Thursday, December 10, 2009

Back-Tracker Obama

It is not often I write on this Blog anymore, but today I thought I just had to write a few lines. After all today is the day that the Noble Peace Prize lost its value. Possibly all of the Noble Prizes. The people of the future who will be unlucky enough to be awarded the Noble Peace Prize will receive a worthless award, although admittedly they will also get a nice bit of pocket money and perhaps that will make up for the disappointment of the empty award.

It will be really difficult to take the Noble Peace Prize serious anymore, not after it has been awarded to a warmongering President of the USA who has done absolutely nothing to deserve this award besides giving many fancy speeches and send many more troops to war and condemning very many people to die, not to mention the amount of destruction.

It is hard to imagine what made the Noble Prise committee take this incredulous decision, but for whatever reason it has marked the prize as being a political one. No longer will be able to see it as being awarded solely for genuine peace actions spread out over a long period of time. From now on it can only be seen as a political tainted choice. Not solely in the interests of peace but for obscure political reasons. Perhaps it was always so, but at least it was hidden in the background but now the award is stained forever.

While receiving this award Obama gave a speech trying to deflect criticism for his warmongering, as always with American Politicians (and a lot of others too) they proclaim they are not doing (the war) for themselves (America) but for the World. They switch their tunes like a fashion model switches clothes. When it fits them they are doing (whatever) for the world (So everyone should stick their nose into it) and when it suits them in another mood they are doing it (solely) for American interests (and everyone else should keep their nose out of it).

I don’t remember being asked by President Obama or by anyone else in America, so how come you say you’re doing it for me? Because I don’t want you to, so you can stop doing it right this minute. Of course you won’t. Because when the truth is told, you are not doing it for me or other people like me. This argument style we hear more and more from America. On the war area, the (illegal) invasions, on the climate, on financial, on companies...and a whole list of others.

Of course Obama has done a little, and without doubt he is better than Bush, but just look at how many things he promised or talked about in his fancy speeches and then later back-tracked on them. Lots of things! Far too many! He has done nothing to speak of about the bankers and financial sector. And he would seem to be just another warmonger President.

It is a really sad day for the Noble Peace Prize. Peace just died.


Added on Friday 11 December 2009 :

I have just read this article:  “Obama's Big Sellout” 
When I have a little more time maybe I write a little more on this subject but for the moment it fits my views (also expressed above) and I highly recommend reading it! There is no doubt that Obama has done a complete turnabout from all those election speeches and promises and the picture on Rollingstone rings true. I am only surprised that so few people (and reporters) are not reacting to what is going on!

Thursday, September 03, 2009

Government extends work by Blackwater successor in Iraq - CIA Hires Blackwater for Assassinations

Government extends work by Blackwater successor in Iraq


CIA Hires Blackwater for Assassinations


Kabul U.S. Embassy Guard: Sexual Deviancy Required for Promotion

Kabul U.S. Embassy Guard: Sexual Deviancy Required for Promotion
Whistleblower Says Bosses Required Sex Acts for Guards Seeking Best shift, Promotion


CIA doctors face human experimentation claims

CIA doctors face human experimentation claims


Friday, May 01, 2009

Israel. The danger to us all! Take action!

Friday, March 27, 2009

Rain of Fire: White Phosphorus in Gaza

Please see:

Boycott Israel! Please! Take action now! The time for action is now!

stop supporting Israel and the killing by non-action
stop believing what Israel says
stop believing that Hamas is the solution or the sole/main cause
stop this killing and mutilation of children
stop the destruction of these children's lives by Israel
stop believing that the rockets fired at Israel are the real problem (take a deeper, critical look)
stop the way Israel treats these children day in and day out
stop a culture that allows and encourages children to sign bombs that will kill other children, parents, and innocent people

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Join the Global BDS Movement! Boycott Israel!

Israeli children sign bombs to be dropped on the people of Lebanon in 2006

copyright: picture/text is from

In Israel "the children sign bombs" before they are used!

Join the Global BDS Movement! Boycott Israel!

Israeli forces and settlers watch as an occupation bulldozer destroys a Palestinian water tank

copyright: picture/text is from

Please! Take action now! The time for action is now!

Join the Global Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Movement

stop supporting Israel and the killing by non-action
stop believing what Israel says
stop believing that Hamas is the solution or the sole/main cause
stop this killing and mutilation of children
stop the destruction of these children's lives by Israel
stop believing that the rockets fired at Israel are the real problem (take a deeper, critical look)
stop the way Israel treats these children day in and day out
stop a culture that allows and encourages children to sign bombs that will kill other children, parents, and innocent people

YOU are change!

can bring the change needed!

YOU and ONLY YOU can bring change!

In 2002, the Occupation dropped a one-ton bomb on a civilian area of Gaza, killing nine children

copyright: picture/text is from

This time 1,314 Palestinians were killed

412 of them children

5,300 men, women and children were injured

and in Israel the children sign bombs and shells before they are used!

Please! I call on you! Take action now!

Join the Global BDS Movement!

go to:

or create your own movement!

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Bullets in the brain, shrapnel in the spine

See the article:

Bullets in the brain, shrapnel in the spine: the terrible injuries suffered by children of Gaza

Take action

stop supporting Israel and the killing by non-action
stop believing what Israel says
stop believing that Hamas is the solution or the cause
stop this killing and mutilation of children
stop the destruction of these children's lives by Israel
stop believing that the rockets fired at Israel are the real problem (take a deeper, critical look)
stop the way Israel treats these children day in and day out

Take action

YOU are the real solution!
YOU are the ONLY real solution

Join the

Movement to Boycott Israel

or create a new movement!

(see articles on left side under Take Action)

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Change, what is change? $150m in “small change" that's what "change" is!

Barack Obama's inauguration cost is predicted to reach over $150m!

$42.3m was spent on George Bush's inauguration in 2005


$33m spent on Bill Clinton's in 1993

The economy is is great trouble, not just in America but all over the world. People are losing jobs everywhere. People are losing their houses! People are losing all they have! People are losing their lives! Yet $150m can be spent for this!

A $700 billion Wall Street bailout was asked for and arranged, so perhaps Obama thinks $150m is “nothing” but "small change" in comparison. A drop in the ocean. What does it matter! At a time when “change” is really needed due to the extremely serious downturn in the American and World economy Obama lets the cost of his inauguration reach this absorbent amount. Lets not fool ourselves, Obama could have prevented this if had reallly wanted. But he has stayed as silent on this matter as he has on others.

Over 1000 people killed in Gaza, but what has that got to do with it, nothing, they are just people....

....all that matters is having a $150m party!

And this is “change”?

The Killers of Children! More than 1,000 killed in Gaza

More than 1,000 killed in Gaza

.........more than a third of these are children.....

......And we do nothing.... NOTHING....

......We, yes.... YOU AND I..............we do NOTHING...

......we do nothing about Israel and what Israel does...

......we use the same old arguments.......

...... believe the same old arguments...

......that have been used time and time again....year after year......

......this is KILLING.........pure

.....The silence of Obama...the words of Hillary Clinton are sickening.......

......almost as sickening as the actions of Israel ...

......but WE.......WE do NOTHING...............

......are we not sickening too........... ?

An introduction to the word “change”

Change! Such a nice word. Nice and short, and you don't need a sentence to offer so much (or so little) with this word.

Lets take an example. I'm a heavy smoker and it is December 2008, I have a really bad cough and the state of my health is not good because of this. I promise I am going to “change” for 2009. I tell everyone this, putting the emphasis on “change” so that everyone thinks I am going to stop smoking, convince everyone I'm going to bring “change”. 2009 comes. People are surprised to see me still smoking away. I point out that I have changed. I now smoke filter cigarettes. The people are not that impressed. So I point out that I also now smoke the low nicotine cigarettes. To really impress them of my “change” I tell them I go for a short jog each day (taking a pack of low nicotine filter cigarettes with me of course). And I tell them I am going to do this.....or...that... and do here and there this or that....... I still smoke of course, but I have brought change......

Hillary Clinton appearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: besides dodging the questions about her husbands actions and fund-raising and the serious question of “the conflict of interests” (so “change” is put to test straight away and what do you think happened - yes your right - were still smoking)

On the extremely serious question of Gaza and all those dead and dying people Hillary Clinton did some more political dodging. She came out with such “changing words” regarding the violence (Killing) in Palestine such as “must only increase our determination to seek a just and lasting peace agreement” . Now I don't know about you but I have the feeling I have heard those words, or similar words, so often before, but I must be wrong, because this is all about “change." She did get around to mention her “husbands” actions and policies in the past (so another clear indication that were going to get “change”). She also expressed that she was “deeply sympathetic” to Israel’s right to defend itself against rocket attacks.......Oh wow......a clear indication of “CHANGE” and if this isn't enough to convince you of “REAL CHANGE” then what about this......she reiterated her opposition to direct negotiations with Hamas unless it renounces violence and recognizes Israel................. isn't that "REAL CHANGE" for you!.......(cough....cough.....cough.....cough...... ....cough....cough.........sounds like I'm getting better).

So now we know it folks “real” I mean "real" change is coming......cough....cough.....cough........”

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Hey, did Obama or the Clinton's win the election? Is this really change?

(This article is extension of article below this one)

It doesn't look very promising does it? Is this change? Is it real change? Are these peole going to provide “change”! It looks very doubtful. Okay, I can hear some of you saying “give him a chance, he is not President, not in power, yet”! Yeah okay, but he didn't get elected on the basis of “give me a chance” he got elected on the basis of “change” and I am sure that most people meant “real change” when they voted. So what about his silence or non-action over the Israel – Gaza situation with over 900 dead. Is this change, real change? So the "I am not yet President" silence and non-action, is this a sign of real change? Wouldn't real change have meant doing something, something different from the past, which includes not remaining silent, non-active just because presidency has not yet taken force. Doesn't this mean taking action that is really different from the past, not following routines and ideas from the past, and policies of the past? Even doing something even though the presidency has not yet come into force? Wouldn't this be the real change? Are we truly seeing change here? Change from the Bush policy, the Clinton policy, and all the policies before that! Is this just more of the same, in a different wrapping?

Is this really change? Does this really promise real change? Yeah right, the court is still out on this one! But somehow or other, sadly, I feel it might not be..........

Hey, did Obama or the Clinton's win the election?

Hey, who is running the show folks?

Obama.: More of the same? And the same from whom?

Over 900 dead in Gaza and still Obama says and does nothing! Israel and Jewish influence still is the master!

Obama's determination to carry on the fight in Afghanistan! Does this mean another war loving President?

Hillary Clinton as secretary of state? The papers talk of „...conflicts of interest...“! What conflict of interests? It is possible that some people might see this as some kind of pay-off position, but there is no evidence of that. Of course she is married to an ex-president who still has much power and sway, and whose charitable foundation have received a number of donations from foreign governments and multinational corporations. And who is still actively busy in business and political matters all over the world. She did run for president herself, and only gave up reluctantly (has she really given up?), so she has strong ideas and policies of her own, she was rather quick to vote for the Iraq war (so does this mean she is another warmonger?), Obama and Hillary Clinton clashed on some foreign policy issues during the primary campaign ........So, what conflict of interests?

Robert Gates: a former director of the CIA, appointed Defence Secretary by President Bush and who promoted the military surge in Iraq..................

Eric Holder: another Clinton ...he was number two in the Clinton Administration Justice Department

Susan Rice, to be UN ambassador was also in Clinton administration

Lisa Jackson to head Environmental Protection Agency -worked for the EPA under Bill Clinton

Shaun Donovan: Secretary of Housing/Urban Development - was also in the Clinton Administration

Tom Vilsack: Agriculture Secretary - endorsed Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

Leon Panetta: to head the CIA (?) - former Clinton White House chief of staff

Janet Napolitano: to head the Department of Homeland Security - President Bill Clinton appointed her US Attorney for the District of Arizona.

whose show is this really?

Friday, January 09, 2009

Don't wait for Obama they will all be dead, …..for Bush that is okay

Forget Obama he is only “concerned” for the press but not concerned enough to do something, speak out, take the risk....

if this is change....

(the usual political games and manoeuvres, staying out of trouble to keep your seat and the votes, don't rock the boat, be careful of the powerful Jewish and other powerful right-wingers...stay on the old road, old policies, old tactics, old everything...)

then lets forget this kind of change, forget Obama and his kind of change...and we can all (accept Israel who are grateful to him) certainly forget Bush....(and we forgot him in this sense long ago....but we wont be able to forget what he did to the world, and how many lives have been lost, how much destruction.....)

it is YOU who brings real change YOU AND ONLY YOU

Stop the Killing – TAKE ACTION! Stop Israel!

If the links are the wrong ones for your country then go to yours and do the same!

and look at articles such as these:

Stop the Killing - Take Action

Stop the Killing – Take Action! Stop Israel!

If the links are the wrong ones for your country then go to yours and do the same!

and look at articles such as these:

and concerning other matters of today:

See the side bar for other links to Naomi Klein articles.

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Over 700 DEAD Mr. "Concerned" Obama

Over 700 DEAD Mr. "Concerned" Obama

The Red Cross has accused Israel of failing to fulfil its obligation to help wounded civilians in Gaza.

International Red Cross workers find four weak and scared children beside their mothers' bodies in houses hit by shelling in Zeitoun.

Shame on you! Shame on your kind of change! Shame on Israel!

and as for Bush.........

The Obama dinner party

As dead bodies of men, women and children litter Gaza Obama the president of the future with presidents of present and past cut the meat of another dead body. Champagne, caviar and foie gras were all on the menu as people in Gaza starve, have nothing to drink, and are surrounded by the dead meat and dead bodies, that were once family, friends, daughters, sons, fathers, mothers, aunts, uncles, school friends, neighbours, and innocent people.

Obama is deeply concerned he said, he is certainly showing it!

This is change to Obama!

Wednesday, January 07, 2009

My oh my Obama is “deeply concerned“

My oh my, Obama is „deeply concerned„! What about! There is nothing to be „deeply concerned“ about is there? I mean Israel has only killed about 600 people or more, and goodness knows wounded how many more, and many of these children and women or innocent men! What has Obama to be concerned about? And why should he be concerned at all, after all he is only the president elect that takes office in a few days time. Why should he be bothered or concerned with such matters? The inauguration party is more important! Sitting on the fence is more important! Not upsetting those Jewish power bosses and voters and right-wingers is more important. Not going against the American trend of supporting Israel no matter what they do, or treat other people, is more important. Why should Obama be „deeply concerned“! What good is that going to do anyway, lets get on with the big party in Washington, that’s more important, that’s what we have be more concerned about!

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Obama’s kind of change: Sitting on the fence

Bush supports the war in Palestine, he supports Israel. We can not expect anything good or worthwhile from him. Obama canvassed for election on the word “change”. Apparently change for him is sitting on the fence.

Obama is busy. Busy sitting on the fence, enjoying his view from a luxury hotel of the Whitehouse, “busy” making financial plans for the “recovery of America“. Very noble. The only trouble is as he is doing this hundreds of people, once real live people, are being killed in Palestine. Not his problem! Not his business! Not his watch!

Come on, what a load of rubbish!

I would say it is every human beings problem, no matter where they are.

Not his business? Why not? He is a human being isn’t he? It’s the business of all of us.

He has been elected because he promised change and just because he is not in the White House (on Watch!) surely does not exclude him from this; he is busy with other presidential problems.

Not his watch (Only one president)! Well I don’t see what his not yet being president has to do with this. I am not president and even I am trying to do something (by writing this and other things) and he is in a more powerful position than I am.

There are a lot more reasons. For example how about the unbalanced and biased support of America for Israel. How about that America has helped Israel to be such a well armed and powerful country and force, even having nuclear capabilities. How about the fact that America has armed Israel. How about the way America has encouraged Israel over all the years, either directly or indirectly or secretly or through third parties. How about the fact that America is still doing that right at this moment. How about the fact that America is responsible for what is going on now, directly or indirectly. How about so many reasons. ……

…….How about the simple fact that these are human beings, that Palestinians are human beings too, and are supposed to have human rights too…but no one can ever really believe this…

…not his watch…only one president at a time……

….come off it…..

…..were not talking about real change…(and he has been elected now so forget that)….

…………..were talking about the game of politics…staying in power…not upsetting those powerful right-wingers, the powerful and influential Jewish votes and power bosses….

….change…what change…change is selective, it means I’m going to talk about it, promise it….it don’t mean I’m going to do it…and even if I do…well don’t expect any heroics or anything "really changeful "

Sunday, January 04, 2009

The Crime of Israel… and the list of The Top Ten greatest Threats to the World

I haven’t written anything for this or any other of my blogs since 7 June 2007. That’s a long time ago and a lot has happened in the world since then. I gave up writing for my blog for a mixture of reasons. Firstly because I did not really have the time anymore, and since I thought no one ever really reads what I write I (rightly or wrongly, probably wrongly) kind of thought “why bother”. Other reasons played a role too and I wasn’t sure I wanted to continue with this kind of blog writing.

But I am back (for this one time).

My second to last article on my blog was titled “The Top Ten Greatest Threats to the World”.

Due to the length of time that had passed since I wrote this article I was surprised to receive a comment for this article on 18 October 2008 from: Blackrain. His comment was:

So right Joe. How prolific. You wrote this almost a year and a half ago, and look at us now!

Blackrain was of course referring to the latest economic situation in the world. Which I had listed many times in my list, directly and indirectly.

I also listed another major threat to the world. Listed at Nr. 5 that has now become acute.

Israeli Politics.

Once again, just as in Iraq, we in the World stand by and passively watch as human rights violations, unjust and disproportionate and illegal death and destruction, on MEN, WOMEN and CHILDREN is carried out by a superior power.

Yes, rockets have been and are being fired at Israel. Yes, this is not right and is not to be supported or condoned. This is a reality.

But there is also another reality. That these rockets (while they should not be excused, supported or condoned) usually only cause some damage and rarely death. This does not mean that this makes them right, or acceptable, or harmless, or any other thing. They are not right and should be stopped.

But to kill over 500 people (and how many more to come?) and create so much destruction of homes, properties and people lives is shameless, and is a far greater crime.

It is a crime against all human rights, and human life, and life in all forms.

It is a disproportionate, inhuman crime.

To treat people the way Israel treats Palestinians, treating them like dirt, like nothing, barricading them from food and supplies, from medical care and help, from travelling, from life, from their own land and property, building walls, denying them any real decency, hope or possibilities, or future, denying them their beliefs, denying their human rights, controlling them in every way possible, denying them energy and water….and continually using their superior and disproportionate military and technical power……and doing this year after year after year…then it is little wonder that you aggravate some reaction…. is to wonder if this is what Israel really wants…keep the rockets coming and they have arguments and excuses to squeeze the Palestinians from their land, their hopes, and…? They certainly do not show any real meaningful sign of truly wanting peace. Peace in any relationship has to be suitable for both sides. But Israel has the power and upper hand and is not willing to sacrifice this. And certainly not so long as it is supported by America.

As in the case of Iraq we, the rest of the World just stand by and watch, and do nothing. All too often we believe the arguments that Israel gives to support its actions and policies. Just as the Americans and so many others believed Bush about the reasons for (illegally) invading Iraq. It turned out not to be true.

Yet once again we do the same. We believe the arguments quickly. It is no surprise that Bush supports Israel, although he does it indirectly, as so many things. That politicians like rightwing Angela Merkel of Germany who also quickly supported Israel is probably also no great surprise, although downright disgusting and a shame and a crime against humanrights.

I think it is unlikely that much will change when Barack Obama is in power either. I would truly like to hope that he will bring change, but…If he truly wanted change from his heart he would not be keeping silent now. But in politics it is always politics that are more important, being popular and keeping in power…not real human lives…not real real change. If we see the people he is bringing into important positions in government then change would not seem to all that high on the list…..and certainly not human lives.

And what about us…we keep silent of course, just watch passively, believe the Israeli and other Western powers propaganda…the propaganda from (political background) radio and T.V. senders such as the BBC….

We see the destruction and the death…we know it is disproportionate…illegal….inhuman…a crime….we know it is power….. But we do nothing…

….are we not also committing a crime…

A crime against humanity, human rights, against life….?

Thursday, June 07, 2007

The premiere performance of the G8 theatre production

The premiere has been and gone, now the leading actors (George Bush, Tony Blair and Angela Merkel) stand bowing to the audience as they await the applause, the encore calls, the backslapping, and the breathtaking caressing critic of how great they were and are, how there has never been a show like it, and how much they accomplished in their breathtaking and spellbinding performance.
And when we the audience awake from the spell as we stagger out of the mesmerising atmosphere of the G8 theatre and realise that real life is just as it was before and that a performance is just a performance, and that a visit to the theatre is just a visit to the theatre, and not a thing has really changed in our life at all, with the exception that now we have the memory that we have seen a theatrical piece that is now a been and gone.

Monday, June 04, 2007

The Top Ten Greatest Threats to the World

1) George W. Bush
2) American political policies
3) American corporate/economic/legal policies and actions
4) Global warming
5) Israeli policies
6) The so called war on terror
7) American public’s internal view and actions
8) World economic policies
9) Hedge/ private equity funds and shareholders
10)Tony Blair mentality and British Policies

Saturday, June 02, 2007

who is Dr. Death?

another case of selective human rights and selective justice

George W. Bush and Tony Blair’s decision to illegally invade a foreign country has (illegally and against all Human Rights) cost the life of tens of thousands of innocent people, and is still costing thousands of lives. Yet, today Tony Blair travels around the world as a free man like a proud peacock showing of its feathers.

Yesterday a 79 year old man was released from prison after having served almost 8 years for assisting terminally ill people in their deaths in what he considered was a humane act.

Do I need to say more!

Friday, May 25, 2007

America rushes in more killing tools to kill even more innocent people

Lebanon: America rushes in even more killing power to the Lebanon army. They are not content with shells that are killing innocent people.

“do they think we are not humans” said a Palestinian man who managed to escape “don’t we look like humans” he cries “don’t we have any human rights”

Children, women and men, innocent, are being killed, maimed and having their lives and their homes destroyed. Ironically enough they are already refugees, having lived in makeshift camps. Young people have grown up there not knowing any other life.

But this is a picture that is all too familiar under the world political leadership of President Bush and Tony Blair.

Human Rights!

Forget human rights and human lives under George W. Bush.

Just look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, and countless other examples around the world. Just look at the world situation in general. Just look at the state of civilian and human rights even in America.

Spineless the world stands by watching. Spineless the politicians and majority of people watch, and above all those in America.

Jimmy Carter retracts his criticism.
The democratic party give in to Bush.
And spineless political leaders order their armies to shell and bomb and kill either their own citizens or other innocent people.

Let us take a look at another spineless time in history that led to similar great tragedies:

Hitler did not gather power overnight. He started in 1919 with the promise of “….extreme 'remedies' to Germany's post-war problems which he and many others blamed on…(Jews and Bolsheviks)…”

In fact in 1923 Hitler was imprisoned but after being released “…..he began to rebuild the Nazi Party and used new techniques of mass communication, backed up with violence, to get his message across….”

There was great fear about due to the economic crises of the time. Hitler used this fear and increased it to develop his power and build his army and to get across his political views and ideas.

“….Hitler saw himself as a political evangelist seeking to convert the German people to his 'world view'……”

You can manipulate situations and circumstances to good or less good needs. Hitler knew how to manipulate circumstances to force on other his 'world view'

Many times he could have been stopped but there was too much fear of personal circumstances and Hitler fed that fear with more fear and ideas and blames for the cause of that fear and the personal (bad) circumstances. There was uncertainty, a desire for security, there was confusion, there was the inability to decide what was best, there was longing, there was the protecting – no matter how falsely, foolishly, unwisely – there was the personal and family concerns, their was the false and misleading information, the manipulations, ……but above all there was the great fear (ever so powerful in the wrong hands) and the inability to act and the complete inability to see or accept the real truth, see what really was going on (and fear will do this)………

And there were the spineless. Those so many who could have changed things but did not. Mostly too worried about their own personal positions and situations. They allowed themselves to be manipulated, and look where that led!

In 2007 are things really any different?

We have not learnt from history.

And human rights and human lives are being treated now as then!

Friday, May 18, 2007

Scratching the fleas

There aren’t that many flea circuses any more but a big one took place the other day with performances of jumping through the loops, spewing of slightly tepid air (fire had died long ago), scratching each others back, (bare) back patting (sorry riding wasn’t allowed and the performers too weak for anyway), pulling the (broken down) cart, much applauding of their own tricks……and so on. Sadly it was more pathetically boring than entertaining and a clear indication why such circuses have died out.

By the way take a look at this:,,2082804,00.html

Thursday, May 10, 2007

A Great Gift to Humanity

Human rights, humanity, and real democracy are, at long last, about to receive a great gift. Tony Blair is finally going to announce the date he will stand down. That day must surely be a great gift for humanity. Of course he will go leaving behind a trail of blood, death, shattered bodies, shattered lives, shattered homes and families, shattered human rights, shattered everything. Since the blood and death is so deep he will practically have to swim and climb to leave, but at least he is going. Perhaps an even greater gift would be when he is put on trial, together with George W. Bush, for his/their crimes.

Saturday, May 05, 2007

Scandal! Survey spits in the eye of Bush arguments about troop withdrawal!

Are not the arguments for troop withdrawal confirmed with this survey?

A survey of battlefield ethics amongst US troops in Iraq has shown a widespread tolerance for torture and problems with morale.

The survey showed that less than the half the troops in Iraq thought civilians should be treated with dignity and respect!

More than a third believes torture is acceptable!

10 % of just those surveyed admitted to having actually mistreated Iraqi civilians and damaging their property even when this was not necessary. This means the actual figure of those US troops mistreating and carrying out atrocities is extremely high.

The survey recommends that tours of duty be reduced to a maximal of six months but in reality under Bush policies the tours of duty are being extended and even more troops are being sent to carry out even more mistreatments and atrocities of civilians.

Obliviously a similar situation will apply to US Troops in Afghanistan.

This report goes against everything Bush argues. Instead of improving the situation of the Iraqi people clearly (if this wasn’t clear enough before) shows that US troops are making it far worse.

Bush argues that troop withdrawal will lead to a bloodbath in Iraq! Is not Iraq a bloodbath already, created by the invasion by US troops, caused greatly by US troop presence, inflicted at least in part by US troops, and now additionally a US report now clearly shows that civilians are being mistreated and suffering atrocities by US troops! And US troops should not be withdrawn!!!!!

Bush argues that withdrawal will send the wrong messages, be a sign of defeat. In reality what he means is that this will send the wrong messages, be a sign of defeat, of him as President of the USA. It is his presidency, his policies, his record for the history books, and his ego that will be defeated. He is concerned that the wrong message will be this, but hasn’t this message been sent long ago.

How can you not expect a decline in moral behaviour of the troops on the ground when there is a decline of moral behaviour from the chief of those troops? Illegal invasions of foreign countries, human and civil rights abuses and reduction of, illegal and secret prisons, people kept without legal rights or trial, people being tortured, and innocent people locked away and tortured with legal rights……the list goes on and on and on. A list of shame.

We condemned Hitler but condone this!

Monday, April 30, 2007

World Bank - Paul Wolfowitz - Hypocrisy

America is famous for its policies of double standards so it is hardly surprising to find this also present in the leadership of the World Bank.

If you are a politician, rich, famous, powerful or have good connections and support from any of these then you have other standards, and mostly other laws and justice, than the rest of us in the world. Hypocrisy is just a word to be used on others. You can change things to suit your own needs, even laws and justice, and most certainly jobs and pay-packets. Are we not used to big bosses awarding themselves, or some other person they choose, extraordinary high pay rises or rewards.

You can move your girlfriend (in the World Bank case Shaha Riza) to a new job to give the impression that no other standards are being applied, no conflicts of interest is taking place. You can suggest that she gets a very high increase in pay ($60,000 pay rise), to earn even more than the US Secretary of State. Then you can get on with the job of cleaning up the corruption in the World. Of course the corruption in the World being in places like Africa, Asia and such likes, not at home, not at the World Bank, or in the USA, or even much closer to home, like……….!

And should that unthinkable, un-democratic, un-social, un-ethical, un-businessman, un-fair, un-sportsman, un-colleague, un-just, un-……thing happen that someone will go and complain about what you have done….well the only thing to do is first deny it, then dig your heels in, refuse to budge, just say the usual….yes well, I might have made a little mistake, I’m so sorry, I promise not to do it again…and with just a little bit of luck - and a lot of pressure from those political/powerful friends of yours – the whole thing will blow over in time. You just have to have put up with a rough ride for a while. You (and your now rich girlfriend) keep your job(s), your power, and your substantial rewards, and get on with the real dirty work of cleaning up the corruption in the real (corrupt) “World”!

Anyway what is all the fuss about! It is not really the World Bank but the USA Bank since the US are the only ones who are allowed to decide who the leader of it is, and therefore control what really goes on, so things are going just the way they normally go, so stop making a storm in a teacup.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

US House votes for Iraq deadline

Story from BBC NEWS:

The US House of Representatives has narrowly approved a bill making further funding of the war in Iraq conditional on a timetable for a US troop pullout.

The bill provides $100bn in new war funds, if troops start leaving in October, with the withdrawal planned to be complete by March 2008.

President Bush has repeatedly threatened to veto the bill.

The commander of US forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus, had met lawmakers to argue against the bill.

Republicans and Democrats have been in deadlock on the legislation for weeks, and it finally passed by 218 votes to 208.

The $124bn bill would pay for military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Senate is due to vote on the bill later on Thursday.

"Tonight, the House of Representatives voted for failure in Iraq - and the president will veto its bill," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Although the Democrats control both houses of Congress, they do not have enough votes to overrule a presidential veto.

If President Bush does veto the bill, temporary measures are expected to be tabled to provide funding until the summer.

Military appeal

Before Wednesday evening's debate, Gen Petraeus was trying to gain support for Mr Bush's plan to increase troop numbers in Iraq, the so-called "surge", to improve stability.

"General Petraeus continued to say that he can give a comprehensive assessment as to whether or not the surge is in fact working around September," said Democratic Representative James Clyburn.

Not all the new extra US forces planned for deployment are yet in place in Iraq.

The Iraqi foreign minister also criticised the Democrats' bill.

Speaking to the BBC while on a visit to Iran, Hoshyar Zebari said efforts by Congress to set a date of October for troops to start leaving Iraq would not help his country's security or political development.

Dr Zebari said he was amazed people had started talking of a timetable when the UN resolution giving the US-led coalition its mandate would be reviewed in June, and then again at the end of the year.

The minister also stressed withdrawal of US troops would have to wait for the Iraqi military to be self-reliant.

Dr Zebari is in Tehran to press the Iranian government to take part in a key regional summit next week in Egypt on the future security of Iraq.

'Surrender date'

Al-Qaeda will view this as the day the House of Representatives threw in the towel
Jerry Lewis

"The sacrifices borne by our troops and their families demand more than the blank cheques the president is asking for, for a war without end," said the leader of House Democrats, Nancy Pelosi.

She urged the president to sign the bill, so that "we can focus on winning the war against terrorism, which is the real threat to the American people".

But Republicans have vowed to back the president's refusal to support what they call a "surrender date".

"Al-Qaeda will view this as the day the House of Representatives threw in the towel," said Republican Jerry Lewis.

Mr Bush shows no signs of budging from his determination to veto any bill tying war spending to a timetable for troop withdrawal.

The legislation was an attempt to "handcuff our generals, add billions of dollars of unrelated spending and begin to pull out of Iraq by an arbitrary date", he said on Tuesday.

"To accept the bill proposed by the Democratic leadership would be to accept a policy that directly contradicts the judgement of our military commanders."

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2007/04/26
04:17:17 GMT


MEPs call on Wolfowitz to resign

The European Parliament has added its voice to those calling on World Bank boss Paul Wolfowitz to resign over a promotion row involving his partner.

MEPs voted by 332 to 251 to ask Germany, which currently holds the EU Presidency, to call for his departure at next week's EU-US summit.

Their resolution states his resignation would be a "welcome step" in supporting the body's anti-corruption strategy.

Mr Wolfowitz is accused of intervening to secure a big salary for Shaha Riza.

'Undermining policy'

The former US deputy defence secretary has been under pressure since it emerged that he sought a promotion and a $200,000 (£100,000) salary for Ms Riza in 2005.

Mr Wolfowitz has apologised for his actions and pledged "major changes" in the way that his office is run in light of the episode.

But his position at the head of the global lending body remains insecure with unions, former bank officials and politicians across Europe calling for him to step down.

Our message for him must be it is time for you to go
Graham Watson, MEP

Story from BBC NEWS:

He has hired a leading US lawyer to defend him while the Bank's board of directors considers his long-term future.

The motion passed by the European Parliament stated that Mr Wolfowitz's "withdrawal from the post would be a welcome step towards preventing the bank's anti-corruption policy from being undermined".

During a debate on the issue, a succession of MEPs called on him to stand down.

"Our message for him must be it is time for you to go," said Graham Watson, leader of the liberal and democrats' alliance.

Martin Schulz, leader of the socialist group, said Mr Wolfowitz's position was "untenable".

US support

The parliament's action is likely to have little direct impact on Mr Wolfowitz's fate.

But its symbolic significance will renew the pressure on the World Bank ahead of President George W Bush's meeting with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and German Chancellor Angela Merkel on 30 April.

The US government, a powerful voice within the World Bank, has backed Mr Wolfowitz, saying that it has "full confidence" in him.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2007/04/25 19:20:08 GMT


Wednesday, April 25, 2007

My thanks to Mia who sent a link regarding my last post (below this). I am posting the link so everyone can check it out. Once again my thanks Mia, you can see Mia’s comment under the last post.


Tuesday, April 24, 2007

US army 'exploited Tillman death'

Story from BBC NEWS:

The brother of former American football star Pat Tillman, killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan, has accused the US military of manipulating his death.

Kevin Tillman said that by claiming Cpl Tillman had died fighting the enemy in 2004, the army had tried to "hijack his virtue and his legacy".

He was testifying to a congressional panel investigating if misinformation from the battlefield was deliberate.

Jessica Lynch, an injured US soldier rescued in Iraq in 2003, also spoke.

Questions have been raised over the details of her capture and subsequent rescue by US forces, with the US defence department accused of turning the episode into a public relations exercise.

Pte Lynch told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that US officials' accounts of her fiercely fighting the enemy were not true and that most of her injuries were from a road accident.

"The bottom line is the American people are capable of determining their own ideals of heroes and they don't need to be told elaborate tales," she said.

'Hero's death'

Last month, a Pentagon watchdog confirmed that Cpl Tillman's family had not been told the truth about his death for more than a month, even though commanders knew soon after his death that he had probably been killed by fellow soldiers.

We believe this narrative was intended to deceive the family but more importantly the American public
Kevin Tillman

The Pentagon's inspector general recommended action be taken against nine officers over the matter, but found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing and no deliberate cover-up.

In an emotional address to the panel, Kevin Tillman accused the military of exploiting his brother's death.

He claimed a decision had been made to cover up the real cause of Cpl Tillman's death - the recklessness of some of his fellow soldiers - and portray it as a heroic event, at a time when US wars overseas were unpopular.

"This freshly manufactured narrative was then distributed to the American public and we believe the strategy had the intended effect," he said.

"It shifted the focus from the grotesque torture at Abu Ghraib [jail] and a downward spiral of an illegal act of aggression to a great American who died a hero's death.

"We believe this narrative was intended to deceive the family but more importantly the American public."

Crucial equipment belonging to his brother, such as his uniform, had been destroyed before a thorough investigation could be carried out, Mr Tillman added.

The US army is in the process of reviewing several hundred deaths of its soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The move follows complaints from families of those who died that they have not always been given accurate information.

Cpl Tillman's death was highly publicised in the US because he had given up a multi-million dollar professional football contract with the Arizona Cardinals to fight for his country.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2007/04/24
17:21:47 GMT


Monday, April 23, 2007

Fresh calls for Wolfowitz to quit

Story from BBC NEWS:

A group of senior former World Bank employees has urged beleaguered head Paul Wolfowitz to resign, saying he can no longer be an effective leader.

Mr Wolfowitz is battling to remain in his job after admitting helping his partner win a promotion and pay rise.

More than 40 World Bank officials, including 18 former vice-presidents, published their call in an open letter to the Financial Times newspaper.

They said Mr Wolfowitz had "lost the trust and respect of bank staff".


Mr Wolfowitz, who has apologised for his "mistake", has vowed to stay on to continue what he called "important work".

He has said that he is confident he can carry out the World Bank's mission.

But the authors of the letter said, "There is only one way for Wolfowitz to further the mission of the bank: he should resign."

"He has [...] damaged his own credibility on good governance - his flagship issue," the letter reads.

The letter was signed by, among others, the former number two in the organisation during the first year of Mr Wolfowitz's time at the Bank, Shengman Zhang.

The former senior officials warn that if Mr Wolfowitz remains in office, he will "preside over a rudderless hulk".

The letter comes as the group responsible for overseeing the workings of the World Bank, the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG), warned that the current crisis was already having a negative impact on the work of the lending agency in developing countries.

The IEG statement will be presented to the Bank's board, which is expected to reach a decision on the fate of Mr Wolfowitz later this week.

Controversial nominee

The row concerns events that occurred shortly after Mr Wolfowitz assumed his position at the World Bank.

His girlfriend, Libyan-born Shaha Riza, was seconded from the World Bank to the US state department to avoid creating a conflict of interest.

There she received promotions and pay rises which the bank's staff association say were "grossly out of line" with bank rules.

The bank's executive board has said that it did not give its approval for Ms Riza's wage rise.

Mr Wolfowitz was seen as a controversial nominee to the role from the beginning due to his part in driving forward the war in Iraq.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2007/04/23
09:15:54 GMT


Sunday, April 22, 2007

US marines 'devalued Iraqi lives'

Story from BBC NEWS:

The US Marine Corps fostered a climate that devalued Iraqi lives, a US general investigating the 2005 killing of Iraqi civilians in Haditha has said.

The report, submitted in 2006 but now declassified, said the US military had ignored signs of "serious misconduct", according to the Washington Post.

A total of 24 men, women and children were killed at Haditha by marines who said they were attacked by insurgents.

A criminal investigation into the incident is continuing.

The Haditha inquiry is just one of a number the US military has been conducting into incidents of alleged unlawful killings by US forces in Iraq.

Maj Gen Eldon Bargewell's report is an indictment of actions throughout the whole chain of command, from the general in charge to the men who carried out the killings on 19 November, 2005.

"All levels of command tended to view civilian casualties, even in significant numbers, as routine and as the natural and intended result of insurgent tactics," the US newspaper quotes him as saying.

Gen Bargewell said statements taken from those involved suggested the marines thought "Iraqi civilian lives are not as important as US lives, their deaths are just the cost of doing business, and that the marines need to get 'the job done' no matter what it takes".

The US military's initial statement on Haditha said that a marine and 15 civilians had been killed in a roadside bomb. A subsequent firefight had left eight insurgents dead, it said.

However, a local journalist took video footage showing men, women and children shot in their homes. Locals said the marines had gone on a rampage.

The US military instigated investigations and confirmed that 24 Iraqi civilians had died, none of them killed by a roadside bomb.

Three marines have since been charged with unpremeditated murder and four with attempting to cover up the incident.

Gen Bargewell is quoted as saying officers had tried to protect themselves and their troops by wilfully ignoring reports of civilian deaths.

There was no interest in investigating reports of a massacre, although there was also no specific cover-up, he is reported to have said.

The general's report, filed in June last year, does not address the specifics of the killings, which are the subject of the criminal case, rather it tackles the command structure and investigation procedure.

Gen Bargewell found that the marines had not identified targets properly, the Washington Post says.

The report also says the marines' story was passed up the chain of command and at all levels signs that the incident was significant were ignored.

A military judge has yet to decide if there is enough evidence against the seven accused marines to convene a court martial.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2007/04/21
14:57:36 GMT


Monday, April 16, 2007

Benn to criticise 'war on terror'

Story from BBC NEWS:

President George W Bush's concept of a "war on terror" has given strength to terrorists by making them feel part of something bigger, Hilary Benn will say.

The international development secretary will tell a meeting in New York the phrase gives a shared identity to small groups with widely differing aims.

And Mr Benn, a candidate for Labour's deputy leadership, will confirm that UK officials will stop using the term.

The White House coined the phrase after the attacks of 11 September 2001.

'Disparate groups'

Mr Benn will say: "In the UK, we do not use the phrase 'war on terror' because we can't win by military means alone.

"And because this isn't us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives."

# By letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength -
Hilary Benn #

It is "the vast majority of the people in the world" against "a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups who have relatively little in common", he will say.

"What these groups want is to force their individual and narrow values on others, without dialogue, without debate, through violence.

"And by letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength."

'Battle of values'

In a New York meeting organised by the Center on International Cooperation think-tank, Mr Benn will urge world leaders to find common ground with potential enemies, rather than relying on "hard" military power.

"The fight for the kind of world that most people want can, in the end, only be won in a different battle - a battle of values and ideas."

Mr Bush first outlined the concept of a "war on terror" shortly after New York and the Pentagon were attacked by Islamist terror group al-Qaeda on 7/11.

"Our war on terror begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there," he told Congress nine days after the attacks.

"It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2007/04/16 04:42:05 GMT