unis. Clark a rendu compte d’un entretien privé qu’il a eu en mai 1991 avec Paul Wolfowitz (à l’époque un officiel du Pentagone) et son second, Lewis « Scooter » Libby (devenu le chef de cabinet de Dick Cheney par la suite). A l’époque, Wolfowitz était totalement furieux du fait que le président américain d’alors, George H.W. Bush avait échoué, selon lui, à conclure l’opération tempête du désert avec le renversement du régime de Saddam Hussein. Wolfowitz disait à Clark, que dans les « 5 à 10 ans à venir, » les Etats-Unis doivent renverser une poignée « d’anciens états clients des Soviets », dont la Syrie, l’Irak et l’Iran. Wolfowitz arguait devant le général choqué que les Etats-Unis disposait d’une fenêtre d’opportunité pour « utiliser la force militaire avec impunité » tant qu’une nouvelle super-puissance, dont l’identité n’était pas encore certaine, n’avait pu émerger pour défier l’hégémonie globale des Américains.
Le général Clark racontait que lorsque Dick Cheney, alors Secrétaire de la Défense, avec Wolfowitz et Libby, ont présenté leur scénario « style empire Romain » au conseiller de la sécurité nationale Bent Scowcroft et le Président Bush, la démarche fut sèchement rejetée. Après le 11 septembre, affirme Clark, Cheney et Wolfowitz ont ressuscité le projet sans jamais en informer le peuple Américain ou le Congrès, « parce qu’on les aurait rigolé au nez. » et on les aurait accusés « d’halluciner ».
Néanmoins, rapporte Clark, un plan écrit a circulé au Pentagone sous Rumsfeld suite au 11 septembre, citant sept régimes à renverser dans les cinq ans à venir : Irak, Syrie, Liban, Iran, Libye, Soudan et Somalie. Maintenant, concluait Clark, « nous vivons avec les conséquences », y compris 800 milliards de dollars dépensés jusqu’à ce jour pour la guerre en Irak et l’Afghanistan. « Les Etats-Unis sont plus faibles, et nos adversaires sont plus forts. »
En réponse à une question posée par le magazine EIR, Clark a plaidé en faveur d’un effort diplomatique envers l’Iran et la Syrie. « Trouvons des intérêts communs, prévenons la guerre, et aidons nos amis dans la région » disait il en ajoutant : « Ne sommes nous pas assez grand pour faire cela ? » L’alternative, disait-il, est une campagne de deux à trois semaines de bombardements qui vont réduire l’Iran en « un état défaillant », mais avec des conséquences extrêmement lourdes pour les Etats-Unis et le monde.
Le message du général Clark a fait grand effet sur les participants de la conférence et s’est reflété dans des efforts renouvelés d’évitement de guerre par d’autres acteurs politiques importants, en particulier le président russe Poutine.
Ce dernier a mobilisé tout son appareil diplomatique dans ce sens, pour commencer lors de sa rencontre à Moscou avec le président français Nicolas Sarkozy. Sarkozy était venu à Moscou avec le credo de Dick Cheney menaçant que la volonté iranienne de vouloir construire la bombe pourrait nous conduire à la troisième guerre mondiale. Mais, pendant sa rencontre avec Poutine, Sarkozy, selon des sources américaines bien renseignées, se serait fait gagner par le camp de ceux qui veulent éviter la guerre, et ceci aussi bien sous la pression de la Russie que par l’influence d’institutions militaires et du renseignement français.
Mardi 30 Octobre 2007
Solidarité et Progrès
(Update 3) Saudi Arabia to buy 150 russian helicopters! Arrest Provides More Evidence India, Israel, and the U.S. Behind Mumbai Attacks – Israeli experts help India prepare commando raids into Pakistan – Russia could supply ground military hardware and fighter jets to Lebanon
In an abrupt policy shift, Saudi Arabia has signed an agreement to buy over 150 Russian-made Mi-35 Hind and Mi-17 Hip helicopters worth over $2.2 billion, ending French hopes of sealing a long-delayed sale of 148 helicopters and raising doubts about future French arms sales to the Saudi kingdom. The sources also said that Saudi Arabia appears to have decided to buy T-90 main battle tanks and medium-range air-defense systems from Russia, replacing previous plans to buy French-made Leclerc tanks and Aster 30 SAMP/T air-defense systems. No agreement has yet been signed for these systems…
By Giovanni de BrigantiPARIS — In an abrupt policy shift, Saudi Arabia has signed an agreement to buy over 150 Russian-made Mi-35 Hind and Mi-17 Hip helicopters worth over $2.2 billion, ending French hopes of sealing a long-delayed sale of 148 helicopters and raising doubts about future French arms sales to the Saudi kingdom.
Abdallah also is loosening arms ties with France because of its insistence on large, multiple-system packages, and its stubborn arm-twisting to include weapons that the Saudis do not want, like the Rafale combat aircraft, in these packages.
While the Saudis were willing as late as the fall of 2006 to sign two or three medium-sized helicopters deals, covering 42 Fennec light helicopters, 20 Cougar Combat Search and Rescue helicopters and 10 NFH-90 naval helicopters, sources say they indefinitely postponed these plans after French officials continued to insist that the package also include Rafales, several FREMM frigates and Gowind corvettes, and Leclerc tanks.
“The idea of selling comprehensive packages was pushed by the Elysée the French President’s office-Ed. as a final coup for former President Jacques Chirac,” one industry official told defense-aerospace.com. “Now, Chirac’s gone, we’ve signed nothing, and we’re shut out of the Saudi market for the foreseeable future. A real success for France,” the official said.France has now conceded it will not sell Rafale to Saudi Arabia. “We haven’t discussed Rafale in Saudi Arabia. It’s not a current issue,” French Defense Minister Hervé Morin said Oct. 28 in Jeddah, after talks with Saudi leaders.
link
In the past, it was already indicated in Saudi Arabia interest in Russian weapons, specially because of US behaviour, fighting to “liberate”, energy producers countries.So this news shows a very interesting path Saudi Arabia is taking and shows the russian growth in influence and as an weapons supplier.Russia is showing that it can be a reliable partner, and the sales around the globe, reflect that.
One caution about this news: i have not found another site, talking about this sale, but i have some confidence on this site, so i believe something must be true.
Comments by FromPortugal
Arrest Provides More Evidence India, Israel, and the U.S. Behind Mumbai Attacks
Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
It is becoming increasingly a hard sell to pin the blame for the Mumbai attacks on Pakistan and thus set the stage for an attack on Pakistan after Barack Obama enters the White House in a few weeks. It now appears Indian intelligence played a large part in the terrorist attacks. On Saturday, the Associated Press reported that a “counterinsurgency police officer who may have been on an undercover mission” was arrested for illegally buying mobile phone cards used by the gunmen.
Mukhtar Ahmed is an Indian police operative who provided cell phone SIM cards to Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistan terrorist group blamed for the Mumbai attacks.
The counterinsurgency operative, Mukhtar Ahmed, worked for the police in Indian Kashmir. “The implications of Ahmed’s involvement — that Indian agents may have been in touch with the militants and perhaps supplied the SIM cards used in the attacks — added to the growing list of questions over India’s ill-trained security forces, which are widely blamed for not thwarting the attacks,” reports the Associated Press.
In other words, Indian intelligence had penetrated Lashkar-e-Taiba and were running a false flag operation through the terrorist group, putatively connected to Pakistan’s ISI.
Indian police in the Kashmir city of Srinagar told Calcutta police that Ahmed is “our man and it’s now up to them how to facilitate his release,” said one senior officer speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information. Other police officials in Kashmir supported his account, reports the Associated Press.
Indian intelligence staging false flag terror attacks and blaming them on Muslims is nothing new. On November 23, Andrew Buncombe, writing for the Independent, reported: “India is in something of a state of shock after learning from official sources that its first Hindu terror cell may have carried out a series of deadly bombings that were initially blamed on militant Muslims.” In addition to bombing attacks in the Muslim town of Malegaon in the western state of Maharashtra in September, the Hindu terror cells are allegedly responsible for last year’s bombing of a cross-border train en route to Pakistan, which killed 68 people, according to Buncombe.
It should be noted that the head of the Maharastrian Anti-Terrorist Squad making the allegations about Hindu false flag terrorism, Hemant Karkare, was assassinated as he led his team into the Hotel Taj Kahal during the Mumbai attacks. “Killed in the line of duty, Hemant Karare was targeted as the man who was an immense problem for the BJP the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party because his forthright investigation revealed Hindutva terrorism and he was not about to stop. Clearly this invalidated the BJP campaign rhetoric against Muslim terrorism, but the BJP will still use the emotional fervor of Hindutva to win against the Congress party,” writes Allen Heart for OpEdNews.
An exposé carried in a national daily published in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh alleges that Indian intelligence supported extremist Hindutvadis in their murderous Malegaon campaign with the cooperation of Israel’s Mossad. “The newspaper writes that relations between Mossad and CIA are world known,” notes the Pak Alert Press blog. “The national daily… has exposed that the officials of the national intelligence agencies have categorically stated that American secret service agency, CIA together with Israel’s secret organization Mossad, has carried out several secret operation all over Asia,” Pak Alert Press reports, translating from the original Urdu.
Indian intelligence, however, is no minor player and its foreign policy objectives currently parallel those of the CIA and Mossad in regard to covert destabilization in South Asia and elsewhere. “RAW the Research and Analysis Wing, the Indian version of the CIA , ever since its creation, has always been a vital, though unobtrusive, actor in Indian policy-making apparatus,” writes Isha Khan.
Since its creation in 1968, RAW has been “given a virtual carte blanche to conduct destabilization operations in neighboring countries inimical to India to seriously undertook restructuring of its organization accordingly. RAW was given a list of seven countries (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Pakistan and Maldives) whom India considered its principal regional protagonists. It very soon systematically and brilliantly crafted covert operations in all these countries to coerce, destabilize and subvert them in consonance with the foreign policy objectives of the Indian Government.”
Specifically, RAW “considers Sindh as Pakistan’s soft under-belly. It has, therefore, made it the prime target for sabotage and subversion. RAW has enrolled and extensive network of agents and anti-government elements, and is convinced that with a little push restless Sindh will revolt. Taking fullest advantage of the agitation in Sindh in 1983 and the ethnic riots, which have continued till today, RAW has deeply penetrated and cultivated dissidents and secessionists, thereby creating hard-liners unlikely to allow peace to return to Sindh.” Sindh includes Urdu-speaking Muslim refugees who migrated to Pakistan from India upon independence.
It now appears obvious that India’s RAW with the help of the CIA and Israel’s Mossad created the current situation and have set-up Pakistan’s ISI to take the blame for the Mumbai attacks. Senator McCain, flanked by senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham, told Ejaz Haider, a senior editor with the Daily Times group, that it could be a “matter of days” before India carried out surgical air strikes if Pakistan did not act on the evidence provided to it on elements linked to the attacks, according to the Daily Star. “If the terrorists succeed in confounding relations between these two great countries, they will achieve their aim. We cannot let that happen,” McCain declared.
A conflict between the two nuclear armed nations may very well be the “international crisis, a generated crisis” Joe Biden mentioned in October that will “test” president Barack Obama.
In August, 2007, Obama said “the United States must be willing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan,” a comment that has led more than a few commentators to conclude that the U.S. will attack Pakistan in the coming months. It now appears the false flag Mumbai attacks, described as India’s “9/11,” will serve as a pretext to get the ball rolling on “surgical strikes” against Pakistan.
Israeli experts help India prepare commando raids into Pakistan
DEBKAfile is an internet MOSSAD website Disinformation and intoxication, but we want to show you their Propaganda, what is true is Israeli Mossad is experts on False flags ( USS Liberty , 9/11, London, madrid, Bombay…want to know more click here )
New Delhi has asked Jerusalem to assist in the operational and intelligence planning of Indian commando cross-border strikes against Islamist terrorist havens in Pakistan – including al Qaeda, Indian counter-terror sources report.
The Indian government’s decision to embark on these in-and-out incursions in reprisal for the Mumbai outrage of Nov. 26-29 was first revealed in DEBKA-Net-Weekly 375 published Dec. 4 (Indian Retaliatory Raids inside Pakistan Impending).
DEBKAfile adds: Israel is willing to help the Indians carry out punitive forays into Pakistan because it has its own scores to settle for the brutal murder of six Israelis in Mumbai’s Chabad Center by the Islamist terrorists and for the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency’s hand in the atrocity.
Security sources in New Delhi disclosed Saturday, Dec. 6, that ISI officers actively trained the terrorists on military lines and selected their targets, including two big hotels and the Jewish-Israeli center.
Indian sources told DEBKAfile that Israel was asked for assistance because its special undercover forces were long seasoned in plotting and executing reprisals for terrorist attacks; above all, they were expert in getting away after covert operations without leaving a trail. New Delhi wants its commando operations in Pakistan to be stealthy and focused, and does not propose to admit responsibility.
Four Pakistani locations are targeted:
1. Pakistani Kashmir where scores if not hundreds of extremist Muslim training facilities are situated – many of them ISI-run and funded;
2. Punjab in eastern Pakistan on the border of northern India. DEBKAfile’s counter terror sources report that Lahore and Multan have attracted a cluster of Islamist terrorist centers.
3. Pakistan’s southern coast – from Karachi north to Gwadar close to the Iranian border. Indian intelligence (RAW) has evidence that this strip was where the terrorists who besieged Mumbai ten days ago were trained for their assault.
Our New Delhi sources disclose that Indian leaders showed the outline of this plan to US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice when she visited last week. She commented guardedly that the United States was strongly opposed to a full-scale war between India and Pakistan but not averse to limited counter-terror operations.
—————————————————
Russia could supply ground military hardware to Lebanon -
MOSCOW. Dec 17 (Interfax-AVN) – Russian ground military hardware
could be supplied to Lebanon, said Mikhail Dmitriyev, Director of the
Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation.
“Ground equipment could be supplied to this country,” he said.
“We consider the Lebanese army as a key element of political
stability within this country and are ready to provide it with arms,” he
said.
kk rp
http://www.interfax.com/3/455717/news.aspx
——————–
Russia to provide Lebanon with fighter jets
Russian news agencies are reporting that Moscow has promised to deliver a batch of fighter jets to Lebanon.
ITAR-Tass and Interfax have quoted Lebanese Defense Minister Elias Murr as saying that Russia has agreed to supply his country with 10 MiG-29 fighter jets.
The ITAR-Tass said the planes will be provided as aid.
Murr spoke during Tuesday’s talks in Moscow with Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov.
Russia has sought to expand its clout in the Middle East and hopes to host a Mideast peace conference next year. It is a member of the so-called Quartet of Mideast peacemakers, which also includes the United States, the European Union and the United Nations.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081216/ap_on_re_eu/eu_russia_lebanon_jets
IRAQ: The Orders-of-Battle and the strategic situation of the Occupiers of Iraq, the United States of Israel and Iran in November 2007
The Orders-of-Battle and the strategic situation of the Occupiers of Iraq, the United States of Israel and Iran in November 2007
By: NEWSDESK HELSINKI FINLAND Analysis Team
on: 29.10.2007
The Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq urges all those taking part in the political wing of the honourable Iraqi Resistance to make the enemy plans publicly known and available in the interenet. With AMSI as our point of reference not only in this, but in general our Analysis Team publishes the Enemy “Political Reconciliation” (a.k.a. puppet government set-up) Plot in the form we successfully understood and compiled it some time ago (for further notice of the contents, cf. at the bottom of this wire).
1. The U.S. Middle East (Iraq) Exit Strategy
§1. The US will not exit Iraq voluntary before all its oil is looted and it has a new Middle East base for further looting in control.
§2. The MEast and its oil are controlled with a string of permanent (U.S.) occupation bases.
§3. According to a Finnish MP Jaakko Laakso (Left Alliance, “anti-imperialist” camp) the U.S. – the Republicans and Democrats fully agreeing in this – is planning to build 14 bases located in the heartlands of Iraq, “regardless of whether orders come from current or future US administrations to bring US troops back home.” In other words, “there will be no withdrawal on a permanent basis”, – but to the permanent bases
2. The U.S. Strategic and Tactic Failure
§1. The central problem of the U.S. occupation strategy is the ever-strengthening Armed Iraqi Resistance that has not only gained the tactical superiority with its invisible attacks with IED/EFPs, snipers and rockets/mortars, but fought the U.S. Forces to operational standstill, currently driving them back to their bases, and through them, away from Iraq.
§2. The problem is, the bases are worthless as such: bases are just for control, and if you don’t even get out of your base due to the enemy curtaining, you’re not permanently based, but hopelessly trapped. In other words, besides the bases, you need an Army securing its surroundings of the bases. This is precisely what the U.S. does not have, on the one hand because the defeat of the U.S. Armed forces, and on the another, the failure of the Iraqi Puppet Army as well.
§3. This urgent U.S. demand for a new (puppet) army in Iraq is the immediate background for the Iraq Study Group’s (ISG) “plan” that we dealt previously from the large perspective here: U.S Defeat and the Iraq Partition Plot, In this article we detail the precise structure of the plot, especially what comes to Iraq.
§4. In brief, the U.S. primary goal of the “surge” for the CY 2007 is nothing other than summoning up an army that is now missing from its orders-of-the-battle, which an absolute must should the U.S. want to continue its illegal occupation of Iraq – which it does (cf. §1).
§5. Revealingly enough, the war waged by the U.S. in Iraq in CY 2007 has been a “counterinsurgency” one. For those having read their strategy this tells it all: the term means exactly what it says: to counter (read: fight”) the “insurgency” (read: the heroic Armed Iraqi Resistance, the Al-Jihad and Reformation, Al-Jihad and Change Front, and the Southern Resistance formations), with another “insurgency”, by insurging against them. In brief, counterinsurgency aims at summoning a civil war within the targeted population (in this case, within the Sunnis and the Shi’i).
§6. In what follows, we’ll reveal you the hidden, intimate parts of this military wing of the U.S. Iraq Study Group plot aiming at the partition of Iraq into a federal state (which the puppet counterinsurgency army described above is supposed to defend).
§7. Finally, like in the connection with our previous strategic analysis piece of the Iraq partition (which we recommend you to read in connection with this one) we would like to remind our readers that not all that is to be said will actually take place, since the deceptions of the occupier enemy do constantly fail.
§8. Before entering the machinations of the occupier, it is however, necessary to sketch its structure, a task we shall begin with in this article:
3. Iraq: A two-way split in between three occupators
The view that the U.S. is the occupier of Iraq, is grossly over-simplified:
§1. The Occupiers of Iraq are the Israel, United States and Iran (a.k.a. “Persia”), and all their supporters, especially the United Kingdom, the Anglo-Saxon coalition and other less known countries forces supporting rather Iranian axis of the occupation than that of Israel (of this more on our later postings).
§2. What comes to the occupation itself, it’s a two-, rather than three-way split(between the United States of Israel and Persia of Iran in a way that will be sketched next.
4. Occupier N:o 1: Israel
The true invader and the first and foremost occupier of Iraq is Israel. This is so, because:
§1. For decades Israel has trained, equipped and orchestrated operations in Northern Iraq though its main tool there, the Peshmergah sectarian militia, the military wing of another well known “political” Kurdish terrorist organization. The Kurdish warlords, masked as politicians obey the Israeli sectarian (and especially its anti-Arab) politics, which – at this moment – aims at luring Turkey to do (or at least provide cover) for the Zionist-Iranian ethnic cleansing throughout the Northern Iraq.
§2. Whatever the U.S. elections, the AIPAC (a.k.a. Israeli lobby a.k.a. Mossad c/o U.S.) purchases the Democratic or the Republican representatives according to the results. Thus, whatever takes place Israel is always in control of the U.S. administration that – in any circumstances – is only a puppet one (we’re illuminating this to the uninformed readers so to make its unstability understandable for them).
§3. With a lot of influence in the world’s terrorist circles, there is no doubt that the Israeli intelligence (Mossad) in cooperation with their U.S. political puppets (and the military organizations they control) orchestrated the phony assault known as the “9/11″, thus opening the way for the U.S. Armed Forces (in what follows: “Waffen US”) to the two illegal occupational invasions, first that of Afghanistan, then that of Iraq.
§4. All the crucial actions, made, allowed or assisted by the occupation forces, especially the assassinations the Iraqi commanders, leaders and religious authorities, driving the Iraqi people into refugees, assasing educated Iraqis, scattering the society and pushing forth the partition into federal states (read: concentration camps) are serving the benefits of the two central occupiers: Israel and Iran.
5. Occupier N:o 2: Iran
What comes to Iran’s participation in the occupation,
§1. Iran is an “investor” that wants Southern Iraq as its share of the loot in the supposed partition of the country as the “compensation” for its collaboration in the wars against Iraq, Iraqi people and the Nation.
§2. Iran wants to control Iraq to influence secretly to Hizbullah, Hamas, Fatah, Syria, the U.N. and other parties involved in the Israel-Iran “relations”, also in Iraq. Furthermore, Iran wants to settle the time of U.N. entry in Iraq itself and manage the peace issue only with Israel, which it does not want to happen in any near future (this is most “understandable”, because Iran wants to “secure” its Southern Iraqi occupation first, which it hasn’t achieved as yet). What comes to these negotiations, Iran doesn’t want peace between Israel and the Arabs, because it would lose its central tool of puppeting the Muslim world, and possibly risk becoming a joint Israeli-Arab target herself, of course. In other words, Iran wants war and occupation to continue just as it does, and in this it is greatly assisted in this by the “U.S.” Middle East “Permanent Occupation” Strategy (not only to control oil, but to back up Israel, naturally.
§3. Some 75% of the current “Iraqi” government is of Iranian origin (latest when it comes to their connections and loyalties). These persons preferred their racist sect orientation instead of their Motherland and the Muslim world. Al-Maliki’s administration consists of hijackers implementing and executing orders from Iran (and to a lesser extent, of Israel).
§4. The Iranian front for Iraq (as potrayed by their PR dentists) the appears as if full of mildness, love and if being distressed of what is happening in Iraq. Behind this mask, the secret face of Iran is identical with that of the United States of Israel: a bloody, bleeding holocaust against the Iraqi people, the Iraqi Nation and the Iraqi Territory. Iran is accomplishing with Israel in the genocide of the Iraqis, both using the “Waffen US” as their central tool in this.
6. Occupier N:o 3: The United States and the Occupation Plan
§1. As implied above (or follow the link), drop the “America”: the U.S. Mercenary-Expeditionary Waffen-SS occupiers in Iraq have been, and still are the main instrument of the occupational control, handled by the AIPAC and other Mossad agents through their marionets in D.C.
§2. In brief, before the war the occupiers, Israel and its U.S. mouthpieces and Iran agreed (with the U.K. securing Iran’s honesty, or “holding her off”) on a war so to partition Iraq into Southern, Middle and Northern parts under a common occupation, not unlike the Nazi Germany and the Soviet Russia started the Second World War (WW II) by a secret agreement (known as the Ribbentrop treaty) in which these occupiers split the Eastern Europe between themselves, thus throwing the World into an abyss.
§3. Under this treaty the the United States of Israel and Iran gave their security guarantees to the other party, which were:
(a) The U.K. was allowed to enter (and thus operate) in the “Iranian” sector (i.e. South), while
(b) The Iranian forces we’re let in the U.S. sector (the Sunni area).
(c) Finally, both the Israel (the Mossad boy Barzani) and Iran (the Iranian Intelligence operator Talabani) were to have their own representative in the Northern sector.
§4. Needless to say, the Iranian leaders have repeatedly confirmed that without the attitude and support of Iran, the war against the Sunni Arabs in Iraq, Afghanistan would not have taken place.
§5. Until recent the Americans functioned as the middle men in the Israeli-Iranian occupation deal, providing the Iranian Forces in the Sunni areas the necessary spearheading and backing (also for the Iraqi death squads and militias under their command), needless to say, coordinating in this with the phony Iraqi administrators, with their loyalties belonging fully and completely to Iran.
§6. In short, the Waffen U.S. (led by “General” Petraeus) in coordination with the Iranian commanders spearheads the armed intrusion to the Arab districts of Iraq so to open the way to their death squads doing the ethnic cleansing, of course shouldering all the monstrosities and illegalities done by the latter, because both wings of the operation, Israel and Iran work for the common purpose: the ethnic cleansing as a necessary preparatory measure for the partition of Iraq, allowing them to get their dirty hands on the loot. Needless to say, this anti-Arab ethnic cleansing is taking place in every possible way, e.g. in the political, cultural, intelligence, logistic, educational, linguistic, military levels.
7. Maliki-Barzani Government (Iran-Israel “pact”)
Tehran has been dealing exclusively with Mossad in Baghdad after the all-out “Sunni” (read: U.S.) walkout from the government it has been a joint Iranian-Israeli (Maliki-Barzani) effort, with understandable common benefit policy of several goals:
§1. Heavy Iranian-Israeli oppression against the Arabs (and other ethnic sections as well), targeted against their leading figures, professionals, military careerists, as well as against the their languages, culture, home place, living conditions, ability to represent themselves legally, the medical treatment, and so on ad infinitum.
§2. The original intention of “implanting” the al-Maliki government was to
accomplish a wide-scale holocaust, horrifying enough to enflame an all-out Sunni vs. Shi’ite civil war in Iraq. In this the “Waffen U.S.” pathfinds the way and repels the resistance forces, thus opening the way for the Iranian (or Al-Qaida or Peshmerga) El Salvador-styled death squads, who take care of the ethnic cleansing right after.
§3. Mildly put, the Waffen U.S. was made to trust into its “allies” Iran and Israel, two of the most racist governments right after their own, so to give birth to the worst of all, the Al-Maliki-Al-Hakim-Al-Sadr-Barzani warlord outfit often outrageously, and outrageously often called the “Iraqi Government” was set loose.
§4. The mercenary phony “insurgent” forces, Mahdi militia, Peshmergah and al-Qaida proving inadequate for the task, the “Al-Maliki government” (a.k.a. the civil war political HQ) broke down in autumn 2006 (the Maliki cover-up now held up for a front till its “replacement” – now in progress – has been completed).
§5. Today, this “Iraqi” government has lost its last respect among the Iraqi people, especially after its evil schemes to destroy Iraq and Iraqis, stealing the wealth of Iraqi nation and the future generations of Iraqis in a blatant blow-job job in favor of the worst occupiers, Iran and Israel and their Waffen US tool.
8. The U.S. of Israel vs. Iran Conflict Course
§1. The U.S. of Israel aims to control Iraq (and with that, the region and then, the world). The D.C. Puppet Administration threatens Iran day and night, and though the offensive (i.e. most) part of this media effort is just a bogus (at the moment), their underlying fear is not: in the current circumstances, it is exceedingly likely that both the U.S. and the Israel lose simultaneously in Iraq, which will lead into the collapse of Israel, which in its turn to the collapse of their Arab puppet governments and the liberation of the countries. A definite no-go for the U.S. – for the moment (as it hasn’t been forced to this just yet, that is).
§2. Iran would like to replace the U.S. of Israel as the main occupier of Iraq and thus, the Middle East. It is for this purpose that it has the hordes of pathfinders and agents installed in the occupied Iraq. To these belong criminals such as al-Hakim(s), al-Maliki and al-Sadr, not to mention their military counterparts, all furiously working to accomplish an invasion bridge to Iraq. To hide its malign intentions the Tehran is using the worlds strictest known censor campaign in the Southern Iraq, twisting the truth about its activities it has succeeded to keep many Iraqi men loyal to Iran.
§3. Both occupiers face the same dilemma: the want to have their share of the partition, but so to succeed they have to prevent their “partner” from having having his own. They call this the “Vicious Circle of Attrition”. This is the essence of “Tehran vs. Tel Aviv” (With spokesman Bush in Washington).
§4. Tel Aviv-ngton D.C. wants to:
(a) Get rid of al-Maliki puppet government Iranian-Zionist double agents
(b) Replace them with new puppets now waiting to enter the stage in Iraq, Iran and abroad.
(c) Cut the strategic invasion plan Tehran has plotted for Iraq by setting the H-hour of the Iraqi partition earlier than Iran is ready to Invade.
§5. So to prevent this, Iran is escalating its invasion efforts and trying to interrupt the U.S. plan by all the possible means available. An intelligence war against the time.
§6. IMPORTANT: What comes to the occupiers for their part the Iraqi Partition would be a deal done, only that there’s a disagreement of its timetable: the USrael wants it when it wins, Iran when it wins.
9. Baathification vs. Debaathification
The thing, in all its simpleness, is that to get “influence” in the “political level” in the future “Federal State of Iraq”, i.e. the “political reconciliation” the Waffen US needs a governmental Puppet Party of its own, just like Iran (al-Sistani) and Israel (Barzani) now have, with at least somewhat attractive puppet figures so to fetch at least reasonable voting to be worked on the supposed election forgery.
§1. A puppet state is not much more complicated than a doll house. Basically the idea is the same: you have a mother doll, a father doll and a couple of kid dolls, while in comparison a puppet state (such as Iraq) has a doll arsenal something like this:
(a) Puppet government (including parties, admins, high ups &c.)
(b) Puppet police (including their leaders, guards, special units &c.)
(c) Puppet army (including “Secret” service, a HQ unit &c.)
§2. Now the problem is that the U.S. fell out of the Iraqi politics, because it didn’t have a political party with credible backup, because the only such backup in the U.S.-led Iraq is a sectarian militia formation. Needless to say, such a Sunni sectarian militia force (of Peshmerga, Mahdi Army al-Qaida style) is the future U.S. puppet army of the Federal State of Iraq.
§3. As already mentioned, the price (a.k.a. “security guarantee”) demanded by Iran for letting Israel to “cut the U.S. in” in the Iraq loot was the “baathification”, a cover for the U.S.-supported and coordinated Iranian search-and-destroy operation of the Baath party members of any kind, and actually a clumsy front for an Iranian-executed ethnic cleansing of Iraq for the purposes of the partition.
§4. Accordingly, right after the U.S. invasion, the fully prepared Iran, assisted by the U.S. in all the ways possible and impossible went right after the Baathists, and more generally, the military and “high-level targets” of any and every kind, just as agreed between Israel and Iran in their plotting of the future war.
§5. Unfortunately for the Americans, and due to that, for Israel, the prize demanded by Iran for allowing the U.S. and Israel to enter Iraq in the first place was to turn out costly: the “U.S. Armed Forces” (a.k.a. Israel) and the “Iraqi” government (a.k.a. Iran) arose the entire flourishing military elite professional class (and with them, everyone) against the occupation with the results to the future U.S. combat possibilities now evident. Furthermore, their actions prevented any puppet Sunni (read: U.S.) participation in the al-Maliki government decision-making, now fully and completely in the hands of the original war-initiators, with disastrous results for the U.S. with no means to reverse the process: Even if the Sunni policymakers didn’t stay off the government because caring for shit about their deeds, then they backed off from it because of the U.S. orders: still in need of a favour from the Sunni puppets, the U.S. could not let them ruin their reputation completely by joining the al-Maliki (Iran, Israel) government in the “decision making”.
§6. Previously assisting Iran in the wipe-out of the Baath Party members during this year the U.S. has been sitting, negotiating (and plotting) with “de-baathificators” (the pro-U.S. Baath Party traitors). Furthermore, the U.S. (Petraeus) and “Iraq” (al-Hashemi (US), al-Maliki(Iran)) have offered their “broad support” for strengthening Baath and its commanders, so that just a couple of days ago it became known that the al-Maliki (“Green Zone”) government is negotiating with the Baath party, the Baath now willing to join al-Maliki’s and Barzani’s holocaust efforts in the Middle Iraq.
10. Conditions for the Looting of Iraq
To find out what’s this all about, we need to back to the basics:
§1. In order to get back to the administration business of the Federal State of Iraq (i.e. to the oil loot), the U.S. has to deliver a three puppets to the game, namely: (a) puppet army, (b) puppet police and (c) puppet administration.
§2. According to the U.S. babble, this time it is starting from “the grass roots”, by which the U.S. means its is building up the puppet militias (with local militias as police, and federal militias as army) before announcing its long ago set-up political party, agreed to participate in the new “federal” government (needless to say, the pro-U.S. “de-Baath” party has a lot to do with this scheme).
§3. Before entering the revelation of the entire plot, we’ll go through the details of it by reviewing its central components, the Puppet Police, the Puppet Army and the Puppet Government (in this order):
11. Police Force (local militia) Formation
§1. The pro-U.S. local militia is recruited (read: bribed) by the U.S. generals opening their checkbooks for the local warlord sheikhs so to convince them to join the Anbar Salvation (a.k.a. Slavation) council. Endless supply of bribery is of course added to this to enable them to buy weapons (smuggled to the bazaars by the U.S. so to secure they’ll get their money back) and of course, hire the local mercenary Sunni militia (the local Mahdi Peshmerga Militia, that is). These “police” forces will be strengthened in the future by disbanding the current U.S. “national” police forces by splitting their members according to the sectarian lines respectively to the South, Middle and Northern Iraq (or so the Iraq partition plot goes).
§2. The Iranian invasion agent Ammar al-Hakim, flanked by Hadi al-Amri, the leader of the Badr Brigades (the SIIC military branch trained by the Iran’s Revolutionary Gds) recently visited ar-Ramadi to “talk” to Sheikh Ahmed Abu Risha, brother of the late Abdul Sattar Abu Risha, the former leader of the “tribal coalition” Anbar Awakening Council, Ammar al-Hakim glowingly described “a national hero”, and who was IEDed by the Unidentified Muslim Charity Workers as their “1st of Ramadan Contribution”.
§3. Needless to say, for this the Al-Anbar Slavation Council’s tribal sheikhs (as well as their counterparts in the Shi’ite South), enforced with the by now seasoned traitors (such as al-Hashemi, etc.), will provide the new dolls for the puppet parliament and other governmental posts of the “Federal Iraq”.
12. The Requirements of the Army of the Federal Iraq
§1. An absolute pre-condition for the “controlled” partition of Iraq is an existent “federal Army” (or actually, a militia): should that fail, there will be no central control, therefore, no federal control, and therefore, no covert project for the oil loot, an absolute disaster for the U.S.
§2. Because of the tactical and strategic defeat of the Waffen U.S. (cf. above), the U.S. administration is in a devastating hurry in replacing its nearly broken Army units with formations from the “federal” army – and withdrawing its own troops to the permanent bases (so to control the surroundings and to train the militia forces from there).
§3. The federal army, i.e. the product of the Petraeus’s counterinsurgency war in Diyala and elsewhere in Iraqi (CY 2007) has a central task of replacing the soundly beaten U.S. Forces and continuing their fight “against the terrorists” (which will soon be defined as the heroic Armed Iraqi Resistance, especially Al-Jihad and Reform, Al-Jihad and Change and the Southern Resistance Fronts, all of them plotted to be called as “al-Qaida” by the Occupier (in contrast with the term “Iraqi Resistance” becoming reserved to the Petraeus’ “Counterinsurgency” army (or rather: counterresistance army).
§4. Unfortunately for them, the U.S. faces a serious “recruiting problem” since practically nobody (some 97% of Sunnis opposing the U.S. occupation) in Al-Anbar is willing to collaborate with anything having anything to do with the U.S. and its minions. Therefore the only way to “sell” the new sectarian formation to Iraqis (except the money, of course), is that it must appear to the buyers as if an “anti-U.S.”, “anti-Iranian”, “anti-occupation” resistance force. So to appear as if a resistance group, the word “Jihad” must appear in it (like as with the Al-Jihad and Reform and Al-Jihad and Change Fronts). Furthermore – as it is intended to Liberate the U.S. forces from the battle responsibility – one may as well demand that the word “Liberation” should appear in it (the latter sold to the Iraqis by the propaganda media as if “Liberation” of Iraq, of course), so that let’s have a look how the Petraeus’ Counterinsurgency army (with these ingredients) looks like:
13. Jihad and Liberation
§1. Ayad Allawi, a former Baath party member is not only behind the ideas of the “National Pact” (to be ), but simultaneously the central machinator in the “serious talks” between the Allawi bloc and the members of the Baath party loyal to Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri.
§2. This pro-U.S. Baath, calling itself “Iraqi Resistance” announced some weeks ago the founding of “Supreme Command for the Jihad and Liberation” (supreme commanded by Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, of course), declaring this to comprise of 22 “groups”:
(1) The Army of the Men of the Naqshbandiyah Order.
(2) The Army of the Prophet’s Companions (Jaysh al-Sahaba)
(3) The Army of the Murabiteen (Jaysh al-Murabiteen)
(4) The Army of al-Hamzah.
(5) The Army of the Message (Jaysh al-Risala)
(6) The Army of Ibn al-Walid (Jaysh al-Walid)
(7) The United Command of the Mujahideen (Iraq).
(8) The Liberation Brigades (Kataeb al-Tahrir)
(9) The Army of al-Mustafa (Jaysh al-Mustafa)
(10) The Army of the Liberation of Iraq (Jaysh Tahrir Iraq)
(11) Squadrons of the Martyrs (Saraya al-Shuhada)
(12) The Army of the Sabireen (Jaysh al-Sabireen)
(13) The Brigades of the Jihad in the Land of the Two Rivers (Kataeb al-Jihad al-Ard al-Rafyein)
(14) The army of the Knight for the Liberation of the (Kurdish) Self-Rule Area (Jaysh al-Faris)
(15) Squadrons of the Jihad in al-Basrah (Saraya al-Jihad)
(16) Jihadist Squadrons of al-Fallujah (Saraya al-Falluja al-Jihadiya)
(17) The Patriotic Popular Front for the Liberation of Iraq.
(18) The Squatrons of the Husayni Revolution of at-Taf (Saraya Altaf al-Husseiniya)
(19) Squadrons of the Liberation of the South (Saraya Tahrir al-Junoob)
(20) Army of Haneen (Jaysh Haneen)
(21) Squadrons of Diyala (Saraya Diyala) for Jihad and Liberation
(22) The Squadrons of Glory (Saraya Al-Majd) for the Liberation of Iraq.
§3. Mildly put, the NDHF Analyst Team has been sorely troubled by the suggestion presented by “Jihad and Liberation” that all the resistance groups should unify with this formation. Even if not going back to what’s already been said, there are several PROBLEMS, those topping the list mentioned here:
(1) Our team, with long experience on the Iraqi Armed Resistance (having just published the most comprehensive orders of the battle of the Iraqi Armed Resistance proper available) would like to point out, highlight and underline the fact that all the units in the catalogue, except the al-Douri’s own group (small), the Naqshbandiyah Order, are previously unheard of, so that calling them “resistance” is non-sense: non of them has never had any chance to resist the occupation, because they we’re just formed in last summer. The formations above have nothing to do with resistance, even less with defending the Iraqis.
(2) Nor have the formations in question to resist the occupation, since the Jihad and Liberation is nothing but a command structure of the baathist traitor officers provided by the party to the dirty purposes of Petraeus’ Counterinsurgency Army: last summer they went on to combat against the Armed Iraqi Resistance in the Diyala Province and were involved in opening the way to the Peshmerga, Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigade’s death squads there. Furthermore, lacking any other troops for its hard core nucleus, it is formed from the the disbanded Al-Qaida, the U.S. using its pro-U.S. ISI infiltrators redeploying these to the mercenary formations available in Diyala (all of the merc militias, Mahdi Army, Badr Brigades, Al-Qaida, Peshmergah and the Waffen U.S. were practicing the ethnical cleansing in this joint rehearsal). In this manner the problem of the Baath party, being not in possession of Armed Formations of its own (which cannot be doubted due to the virtual absence of any Baath combat reports, except by some well-known western propagandist) has been “solved” by the Waffen U.S. by unifying the previous Al-Qaida infiltrators to the pro-U.S. Baath officers enforced with the Anbar Slavation council and other infiltrators. It is no coincident that the appearance of the Baath front “Jihad and Liberation” (with new never-heard-before formations) comes simultaneously with the official ending of the U.S. operations in the Diyala province.
(3) In Baghdad, 22 August AKI reported the following: “The leader of Iraq’s (…) Baath party, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, has decided to join efforts by the Iraqi authorities to “fight al-Qaeda” al-Qaida here as the current label for the Armed Iraqi Resistance, one of the party’s former top officials, Abu Wisam al-Jashaami, told pan-Arab daily Al Hayat. Al-Douri has decided to sever ties with “al-Qaeda” and sign up to the programme of the “national” “resistance” (now known as the Petraeus’s Counterinsurgency Army a.k.a. “Jihad and Liberation”), which – according to al-Jashaami – includes with translations in the corner brackets:
(a) Routing Islamist terrorists a.k.a. the Iraqi Armed Resistance
(b) Opening up dialogue with the Baghdad government i.e. al-Maliki
(c) Opening up dialogue with foreign U.S., Iranian forces.
So, here we are then, a group calling itself “Iraqi Resistance”, actually the pro-U.S. al-Qaida infiltrators jump from assisting the Waffen U.S. to another formation to continue its fight against the armed resistance proper.
(4) But the worst nonsense of all is yet to come: the “Jihad and Liberation”, never shot a bullet except against the true Iraqi Resistance, as their first move after the “formation” of the phony front proceeds with offering to surrender. The surrealism of the “conditions” the “Jihad and Liberation”, a non-existent non-combat formation “dictates” are obvious: it suggest a “ceasefire” (as if having done some shooting) in exchange for the U.S. “officially announce an unconditional withdrawal from Iraq”. Anyone having spent some time in the business, knows that this is the purest poop you can release: every U.S. announcement – official or not – is worthless and not to be trusted. Evidently, this doesn’t seem to trouble the Baathist traitors who in their “Unification Congress” (in September) revealingly enough announce that their “aim is the total liberation of the entirety of Iraq, however long that might take.” In other words, these people will wait the liberation as long as the Iraqi National wealth is looted, as long as they’re taken back to power (for which they’ve been working all these years collaborating with the U.S. and deceiving their own people as well as some “bonafiders” around).
(5) Equal doubts arise concerning the State form announced: While the “manifesto” of this Baath claims “that one-man rule was being done away with” it has simultaneously chosen the already appointed “Secretary General of the Baath Party” and the “elected” (by whom?) “Iraqi President” Izzat Ibrahim ad-Douri also as the “Supreme Commander of the Jihad and Liberation”. Comparing the statement to the reality it rather appears that the “one-man rule has been done” rather than “done away with”. Actually, the true form of the thinking behind the front was revealed by al-Basrah, who just yesterday released some leaflets containing the all-revealing inconsistency of the ideology with referring to a “Global National Front”. There is no such thing, except in the thinking of pro-U.S. al-Qaidist nuts, and revealingly enough, that’s what al-Douri (and his lunatic friends) are (should you hesitate on whether al-Douri is for a pro-U.S. caliphate or not, simply ask then, if he’s for an anti-U.S. caliphate, why didn’t he join the anti-U.S. caliphate program (as represented by the Hamas-Iraq?) Unfortunately, the answer seem to be that Al-Douri is in favour of an international pro-U.S. puppet caliphate waging a war against Iran with the support of Arab puppets and Israel (as if such lunacy was something the Iraqis need in the any future after all they’ve been through in the recent years).
(6) Recently IRR (Nasr) reported that “the Supreme Command for the Jihad and Liberation (… is) not affiliated with the new Political Council for the Iraqi Resistance i.e. the Jihad and Reform front + Hamas + Jaami“, which is impossible to accept: besides the Al-Jihad and Change Front, Al-Jihad and Reform Front is the another front that can be only welcomed, because (1) the solid fight they’ve put forth (2) they’re backed by decent Iraqi Clerical Council, Ansarusunnah, the Ansar al-Sunna Sharia Council (3) their attitudes to any negotiations with all occupiers are sound (i.e. non-collaborationist) – unlike those of “Jihad” and “Liberation”.
(7) In an “explanatory” piece “Iraq’s National Liberation Front” (cf. at the bottom of the article) it is said: “Arab Ba’ath Socialist Party has steadily been uniting and cooperating with all in Iraq who show themselves to be committed to ridding their country of occupation”. This is not true, of course, because in all the Baath statements the true Iraqi Resistance, Al-Jihad and Change Front, Al-Jihad and Reform Front and their political wing, the ASSOCIATION of MUSLIM SCHOLARS in IRAQ is never referred to as an existing entities (not even in their names), so that the crap put forth by the Baath-al-Qaida bozos is simple propaganda for the very same purpose they’ve always been there: to distract those interested in supporting the Iraqi Resistance to waste their efforts with the traitor baathists.
§4. Though the phony “Jihad and Liberation” sectarian militia seems to have made an impression into some weaker minds and actually viewed as if a genuine “resistance formation” (e.g. here, one is not too troubled with this: Months before our Analyst Team today chose to take the trash out, the representatives of what now are known as the Reform and Jihad Front and the Change and Jihad Front declared in a joint interview that both the Ba’ath Party and the al-Qaida will be excluded from the common front of the National Liberation in formation. You don’t have look far to find reasons for that: after million plus dead, two million plus wounded, seven millions plus refugees anybody familiarizing with the enemy in any way or manner is an enemy.
14. The Puppet Government: The National Pact
Naturally, the puppet administration for this grass-root effort has been ready all along:
§1. On September 26 Tariq al-Hashemi recycled the U.S. (read: Israel) favourite Allawi’s “National Pact”, actually the very disguise of the partition of Iraq into three concentration camps. Needless to say, that was “blessed” by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani right after (if we pretend for the moment that al-Sistani wasn’t involved when the Pact was originally forged, that is).
§2. Here are the main aims of the pact are stated in “quotes” followed by an explanatory translation what is actually meant:
(1) Declaration that “terror is not considered resistance”. This is aimed at continuing the U.S. war against the Jihad and Reform Front, Jihad and Change Front and the Shi’ite resistance, i.e. the Iraqi Armed Resistance proper behind the phony label of “fight against al-Qaida”.
(2) Recognizing the “Resistance as a right of all occupied nations” – Translation for this is that the occupier and its puppets are setting up these rights for the phony “Jihad and Liberation”, which will be “recognized” so to fight the true Iraqi resistance (which in its turn will be called al-Qaida or something similar).
(3) “Shunning extremism” – In English, the former el-salvadorian death squad militias of the occupier, especially the Mahdi Army (Shi’ite), al-Qaida (Sunni) and the Peshmerga (Kurd) will be partitioned (just like the Iraq itself and the Baath party).
(4) “Rejecting foreign interference in Iraqi affairs” – By this it is meant that the phony “resistance front” will assist the U.S. Army to withdraw to its permanent bases (with 14 or so them around) so that nobody will interrupt the looting now that the Waffen U.S. has already lost its battle against the heroic, noble Iraqi Resistance.
(5) “Equality of all Iraqis before the law, condemnation of killing based on identity” – This is the disguise for the completing the ethnical cleansing, as it turns out necessary to “separate” the Iraqis from each other so to “protect their equality” (it will turn out that this is “impossible” in any other way than blocking the concentration camps from each other with concrete barriers, of course: See the Palestinian apartheid wall to get our meaning).
§3. Not long after Salih Al-Mutlak (National Dialogue Front), announced
(1) their support for the recently founded The Political Council of the Iraqi Resistance, comprising of six Armed Resistance groups, the Islamic Army in Iraq, the Mujahideen Army, the Fatiheen Army, the Brigades of the Shari’a Council of Ansar al-Sunnah, Islamic Front for the Iraqi resistance (Jaami), and Hamas-Iraq.
(2) that the solution to the Iraqi crisis and achieving the stability is to negotiate with the Iraqi Resistance
§3. Furthermore, the Iraqi Vice President read: “Roy” Tareq al-Hashemi’s Iraqi Islamic Party had issued a statement “welcoming” the formation of the Political Council for the Iraqi Resistance.
§4. Now, as the Anbar Slavation, the phony Baath militia “Jihad and Liberation” (a.k.a. Petraeus’ puppet blow-jobbers) are meeting so to get the details fixed, it should not become as a surprise that whenthe Americans promised to recognize the Iraq resistance, this promise, of course holds for good only for the traitors that were always traitors, i.e. the Baathist puppet forces.
§5. So when Salah al-Mukhtar (c/o IPA c/o Albasrah.net) says amongst his “U.S. negotiation instructions” (to the negotiators) that “A joint delegation representing the resistance factions and not a delegation representing one faction” one immediately grasps the nonsense included in this, because the Iraqi Armed Resistance, no more the Al-Jihad and Change Front, Al-Jihad and Reform Front, the Southern Resistance groups or any other proper Resistance group is not negotiating.
§6. In short, the truth about these instructions is that the U.S. traitor political puppets “offering” their “support” to the Political Council of the Iraqi Resistance only wish to gain their mandate so to deceive them by entering the negotiations as if authorized by them so to negotiate with the U.S. with the result we already know: the phony front “Jihad and Liberation” becomes recognized by the U.S. (and supposedly by UN soon after) as the “legitimate Iraqi Resistance”, in a decision associating the real resistance to the Al-Qaida, so to steal the international goodwill joined by the true resistance.
§7. What comes to Tariq al-Hashemi and his “Iraqi” “Islamic” “Party”, the view of Political Council of the Iraqi Resistance has been readily defined nearly month ago in a Jihad and Reform Front (c/o Political Council of the Iraqi Resistance) Statement on the positions of Tariq al-Hashimi and the Iraqi Islamic Party, condemning the “National Pact”:
“The strange and disagreeable things that the Islamic Party issues have become routine.”, then then adding on Tariq al-Hashemi: “It wasn’t the first time that he did such things.”
To this our eds want only add:
It wasn’t the last time that he did such things, either.
15. The Federal State of “Iraq”
Putting all what’s been said togeter, here you are then: The Partitioned Iraq, the “self-governing regions” or “political reconciliation” (between the occupiers, of course) as plotted by the Occupiers, i.e. the next “Iraqi” government:
§1. Israel (Prez: Barzani c/o Mossad)
(a) Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), Massoud Barzani
(b) Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Jalal Talabani
(c) ARMED WING: Peshmerga
§2. The U.S. (Prez: Embassador Crocker c/o Bush)
(a) Iraqi Accord Front (al-Hashimi, al-Dulaimi)
(b) Anbar Slavation Militia (Ahmed Abu Risha)
(c) Iraqi National Accord (Allawi)
(d) Jihad and Liberation (al-Douri)
§3. Iran (Prez: “Grand Ayatollah” Ali al-Sistani)
(a) SCIRI = SIIC (Abdul Aziz al-Hakim), Badr brigades (Hadi al-Amri)
(b) The Islamic Daawa (Ibrahim Al-Jaafari, “replacing” al-Maliki)
(c) The Fadhila party Iran invasion backers
(d) Mahdi Blog (or the Iran Invasion collaborators of the Blog)
§4. Simply put, all the same puppets responsible for all the Iraqi miseries are plotted to be back in the “government” as when the Vice Roy Bremer passed the puppet mandate to Allawi and his gang (only enforced by foreign Baath invaders ready to participate in the treason of Iraq): There they are:
(a) The Waffen U.S. (Allawi, Hashimi, al-Dulaimi, etc.)
(b) Iranian Invaders (SCIRI (& Badr), Sadr (Mahdi), Jafari,..
Noteworthy in this, of course is that one does not expect the Kurds to participate in this as their Mossad agents are driving the partition exactly with this.
§5. It is the unified opinion of our Analysis Team that no Iraqi should trust to any occupier (Israel, U.S. and Iran) or their minion all of these only with a hideous goal to ethnically cleanse the Iraqis so to proceed with their largest armed robbery attempt in the history of the mankind.
16. The Occupation (Israel, Iran, Waffen U.S.) vs. the Al-Jihad, Reform, Change and Southern Fronts
In these circs the Iraqis have but one choice: to joining the Iraqi Armed or Political Resistance so to partake in the battle of rescuing the Iraqi Motherland, the Country and the Nation from the malicious hands of the vicious occupiers, Israel, the United States and Iran – and their minions.
§1. What comes to the Iraqi Armed Resistance (with a full description of that here, any Resistance formation belonging to either of Al-Jihad and Change Front or Al-Jihad and Reform Front or to the Southern resistance groups is most warmly recommended by the entire NEWSDESK HELSINKI FINLAND crew, just as is their political arm and their healing hands, the ASSOCIATION of MUSLIM SCHOLARS in IRAQ (AMSI), the Jama’at e-Ulema e-Islami (in case you should prefer political activity instead).
§2. These forces of Al-Jihad and Reform Front, Al-Jihad and Change Front and the Southern resistance (whether Sunni or Shi’ite or anything anti-occupation) have already partitioned the occupier (of which partition this is all about, not that of Iraq), so that nothing is lost yet, as long as every Iraqi takes an active step in his/her life and starts supporting these sole legitimate representatives of Iraq and Iraqi people.
The common policy of all the resistance mentioned above is to get rid of all the forms of the occupation, so to retrieve the governing of the Iraqi affairs to no one except the Iraqis themselves. This is the Road to Freedom, this is the only way out. This is why we here in Finland stand steadfast at your side and battle for you without anybody asking that. Do not fail us, as we won’t fail you either.
What comes to this, nothing describes better our feelings about this issue than what the brothers in Al-Jihad and Reformation Front have been repeatedly saying:
In the name of Allah, the most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
Fight them!
To that we have little to add, except perhaps a quote from the brothers in Al-Jihad and Change Front:
And may the best man win!
Finally, we would only what the Jama’at e-Ulema e-Islami has to say to the Resistance Fighters:
Allah always be with you
NDHF Analysis Team: Ilmarinen, Louhi, and Perkele
Editor: Louhi
The analysis is derived inductively from numerous recently appeared articles, of which we’d like to separately mention the following:
Who is Occupying Iraq? (by Samir Obaid, AMSI)
Furthermore, the recent superb Roads to Iraq coverage of the Baath Party (including the little chat in the comment section) should be taken to notice (and to the thought!). The recent Baath articles so far as Roads to Iraq postings (with other central pieces added):
IRAQ: Al-Qaida a.k.a. the “Islamic” Federation of Iraq
Iraqi Resistance announces Founding of Supreme Command for the Jihad and Liberation in Baghdad
Iraq’s National Liberation Front (by Ibrahim Ebeid and Husayn Al-Kurdi)
The Significance of the Jihad and Liberation Declaration (by Salah al-Mukhtar)
Ba’ath party 13th conference: New resistance alliance front and statement about dividing Iraq
How to negotiate with the occupier?
The “Green Zone” government negotiates with the Ba’ath Party
The Americans promised to recognize the Iraq resistance
LINK: http://theunitedstatesofmonsters.blogspot.com/2007/10/hot-news-orders-of-battle-of-armed.html
General Commanding Army Corps of Engineers in Persian Gulf Wounded by IED
General Commanding Army Corps of Engineers in Persian Gulf Wounded by IED
Monday, October 29, 2007
BREAKING NEWS: Pentagon officials confirmed to FOX News that Brigadier Gen. Jeffrey J. Dorko, commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gulf Region Division in Baghdad, was one of two soldiers wounded Monday by an improvised explosive device (IED) in northern Baghdad.
Military officials said Dorko suffered shrapnel wounds and was flown to Landstuhl Army Hospital in Germany for treatment. His wounds were described as non-life threatening.
The other soldier was treated and released.
Dorko was traveling Monday morning with a private security team belonging to Erinys International when the attack occurred in northern Baghdad.
