Turning Away From American State Terrorism

Elections 2008

Elections 2008

The choice we face in November is very clear. It is a choice to continue to support the US terror war, or to turn away from this path of unlimited destruction. This lie-based war is all about terrorism –whether America actually fights terrorism or promotes its use. To
find the answer to this conundrum all we have to do is turn our gaze to Pakistan.

In Pakistan we find the complete history of the American “war on terrorism,” from its Cold War origins nearly thirty years ago to its present incarnation in the illegal American aggression in Pakistan’s Frontier region (FATA, Federally Administered Tribal Areas) and in American attempts to reignite the Cold War with Russia. The latest cross-border attack against Pakistan in South Waziristan, which involved American helicopters and ground troops, costing 15 villagers their lives, represents the first steps in American attempts to escalate its war into a reasonable facsimile of another world war.

Once again, America claims that its aggression against Pakistan is a legitimate act of self-defense against the “Pakistani Taliban” (TTP,Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan), who, it is claimed, are responsible for America’s faltering war effort in Afghanistan. Wednesday’s
aggression was another attempt to get TTP leader Baitullah Mehsud (branded “public enemy number one” by the US) or one of his top commanders. Mehsud is the key to understanding America’s true role in the terror war, that of state terrorism planner and facilitator, in order to later assume the role of defender against the terrorism it causes.

Baitullah Mehsud assumed control of the TTP from its founder, his infamous cousin Abdullah Mehsud. Abdullah was a prisoner at Guantanamo before being inexplicably released to return to Pakistan, where he founded the new Taliban splinter group. On his second day in S. Waziristan he instigated the kidnapping of two Chinese engineers
from the building of the Gomal Zam Dam, beginning the TTP fight against America’s adversaries in the region.

Setting the pattern for all future American terror attacks, the American media reported that America’s secret allies, the TTP, were “al Qaida linked.” Whenever and wherever the Western media uses the expression “al Qaida linked,” to describe terrorist attacks, they are referring to American terrorism. This is also painfully true about those sinister forces that killed 3,000 American civilians on September 11, 2001. American/”al Qaida” terrorism always targets civilians, even American civilians. Next to the US military, al
Qaida is the greatest killer of innocent Muslims in the world.

full article: www.insight-info.com

Advertisements

1835: theatre or diplomacy?

United Nations Security Council

Transforming diplomacy to showing off, action to presentation, and pressure to protecting honor are the most important yard sticks of the present age. The issue of resolution 1835 shows all of these. Yesterday morning, the Security Council of the United Nations issued a resolution against Iran. The writers confessed to the fact and the text showed that it was only an emphasis of previous resolutions and that there was nothing new in it. After the resolution was passed, the American who seemed excited immediately tried to clarify the purpose of the P5+1 from this move so that no misunderstanding could remain. Rice, in the first minutes after the resolution was passed, told Reuters that Iran should recognize that the P5+1 is still strong. After her other foreign ministers made similar statements explaining the reasons behind the resolution. David Miliband, who has always been severely against Iran, told a French news agency that this resolution shows that the will of six powers in the world in regards to the Iranian nuclear program has not weakened. Frank-Walter Steinmeier showed his views in a prettier and clearer statement. The press in New York wrote narrated him saying that there was no new sanctions in the resolution against Iran, but it was a move made so that Iran would not become happy over the differences that arose in the P5+1.

Allow me to start the discussion by asking a question: What message should Iran take from the resolution? America, and apparently all of the six nations of the group, want Iran to take the message that the internal differences of the six nations was really a mistake in calculations made by Iran and that all of these countries are united in preventing a nuclear Iran. The recent debates in regards to Georgia and other issues, whatever they are, do not make any difference in relation to Iran. They are still firm in whatever was previously written in resolutions drafted by the Security Council of the United Nations. But, the truth is that 1835 can, in no way, relate such a message. Rather, the opposite. Just as many political analogists in Tehran conclude, the issuing of this resolution and the words that the western politicians said in regards to explaining their actions all show that Iran made the correct calculations. 1835 is nothing but a small Band-Aid placed over the deep wounds of differences that the P5+1 have. It is interesting that western politicians said that their purpose was to prevent Iran from becoming happier. It was a way of coming together despite differences and showing how they will react to Iran not hiding their differences which are clearer than the sun.

If we go a little bit back in the past the issue will become clearer. After the latest developments in Georgia where the west and Russia stood up, face to face, for the first time after the Cold War, the cooperation of the P5+1 felt a shock in regards to Iran. Some Russian and European sources wrote in the first days that the first sacrifice of this situation, before Georgia, will be the P5+1’s efforts for cooperation in quelling Iran’s nuclear program. A few days after the fighting the analysis was seen in almost all of the world’s media that great diplomacy has ended and Russia will not longer continue its cooperation with the west, including in regards to Iran’s nuclear program. Inside Iran, although America’s efforts to create divisions in the Caucuses were rebuked, but nobody believed that the problems in Georgia would take Russia out of the western camp and make them join with Iran. Almost all people inside Iran believed that Russia has always dealed with Iran and will continue to do this. They benefit from this and this is exactly what happened. Meanwhile, it is not necessarily because of Russia’s resistance, rather it is mostly because of the successful and effective resistance of Iran that the pressure on Iran has increased and sanctions of become more severe. The Georgia issue was only a small aid to this process.

full article: www.insight-info.com


Brzezinski: McCain would start WWIV

 

Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:26:50

Former White House national security adviser says if John McCain becomes the next US president the world will move toward World War IV.

Former US President Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski criticized US officials in Senator McCain’s camp for pushing the presumptive Republican nominee toward a radical foreign policy on issues such as Iran.

Brzezinski described McCain’s presidency as an ‘appalling concept’ as it would lead to the World War IV, arguing that from the viewpoint of figures surrounding the Arizona senator the Cold War counted as World War III.

“Well, if McCain is president and if his Secretary of State is Joe Lieberman and his Secretary of Defense is [Rudolph] Giuliani, we will be moving towards the World War IV that they have been both favoring and predicting,” Brzezinski cautioned.

Earlier in October 2007, President George W. Bush, who has endorsed John McCain, warned of the eruption of World War III should Iran continue uranium enrichment.

CS/HGH 

Nato Culture: Peace for the west and war for the rest

Summary: The Islamic revolution of Iran quickly spread Islamic Awakening. This movement brought about reactions in the west in both the intellectual and the practical arenas. On the intellectual side thoughts emerged which were given the title of the ‘clash of civilizations.’ Maybe Huntington’s sentence: “The future is for Islam and Islam will make the west fall,” clarifies which side will win for all of the politicians in the west.

 

Nato emblem

 

When the Second World War ended the powers that be established a temporary union so that they could benefit more from their victories in peace and divide the power better between each other. On the one side they wanted peace and on the other they were after more power and wealth by moving ahead of their adversaries. This caused the cold war between the East and the West.

 

During the cold war years, especially at the beginning, there was a sort of grouping between the East and the West. The Western countries sided with each other just like the Eastern countries did. The Liberal west with America at its head was more successful in taking out its socialist neighbors so that socialism would not influence the west.

 

The scholars of the liberal powers intellectually stood up to the socialists next to the military. They used the term modernization for this. This style of thought was sent to most third world countries. Most of these western scholars confessed in the 1990s that bringing modernization to the third world was not done completely. They only gave some thoughts and plans to the countries so that they would be on the way to modernization but would never get there. The reason behind this is that they did not want these countries to be competitors to America and to keep them forever reliant on the west.

 

Full article: http://www.insight-info.com

A Glaring Preventive Tactic

 

The Lebanese resistance fighters’ actions purifying the capitol from para-military fighters and connected to Walid Jumblatt and the 14th of March Political Movement was Hizbollah’s second preventive strike against the complicated Ameircan-Israeli plans against Hizbollah. The public force of the resistance lead by Hizbollah surprised the hands that were at work after suspicious activity was seen and before it was too late for them to do anything. Capturing 800 para-military fighters made the plan of acting against the resistance from inside Beirut until the Mediterranean Sea unpractical. Some other actions that the popular resistance was able to do in 24 hours were blocking all roads leading to the airport, stopping the activities of some television, radio, and newspaper outlets (such as Al-Mustaqbal and al-Sharq). This confused the enemies’ plots. These measures occurred hours after Hizbollah’s Secretary-General’s speech and news conference where he laid it all out for the opposition who is in authority. The authorities who operate by Saudi Arabian money and who are representatives of America and Israel in Lebanon tried to destroy Hizbollah’s political, informational, and security strength in a few moves. If they were successful they would have been the groundwork for implementing America’s stratedgy of crippling Hizbollah.

 

beirut

 

About three months after Hajj Imad Mughniyeh’s, Hizbollah’s high commander, assassination which has been said to have been carried out by Jumblatt’s and Saudi Arabian security forces helped by Israeli spy agents, many accusations have been made against Hizbollah by Walid Jumblatt and newspapers connected to the 14th of March Political Movement. They tried to put public pressure on Hizbollah to disarm themselves. They claimed that Hizbollah, with the cooperation of Wafiq Shaqir (the head Beirut’s airport security), put video cameras around the airport in order to be able to control political figures movement and possible carry out assassinations. Another accusation was that Hizbollah overhears governmental phone conversations with their own phone system. The Siniora government, which is itself an illegal government, made a move by firing Shaqir and planned to cut Hizbollah’s phone system – which is a successful informational tool and one of the factor’s behind their victory in the 33-Day-War. Add this to the addition of American warships in Lebanese waters and the leakage of the American-Israeli plan to bomb Beirut and assassinate the leaders of the resistance including Sayyid Hassan Nasrullah.

 

Hizbollah is known in Beirut to be exclusive and because of this the authorities thought that they would be successful in a cold-war against them. They thought that they would be destroyed without war and without bloodshed. But, Hizbollah’s sudden move purifying Beirut and taking control of the country, which will probably end in Siniora’s resignation, shows that Sayyid Hassan Nasrullah and his people have completely surprised their enemies. Just as they did 2 years ago in the summer – shook up Israeli’s plans of a huge attack on Lebanon – they did it again now.

 

Sayyid Hassan Nasrullah once again showed that he is an ancestor of Ali bin Abi Talib (a)!

www.insight-info.com