May 062011

By Aleksey Pushkov – Russia Today

Amid the flurry of comments on the operation that killed the world’s No. 1 terrorist Osama bin Laden, the war in Libya cannot boast of any achievements of similar proportions and is clearly taking longer than expected. Thus, it is no wonder that the killing of Muammar Gaddafi, another “enemy of the civilized world,” is on the agenda today. Evidently, when Barack Obama said that Gaddafi must go, he expected that the latter would obsequiously follow his order. But no such luck. “The Obama administration imagined that a taste of the lash would put Gaddafi in his place,” writes US columnist Steve Chapman. “Either he would stop his attacks, or he would be forced from power, or both. But neither has happened, and neither is about to.” As a result, the main goal of NATO’s war efforts in Libya is now to get Gaddafi. NATO’s leadership has long forgotten about the initial objective, i.e. to protect civilians. Judging by the way they bomb Tripoli, they think Gaddafi is the only person living there. “Any innocent lives saved in Benghazi may be lost elsewhere as the war settles into a bloody stalemate,” Steve Chapman continues. But that’s not all – there are also civilians killed directly by NATO air strikes.

He is right about the stalemate though. Notwithstanding optimistic reports, NATO chiefs are in despair, says the Financial Times: “The result is the allies are still providing enough military support to prevent the rebels’ defeat, but not enough to end the bloodshed or achieve the declared objectives.”

The objective is clear. It is to change the regime in Libya by ousting Gaddafi or, still better, killing him. But this objective declared by the leaders of the US, France and the UK has nothing to do with UN decisions. That’s what prompted Vladimir Putin to make the following comment during his visit to Copenhagen: “Many said that they were not interested in Gaddafi’s death. Now, certain officials say out loud that they want Gaddafi killed. Did anyone authorize such pronouncements? Has any court sentenced him to death? Who can assume the right to kill a man, however bad he might be? Everyone keeps silent on this…. We should act responsibly, in compliance with international law and with consideration for civilians. Meanwhile, the so-called civilized community with all its might attacks a small country and destroys its infrastructure, created by many generations’ efforts. I don’t know whether this is good or bad but I don’t like it.”

The thing is, however, that international law has been consistently and purposefully undermined over the past ten years. When the US and its allies invaded Iraq in 2003, it was an outrageous violation of international law. When Kosovo was separated from Serbia in 2008, this too was another violation of international law. When the West, for all practical purposes, supported Saakashvili in his aggression against Tskhinval in August 2008, it was again an infringement against international law. As a result, international law has been reduced to a nuisance that interferes with plans drawn up in Washington or Brussels. One may recall a remark George W. Bush once made to the press: “International law? I better call my lawyer. I don’t know what you’re talking about.”

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates gave a staggering answer to Putin’s remark: “We are not targeting him specifically, but we do consider command-and-control targets legitimate targets wherever we find them.” Actually, this statement marked the end of Gates’ career, as he resigned the next day and was replaced by CIA Director Leon Panetta.

However, his resignation clearly does not mean that Gates expressed his personal opinion. The US leadership always deems legitimate whatever it decides to do, even if it is totally illegitimate. They decide to separate Kosovo, and it’s legitimate. They decide to bomb the TV station in Belgrade, and it’s legitimate. They decide to supply Libyan rebels with weapons despite a strict ban by the UN Security Council, and, according to Hillary Clinton and UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, it’s legitimate too. Now the EU is gearing up for a ground operation in Libya, which they call a humanitarian mission. Naturally, its objective is to protect civilians in Libya even better. To achieve this goal, military equipment, troops, engineers, air-traffic controllers and reconnaissance units will be deployed in Libya. In other words, we already have one humanitarian operation underway, and soon there will be another one, even more humanitarian.

If a ground operation is launched, this will show that the resolutions of the UN Security Council, which has clearly prohibited it, mean absolutely nothing. But without a ground operation, the allies will not be able to kill Gaddafi, to end the war quickly and to triumph on the remains of what used to be called international law.


 Posted by at 1:05 pm
May 032011

"Osama's mansion:" Looking more like an LA crack house, it is more likely that it was a CIA building hosting an "exercise" that went "live" at the cost of multiple, unsuspecting lives. Of course, this is just as credible as government claims based on evidence either photoshopped, burned to the ground or at the bottom of the sea.

Globalist think-tanks are already building a case against Pakistan

By Tony Cartalucci

Foundation for the Defense of Democracy (FDD) scribe and all around intellectually dishonest propagandist, Bill Roggio of the “Long War Journal,” has dedicated his life to perpetuating the entirely fake “War on Terror,” abandoning all objectivity with the very name of his now officially government funded, Neo-Conservative establishment affiliated blog. The term “Long War” of course is a throwback to the Bush era and constant reassurances by the president that indeed the “War on Terror” will be endless.

FDD and their doppelganger organization Foreign Policy Initiative – essentially the reincarnation of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) – were amongst the first in the wake of Obama’s announcement to begin implicating Pakistan for harboring Bin Laden leading up to his death. These calls have only intensified.

Roggio’s recent article, “Pakistani complicity in sheltering Osama bin Laden is evident” lays out what appears to be a convincing argument that not only was Pakistan aware of Bin Laden’s presence in the city of Abbotabad, the center of Pakistan’s military and intelligence community, but were complicit in providing him with sanctuary. Roggio is quick to remind readers of Pakistan’s “vast links to terrorist groups.”

Despite arguing that Pakistan was knowingly harboring the most notorious fugitive in human history, Roggio suggests that the US kept the operation a complete secret from Pakistani intelligence until the operation itself was underway – and even then – the US did not reveal the location of the operation because of a supposed lack of trust. Unfettered, Roggio skips past this lapse of logic either out of his own lack of imagination or his utter contempt for his readership. Of course, if Osama Bin Laden was actually in Abbotabad, and Pakistan was providing him sanctuary, wouldn’t the compound itself be under constant watch? At the very least, after the operation was announced to Pakistani officials, wouldn’t they already know the exact location?

Roggio’s poorly contrived narrative, like the entire Bin Laden hoax itself, along with FDD and FPI’s entire existence is not meant to advance our understanding of the world but rather advance the agenda of the corporate-financier interests that drive these nefarious organizations. In this case, Pakistan stands as an obstacle on the war path that begins in the Middle East with the engineered, US-funded “Arab Spring” and stabs outward through Eastern Europe, Central Asia and as far as Moscow and Beijing.

Tensions in Pakistan have been rising dramatically as of late. Open calls from corporate-financier funded think-tanks have been made to literally carve Pakistan into smaller states via a US-funded insurrection in the province of Baluchistan. This is in direct response to Pakistan’s growing relationship with China and its increasing defiance against serving American interests in the region.

Globalist scribe Selig Harrison of the Soros funded Center for International Policy has published two pieces regarding the overarching importance of Pakistan in a broader geopolitical context and ways to bring about favorable “change.” Harrison’s February 2011 piece, “Free Baluchistan,” in name alone indicates yet another “freedom movement” contrived and fueled to give a favorable outcome to his corporate-financier patrons. He explicitly calls to “aid the 6 million Baluch insurgents fighting for independence from Pakistan in the face of growing ISI repression.” He continues by explaining the various merits of such meddling by stating, “Pakistan has given China a base at Gwadar in the heart of Baluch territory. So an independent Baluchistan would serve U.S. strategic interests in addition to the immediate goal of countering Islamist forces.”

Harrison would follow up his call to carve up Pakistan by addressing the issue of Chinese-Pakistani relations in a March 2011 piece titled, “The Chinese Cozy Up to the Pakistanis.” He begins by stating, “China’s expanding reach is a natural and acceptable accompaniment of its growing power—but only up to a point. ” He then reiterates his call for extraterritorial meddling in Pakistan by saying, “to counter what China is doing in Pakistan, the United States should play hardball by supporting the movement for an independent Baluchistan along the Arabian Sea and working with Baluch insurgents to oust the Chinese from their budding naval base at Gwadar. Beijing wants its inroads into Gilgit and Baltistan to be the first step on its way to an Arabian Sea outlet at Gwadar.”

Considering that Baluchi rebels are already being funded and armed to wage war inside of Iran, it is more than likely similar aid is being rendered to them to confront the ISI and Pakistan’s government. After a recent show of defiance by Pakistan calling on the US to halt all drone operations within its borders, the CIA responded with multiple attacks, the latest of which killed at least 22, including woman and possibly children, seemingly just to spite and incense this reassertion of national sovereignty.

Now, finding “Osama Bin Laden” in the heart of Pakistan’s intelligence and military community serves as an overt threat to Pakistan, with cheerleaders like Roggio already waving the accusing finger particularly at the ISI and leaving it for now, to our and Pakistani officials’ imaginations as to what the next logical course of action will be.

Pakistan is faced with two choices. Remain complicit with the West as it sets out to dominate the planet to Pakistan’s own detriment, or call the United States’ bluff – a bluff they have no way of making good on. Life is going to be miserable in Pakistan for the foreseeable future no matter what decision they make as they serve as a point of convergence for the West’s designs on Iran, China, and Russia.

Concurrently, while Washington poses as India’s ally, the sole purpose of this relationship is to manage the growth of competition in both China and across the entirety of Central and South Asia – including India. Perhaps India as well has been getting cold feet, unwilling to play its part against Pakistan and China, necessitating another convenient precision release from Wikileaks targeting the Indian government for rampant corruption – which in turn has generated an “anti-corruption movement.”

While India seems to hope the announcement of Bin Laden’s latest death will finally give America the excuse to make a graceful exit from the region, the warmongers who started and perpetuated the war, including FDD, FPI, and propagandists like Bill Roggio suggest it will only serve as an impetus to stay longer and expand operations further. Perhaps now would be a good time for India, Pakistan and China together to abandon this strategy of tension that ultimately serves none of their best interests and eject the West once and for all from their borders and the region as a whole. At the very least, it is most certainly time for individuals to claim back their personal and national sovereignty from a ruling elite that has clearly lost its mind

 Posted by at 10:58 am
May 022011
Osama Bin Laden: Not an Issue

Globalists cartoonishly pull rabbit from hat in desperate act of misdirection. by Tony Cartalucci – The Land Destroyer Report We were knowingly told verified lies to invade and occupy Iraq. We were lied to entirely about the “spontaneous” “Arab Spring” later admitted to by the US State Department as a preplanned operation years in the making. We were knowingly told verified lies regarding Libya to engage in military operations in North Africa and we are currently being told verified lies about US-fueled uprisings in Syria. Now we are told the notoriously deceptive CIA has “killed” “Osama Bin Laden” in Pakistan. This is the same CIA ……. [Full Post]

 Posted by at 9:45 am
Apr 122011

“WE CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH, SOME OF US ANYWAY” By Gordon Duff  – Veterans Today 11 April 2011 America is in its 10th year of war in Afghanistan and losing.  Everyone there hates us, we haven’t won a single “heart” or “mind.”  We have succeeded in building an empire of opium and heroin on a scale never before imagined. Millions at home, tens of millions in Russia, Europe and around the world have been destroyed by the flood of narcotics distributed with deadly efficiency by a combination of rogue military and intelligence operations and the contracting firms we payed to protect us. American corruption, incompetence ……. [Full Post]

 Posted by at 4:56 pm
© 2011 Wikispooks Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha
Sharing Buttons by Linksku