NOVANEWS

‘How can you speak of human rights and the dignity of peoples when you perpetually violate them and block those who don’t share your ideology and must endure your abuses?’, asks 1980 Nobel Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel in an open letter to US President Barack Obama.

by Adolfo Pérez Esquivel

Dear Barack,

Adolfo Pérez Esquivel

In addressing you I do so fraternally, and at the same time, to express my concern and indignation after seeing the destruction and death caused in several nations in the name of ‘freedom and democracy’, two words which have been twisted and stripped of meaning. They end up justifying murder, and is cheered on as if it were a sports event.

Indignation at the attitude of some parts of the US population, of heads of state in Europe and other countries who came out in support of the assassination of bin Laden, and by your complacency in the name of supposed justice. You didn’t look to seize and judge him for his alleged crimes, which generates more doubts. The objective was to assassinate him.

The dead are mute, and the fear of the accused who could disclose inconvenient facts for the USA, was turned into assassination, to ensure that the ‘death of the dog would end the madness’, without considering that you have only increased it.

When you were granted the Nobel Prize, of which we are holders, I sent you a letter which read: ‘Barack, I was very surprised by your having been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but now that you have it, you must use it in the service of peace among peoples, you have all the possibilities of doing it, to end the wars and begin correcting the severe crisis in your own country and the world’.

Unfortunately, you have increased hatred and betrayed the principles assumed during your electoral campaign before your people, such as ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, closing the prisons in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib in Iraq. But on the contrary, you decided to start another war against Libya, backed up by NATO, and the shameful resolution of the UN to support you, when this high organisation, diminished and without its own mind, has lost its path and has been subjugated to the whims and interests of the dominant powers.

The foundational premise of the UN is the defence and promotion of peace and dignity among peoples. Its Preamble begins saying: ‘We, the peoples of the world…’ now absent from this organization.

I would like to recall a mystic and teacher who has had a great influence in my life: Trapist monk Thomas Merton of the Gethsemane Abbey in Kentucky, who said ‘The greatest necessity of our time is to clean the enormous mass of mental and emotional garbage which blocks our minds and converts all public and social life into a disease of the masses. Without this domestic cleaning we can’t begin to see. If we can’t see, we can’t think’.

Barack you were very young during the Vietnam war, perhaps you don’t remember the struggle of North American people to oppose the war. I have shared and accompanied the veterans of the Vietnam war, in particular Brian Wilson and his companions who were victims of this wars and of all wars.

Thomas Merton, analysing a stamp postmark which had just arrived saying ‘The U.S. Army, key to peace’ (‘El ejercito U.S., clave de la paz’) said:

‘No army is the key to peace. No nation has the key to anything which is not war. Power has nothing to do with peace. The more men increase military power, the more they violate peace and destroy it.’

We should protect LIFE to leave future generations a more just and fraternal society, re-establishing equilibrium with Mother Earth. If we don’t react to change the current situation of suicidal arrogance which is dragging peoples down, it will be very hard to come out and see the light. Humanity deserves a better fate.

You know, hope is like the flower which grows in the mud and blossoms in all its splendour, showing its beauty. Leopoldo Marechal, the great Argentine writer, said that: ‘You get out the maze via the top’.

I believe, Barack, that after following your erring way, you find yourself in a maze, unable to find the exit and you are burying yourself more and more in violence, devoured by the domination of power, and you think you possess all the power anyone could have, and that the world is at the feet of the USA. So large are the atrocities committed by different US governments in the world… It is a sad reality, but there is also the resistance of peoples who do not capitulate before the powerful.

Bin Laden, alleged author of the attack of the Twin Towers, has been made the devil incarnate who terrorised the world, identified as the ‘axis of evil’ and this has served you to wage the wars that the military industrial complex needs to place its products of death.

You should not ignore that researchers of the tragedy of September 11 have declared that the attacks were in many ways self-inflicted, such as the crash of a plane into the Pentagon and the prior evacuation of the Towers; an attack which provided a motive to launch the war against Iraq and Afghanistan and now against Libya; arguing based on the lie that all is done to save peoples in the name of ‘freedom and the defence of democracy’. And cynically stating that the deaths of women and children are ‘collateral damage’.

The word is devoid of values and meaning. You dub assassination ‘death’ and finally the US has ‘killed’ bin Laden. I am not in any way defending bin Laden, I am against all terrorism, by both these armed groups and the terrorism of the State which your government exercises in various parts of the world, supporting dictators, imposing military bases and armed intervention, using violence to maintain yourself via terror at the hub of world power. Is there only one ‘axis of evil’?

Peace is a practice of life in relations between persons and among peoples; it is a challenge to humanity’s consciousness. Its path is difficult, daily and hopeful; where people build from their own lives and their own history. Peace can’t be gifted, it is built. And this is what you’re missing lad, courage to assume the historical responsibility with your people and with humanity.

You cannot live in the labyrinth of fear and control, ignoring international treaties, pacts and protocols of governments which are signed and then transgressed once and again. How can you speak of peace if you don’t want to honour anything, except in the interests of your country?

How can you talk about freedom when you keep innocent people in the prisons of Guantanamo, in the USA, in Iraq and in Afghanistan?

How can you speak of human rights and the dignity of peoples when you perpetually violate them and block those who don’t share your ideology and must endure your abuses?

How can you send military forces to Haiti after a devastating earthquake, instead of humanitarian aid to that suffering people?

How can you speak of freedom if you massacre the peoples in the Middle East and foster endless conflict which bleeds the Palestinians and Israelis?

Barack: Try to look at your maze from above; you may find the star that guides you, even knowing you can never reach it, as Eduardo Galeano said so well. Try to be consistent between what you say and do, it’s the only way to not lose the path. It’s a challenge of life. The Nobel Peace Prize is a tool at the service of the peoples, never for personal vanity.

I wish you much strength and hope, and we hope you will have the courage to correct your path and find wisdom and Peace.

Source: Pambazuka News

NOVANEWS

“The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.” — JFK, 1961 address to newspaper publishers

By Captain Eric H. May

Secret societies are a pernicious presence throughout the history of the United States. George Washington, our great inceptor, denounced the dark doctrines of Illuminism, which he believed threatened the Republic:

“The Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism (have) spread in the United States. … No one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.”

Today’s Republican Party is derived from the Whig Party, as many know. Not many, however, know that the Whig Party was derived from our country’s first third party, the Anti-Masonic Party of the 1820′s and 30′s. The party’s opposition to Freemasonry was derived from the 9/11 murder of William Morgan, himself a Mason, who was blowing the whistle on what he had come to regard as a diabolic criminal system. The date of Morgan’s murder is chilling: 9/11, 1826.

On 9/11, 1857, a party of Mormons (a cult zealous about Freemasonry), massacred some 120 settlers passing through Utah on the way to California in what came to be called the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

These Freemasonic cult killings, of course, foreshadow 9/11/01, our New Pearl Harbor, which took place on the 175th anniversary of the Morgan murder and the 144th (12 x 12) anniversary of the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

The four airplane flight numbers are codes. I present them in chronological order, according to the official 9/11 story:

• 11 — The key number in most false flag terror attacks since 9/11/01.

• 175 — A not-so-subtle reminder of the Morgan murder for any potential whistle blowers.

• 77 — Struck the Pentagon on its 60th anniversary, and foretold the UK 7/7/05 attacks.

• 93 — Contais day numbers for the 9/11/01 and 3/11/04 (Madrid) attacks — between which there was a span of 911 days.

Since calendar coding is crucial to conspiracies, here are two separate terror timetables, the first anchored by 9/11/01, and the second by 6/6/06. Omit the zeros to see the occult (i.e., hidden) numbers:

9/11/01 Overt Calendar & Covert Schedule

• 10/12/2000 (1122) — Al Qaeda attacks USS Cole.

• 9/11/2001 (911) — Al Qaeda demolishes Twin Towers.

• 3/20/2003 (3223) — U.S. Invades Iraq.

• 3/11/2004 (311) — Al Qaeda bombs Madrid.

• 3/30/2004 (33) — BP Texas City refinery explodes.*

• 3/23/05  (323) — BP Texas City refinery explodes.

Decoded, it’s a master schedule:

• Between the Cole and the Towers: 333 days.

• Between the Towers and the Iraq War: 555 days.

• Between the Towers and Madrid: 911 days.

• Between the Towers and BP, Texas City, 3/30/04: 930 (93) days.*

• Between BP, Texas City, 3/30/04 and 3/23/05: 357 days

• Between BP, Texas City, 3/23/05 and 1/31/06: 313 days

6/6/06 Overt Calendar & Covert Schedule

• 10/11/2002 (11122) — Congress gives Bush illegal blank check for war on Iraq.
• 10/12/2002 (11222) — Bali bombings give Australia its causus belli.
• 4/19/04 (4194) — Attempted terror strike on Sears Tower.
• 7/7/05 (77) — London bombings renew UK zeal for Mideast wars.
• 5/3/06 (53) — Attempted terror attack on Sears Tower.
• 6/6/06 (666) — Key reference date; identical with Sears Tower zip code 60606 (666).
• 7/11/06 (711) — Mumbai bombings, which turns India against the Mideast.
• 7/12/06 — Israel invades Lebanon.

“Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control.” — JFK, 1961 address to newspaper publishera

NOVANEWS

By Captain Eric H. May, Ghost Troop CO

JS says: April 29, 2011 at 5:18 pm:

Have you noticed atomic Endeavour’s new Launch Target: May 2, 2:33 p.m. EDT? This info comes from NASA. So local time for the launch will be 2:33, a variation of 322, the Skull and Bones number.

CPT MAY says: April 29, 2011 at 5:41 pm:

Excellent cyber-scouting, JS! May 3 will be the anniversary of the completion of Sears Tower (5/3/73), and of the successful false flag interdiction led by Ghost Troop in 2006: Chicago Cops Dodge Blagojevich/Sears Tower Investigation.  233 is the Sears Tower street address: 233 South Wacker Drive. If my job was in or near Sears Tower (zip code 60606), I wouldn’t go to work Monday, and I wouldn’t take my eye off Jewish co-workers. They were in the know about 9/11, and it’s common sense to suspect that they might be in the know again.

AR says: April 30, 2011 at 7:02 am

Jewish workers were in the know about 9/11? Aren’t you even a bit ashamed for writing that? Who are these workers who didn’t show for work? Can you provide names?

CPT MAY says: April 30, 2011 at 10:08 am

I believe objective readers will find themselves in agreement with me if they read the well-documented article, An Independent Investigation of the True Culprits Behind 9-11. If they want to watch a compelling documentary, they can do no better than Mike Delaney’s expose of Jewish false flag terrorism, 9/11 Missing Links. For my recent cryptanalysis, which thoroughly exposes the Cabala code used by the 9/11 Cabal, they should peruse Holy Ghost Troop vs. the Synagogue of Satan. Now, before you clutter my comments with your sophomoric sophistry again, answer my two-part question:

(1) Why did the New York Jews dedicate their holocaust museum on 9/11/97, and (2) why has that fact been almost totally suppressed?

I only found one confirming source, Rudy Giuliani’s archive: New York City’s Memorial to the Holocaust: Learning about Tragedy and Triumph.

I’m not at all ashamed to accuse the Jews of foreknowledge; in light of my demonstrations above, I’d be ashamed if I didn’t!

JS says: April 30, 2011 at 6:26 pm Consider this small but disturbing sample of this week’s upcoming news:

4/30/2011 – Today is the 66th (6×11) anniversary of the marriage and double-suicide of Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun, 4/30/1945. After death, they were set on FIRE, all of it an occult ritual. Of course, Nazism did not die with them, and anyone who thinks so is a naif living in fantasyland.

5/1/2011 – Beatification of Pope John Paul II on the feast day of Divine Mercy, important to Poles. But this is also May 1, the Communist holiday. John Paul II was instrumental in the breakup of the Soviet Union. What kind of message is Pope Benedict XVI (1st German Pope) trying to give us?

5/2/2011 – Launch of shuttle Endeavour at 2:33 pm, variation of 322, Skull and Bones number. Not good.

AR says: May 1, 2011 at 8:33 am

The sources you provided prove absolutely nothing. The Odigo workers are the only ones mentioned in the first source. Where are the 4000 Jews who didn’t show for work that day?  I watched “911 Missing Links” with disgust and I got to the part where 3 of the 5 dancing Israelis are being interviewed to a talk show. All I can say is whoever simultaneously translated their words distorted their entire meaning. I can only assume it was done deliberately, they don’t say that their purpose was to document the “event”. I stopped watching afterwards, it was too low for my taste.  To answer your question – I have no idea why the New York Jews dedicated their holocaust museum on 9/11/97 and I don’t care. If you wish to rely on cryptanalysis to predict the Synagogue of Satan terror attacks, be my guest.  By the way I’m still waiting for that Passover false flag terror attack. Any idea when it supposed to occur? Wait, I forgot, Passover ended last Monday.

NOVANEWS

The Needed Trigger for Next Step-Pakistan

Time to Talk about ‘Why & Why Now’

By Sibel Edmonds

It has been over two weeks since the orchestrated ever-changing Bin Laden Death. The question of what happened remains the same except it doesn’t seem to matter any longer. The US media is done after making their initial splash, and the majority is left with one conclusion: the SOB is dead, and who gives a da… how it happened. Whether Osama held an AK-47 while using some damsel in distress as a shield, whether there was a real fight or not, whether it was really Osama’s body in an organic edible shell we fed to the endangered sharks, whether the full credit goes to the CIA or the White House or the Pentagon …no longer seems to matter.

Dizzy-fying confusion induced by dozens and dozens of lies and discrepancies and denials has given way to post-adrenaline-rush exhaustion. The question of what happened has been classified as moot and irrelevant. Right or wrong I’ll leave that question behind, at least for now, and instead, go back to focus on the more important question- the question of ‘why and why now.’

As I stated during the first few days of covering the Bin Laden Death Script, when it comes to DC dirty politics, when it comes to the new world order machine, and when it comes to US presidents, timing is everything and there are no such things as coincidences:

Considering the mainstream media’s sensationalism and propaganda tactics and their cemented role as an extension of the establishment, one must step back and take in the entire landscape, the context, connections, and of course the timing. Only after that, after putting the pieces together instead of dumbly staring at the images spread before us by the media, we have a chance to get a grasp of the reality-facts; or at least a chance to come up with real questions.

In the past two weeks, after talking with many experts and sources, both nationally and internationally, Pakistan has been surfacing as the common thread holding the most rational explanation of ‘why and why now.’ Interestingly, I came across the following statement by Rep. Ron Paul during his interview on MSNBC’s Morning Joe:

“The helicopters that landed in Abbottabad won’t be the last to put American troops on the ground in Pakistan, I see the whole thing as a mess, and I think that we are going to be in Pakistan. I think that’s the next occupation and I fear it. I think it’s ridiculous, and I think our foreign policy is such that we don’t need to be doing this.”

I was planning to write a comprehensive piece based on information and analyses I have gathered from my solid intelligence and Pentagon sources. However, after watching the interview with Ron Paul (And he has his credible sources), I decided to go ahead and write a fairly quick commentary on why the question of ‘why and why now’ keeps pointing to Pakistan as the next probable occupation target for our never-dying neocon objective-makers. Actually the following is more of significant developments and a timeline than a subjective interpretation or commentary. I am going to put them together and have us look at the pattern and where these points point to, and that’s exactly what I meant by “one must step back and take in the entire landscape, the context, connections, and of course the timing.”

Let’s start with Project for the New American Century (PNAC) which was launched in 1997 and became known for leading the public campaign to oust Saddam Hussein both before and after the September 11 attacks. As many of my highly aware readers know, those neocons, their objectives and activities, never go away. They may change names or change a few front faces, but like a leech they always hold on to the system; the system they help put in place in the first place:

The blandly-named Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) – the brainchild of Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, neo-conservative foreign policy guru Robert Kagan, and former Bush administration official Dan Senor – has thus far kept a low profile; its only activity to this point has been to sponsor a conference pushing for a U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan.But some see FPI as a likely successor to Kristol’s and Kagan’s previous organisation, the now-defunct Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which they launched in 1997 and which became best known for leading the public campaign to oust former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein both before and after the Sep. 11 attacks.

…

So what’s their mission statement, and what have these neocons been cooking up with the new face, their new president, Obama? The following is from an article by Jim Lobe in 2009:

The mission statement opens by listing a familiar litany of threats to the U.S., including “rogue states,” “failed states,” “autocracies” and “terrorism”, but gives pride of place to the “challenges” posed by “rising and resurgent powers,” of which only China and Russia are named.

…FPI intends to make confrontation with China and Russia the centrepiece of its foreign policy stance. If this is the case, it would mark a return to the early days of the Bush administration, before 9/11, when Kristol’s Weekly Standard took the lead in attacking Washington for its alleged “appeasement” of Beijing… FPI has chosen to push for escalating the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan. The organisation’s first event, to be held here Mar. 31, will be a conference entitled “Afghanistan: Planning for Success”.

…

For now, this is what I want you to take from the above on Obama’s Neoconistic objectives: fiercely counter China-Russia when it comes to establishing US hegemony, especially in Central and South Asia, with emphasis on Afghanistan. Next, let’s look at the strategic importance of the same region for China [All emphasis mine]:

In order for China to sustain its status as the emerging economic superpower, it must take all the necessary steps required in order to have sufficient energy resources for the near future. According to Pakistani think tank, BrassTacks, Chinese interests in the Indian Ocean became visible in 2002, when they invested heavily and began work on the Gwadar Port, located in Baluchestan, a province of Pakistan.

The Gwadar Port has its benefits for both Pakistan and China. According to Abdus Sattar Ghazali, executive editor for American Muslim Perspective, “The cost benefits to China of using Gwadar as the port for western China’s imports and exports are as evident as the long-term economic benefits to Pakistan of Gwadar becoming a port for Chinese goods.” Not only does Gwadar enable China to fulfill its energy needs, but it will also provide a strategic military footprint in the Arabian Sea, which has the United States worried.

…

Okay, now you have Obama’s Neoconistic objectives with China as its main target and competitor, and you have China competing for the same strategic area, Pakistan, to fulfill its energy needs and establish a strategic footprint in the Arabian Sea, and in the middle of it, the point where US-China strategic objectives intersect: Pakistan.

In order to halt this, the globalists need to block China’s access to the Arabian Sea by way of Gwadar. According to BrassTacks, to do this, “there needs to be a ‘new Pakistan’ as indicated in Operation Enduring Turmoil.” Operation Enduring Turmoil is PNAC’s plan to disassemble Pakistan into three parts. According to a “game plan” drawn out by Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, in a 2006 article of the Armed Forces Journal, “Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier tribes would be reunited with their Afghan brethren [and] would also lose its Baluch territory to Free Baluchistan. The remaining ‘natural’ Pakistan would lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi.” With this done, what was once the NWFP, a province of Pakistan, is now part of Afghanistan, and what was once Baluchistan, a province of Pakistan, is now its own state, Free Baluchistan. This would force China to impossibly go through Afghanistan and Free Baluchistan in order to reach the Arabian Sea. Such an arrangement would cut China’s route to the Arabian Sea.

…

Now, please focus on our three main actors- China, US and in the middle, the strategically important Pakistan. Let’s use our common sense minus logic-clouding details, and consider what happens when the strategically crucial actor in the middle starts straying away from one main actor and moving toward the other.

This is from November, 2009:

China has sent out an interesting signal ahead of US president Barack Obama’s scheduled visit to Beijing by offering a set of advanced fighter jets to Pakistan. It has agreed to sell $1.4 billion worth of jets to Islamabad days ahead of the planned visit of the US president Barack Obama to Shanghai and Beijing on November 15-18.

The move is expected to jolt the US administration as it works on notes and talking points for Obama’s meetings with Chinese leaders. He is expected to discuss Beijing’s relationship with India and its role in internal conflicts in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Beijing is keen to reduce US influence on Pakistan, which will make it easier for it to deal with India, sources said. Washington’s recent decision to extend massive financial assistance to Islamabad is seen in some quarters as a policy setback for China.

…

A year later, in October 2010, the following interesting perspective on how things were heating up between the US and Pakistan is published by Margolis:

The neoconservative far right in Washington and its media allies again claim Pakistan is a grave threat to US interests and to Israel. Pakistan must be declawed and dismembered, insist the neocons. Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is reportedly being targeted for seizure or elimination by US Special Forces. There is also talk in Washington of dividing Afghanistan into Pashtun, Tajik and Uzbek mini-states, as the US has done in Iraq, and perhaps Pakistan, as well. Little states are easier to rule or intimidate than big ones. Many Pakistanis believe the United States is bent on dismembering their nation. Some polls show Pakistanis now regard the United States as a greater enemy than India.

…

It is important to remember how Obama passed AIPAC neocons’ test on Pakistan during his presidential campaign in 2007. Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government,”If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” Obama said.

Now, let’s fast-forward to early April 2011:

Pakistan’s ambassador to China used a recent celebration of his country’s Republic Day to give a rhetoric-filled talk about Beijing-Islamabad relations. If March 23, 1940, was the day the Muslim League decided to establish Pakistan, then the anniversary would be a time to declare that relations with China will define the way forward. ‘We shall take our bilateral relations to new heights,’ Masood Khan proclaimed. […] Pakistan has been moving into China’s sphere of influence for decades and the countries routinely refer to each other as ‘all-weather’ partners.

This year will mark the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations. ‘Even when I was there in 1981, ’82, I could see Chinese military factories going up,’ says Stephen Cohen, a Pakistan expert at the Brookings Institution. Now, Pakistan represents a major market for China’s nuclear and military technology. According to SIPRI, a Swedish think tank, over 40 per cent of Chinese arms exports go to Pakistan—the largest share of any country China sells to.”

Obviously Obama’s day in day out bombing of Pakistan, his ‘let’s drone the hell out of them’ policy, had backfired, producing the opposite effect for his Neoconistic global hegemony objectives. Now, things begin to really heat up; this is from April 17, 2011:

President Obama’s rhetoric in Delhi had no substance except to rile the Pakistanis. The Delhi card didn’t quite work. The Chinese Premier visited Islamabad and pledged $20 billion in investment in Pakistan during the next five years. How about them apples? The Pakistani retort is what it has always been we need “Friends Not Masters”.

Britain as a colonial power practiced “Divide and rule” pitting religious and ethnic differences in the Middle East to rule continents. Bhutto famously theorized that the post-colonial powers were working on a “unite and rule” strategy forcing Pakistan to work with India against China.

“The idea of becoming subservient to India is abhorrent and that of cooperation with India, with the object of promoting tension with China, equally repugnant.” Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.

…

Most Pakistanis don’t want closer relations with Washington–they want to build closer relations with Beijing, and work on creating the Muslim Union (similar to the European Union) in Central Asia. Links with Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey are key to the future of Pakistan.

Islamabad is moving ever closer to China, both militarily and economically– and that’s a fact Jack.

…

By mid April things start going downhill; very fast.

The transactional relationship between Washington and Islamabad is coming to an end. While US-Pakistani transactional relations are fraying at both ends, the opposite is true of Sino-Pakistani relations.

Pakistan supported China when she was recognized only by Albania, and built the bridge to the USA. This fact cannot be forgotten by the Chinese who mention it in every summit and mentioned it in this summit also

…

There is renewed energy to pace up the development of Gwadar Port to provide China a shorter route and easy excess to world markets to dispatch its goods to Europe and America.

“The Gwadar port project will transform Pakistan’s Navy into a force that can rival regional navies. The government of Pakistan has designated the port area as a “sensitive defense zone.” The Gwadar port will rank among the world’s largest deep-sea ports. The port provides China a strategic foothold in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean.

Located at the entrance of the Persian Gulf and about 460 kms from Karachi, Gwadar has had immense Geostrategic significance on many accounts. The continued unstable regional environment in the Persian Gulf in particular as a result of the Iran/Iraq war, the Gulf war and the emergence of the new Central Asian States has added to this importance. Considering the Geo-economic imperative of the regional changes, the ADB’s Ports Master Plan studies considered an alternate to the Persian Gulf Ports to capture the transit trade of the Central Asian Republic (CAR) as well as the trans-shipment trade of the region.

…

And finally, on April 27, according to my sources, the following catalyst prompts the Obama team to execute the Kill Osama Bin Laden Script. This is the pivotal point in the Bin Laden Death Operation Script as a catalyst for the soon to come Pakistan Occupation:

Pakistan is lobbying Afghan President Hamid Karzai against building a long-term strategic partnership with the United States, and urging him instead to look to Pakistan and its ally, China, for help in striking a peace deal with the Taliban and rebuilding the economy, according to Afghan officials.

…

Washington”s relations with Pakistan have reached their lowest point in years following a series of missteps on both sides, and Pakistani officials say that they no longer have an incentive to follow the American lead in their own backyard, the report added.

“Pakistan is sole guarantor of its own interest,” said a senior Pakistani official, adding: “We”re not looking for anyone else to protect us, especially the US. If they”re leaving, they”re leaving and they should go.”

…

The next day, on April 28, , a senior Pakistani government official said that the Export-Import Bank of China will loan Pakistan $1.7 billion to develop a city-wide train system in the eastern city of Lahore.

Since the holes-filled and never-explained ‘kill or capture’ operation, the presidential PR machine, theUS media and their extension guised under ‘alternative’ have been beating the war drums. After all, as with any wars of ours, public opinion must be shaped, and public backing must be garnered. This isone of the latest reflecting just that:

After the killing of Usama bin Laden in Pakistan, few American voters believe that country is an ally of theUnited States in the war against terrorism. Moreover, most doubt Pakistan is worthy of continued U.S. foreign aid.

That’s according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.

Nearly three out of four voters — 73 percent — say the United States should stop sending foreign aid until Pakistan demonstrates a deeper commitment to the war against terrorism. Some 19 percent would continue to provide funding.

With the discovery that bin Laden apparently had been living in Pakistan for years, the consensus is Pakistan is not a friend (74 percent). A small 16 percent minority of voters views Pakistan as a strong U.S. ally in the war against terrorism.

…

You must be thinking: Pakistan must have tons in their own dossier to expose US government duplicities, lies, and nefarious activities. So why have they been relatively silent in all this? Why don’t they open the flood gate on ‘facts’ surrounding Bin Laden, his supposed role in 9/11, his supposed journey since 9/11, and his supposed death recently? And I have an answer for that: neither party has played all their cards yet. Just take a look at how Gates has been playing both sides carefully while measuring the outcome of various factors in play:

Gates reiterated the accusation that elements within the Pakistani government knew about the location of Osama bin Laden and were keeping that information from the United States. Bin Laden was killed in a US raid earlier this month.

At the same time, Gates echoed comments by other officials, conceding that the US has absolutely no evidence to that effect and that it is “pure supposition on our part.” The repeated accusations, despite being based on “pure supposition” have done major damage to US-Pakistan ties, and have spawned calls from Congress to suspend all aid to Pakistan to punish them.

Gates, who attended the conference with Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen, also said that the US raid that killed bin Laden had “humiliated” the Pakistani government, and that they had “paid a price” for bin Laden’s presence. Mullen added that the US ability to attack Pakistan with impunity was “a humbling experience” for the Pakistani military.

…

The White House neocons are in the midst of age-old diplomatic games, bluffing, and hedging their bets. They have the ‘foreign & military aid’ card. They have the ‘ISI dirt files’ card. They have the ‘ultimate China leaning’card. And of course, they have the ‘mighty power of preemptive occupation war’ card which is always blessed and supported by NATO and overlooked by their butlers in the UN.

China has its own set of cards; whether it is their biggest market for dumping goods, or carrying the US debt, or who knows what else. For now they are using the ‘talk’ card with no real strings attached:

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao assured his Pakistani counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani of China’s “all-weather friendship” on Wednesday, during a visit that sharply contrasted with anger between Washington and Islamabad.

“I wish to stress here that no matter what changes might take place in the international landscape, China and Pakistan will remain forever good neighbours, good friends, good partners and good brothers,” Wen told Gilani at the start of a meeting in central Beijing’s Great Hall of the People.

Suffice it to say that not all cards have been placed on the table. As the famous Kenny Rogers’ Gamblerlyrics go:

You got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em,
Know when to walk away and know when to run.
You never count your money when you’re sittin’ at the table.
There’ll be time enough for countin’ when the dealin’s done.

As for us the people, we’ll be sitting and waiting for the three parties to conclude this stage of their global hegemony game. We’ll be reading and watching and listening to their PR machine in the media give us one concocted fantasy after another. As in all other wars of ours we will have zero to say, zilch to gain, and plenty to lose. They have the cards, and we are the piled up tokens on the table.

NOVANEWS

Phony Osama operating under agent Davis

The US operation that allegedly killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan has actually led to the death of a clone of the al-Qaeda leader, working under CIA operative Raymond Davis, an American editor says.

Gordon Duff, Senior Editor of Ohio-based Veterans Today, says what the United States claims to be Osama bin Laden was actually a “clone” operating under the supervision of CIA operative Raymond Davis in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

“The CIA maintained a safe house at Abbottabad [where it] kept agents right next to the compound that ‘bin Laden’ was allegedly at,” Duff said in a phone interview with Press TV’s U.S. Desk on Tuesday.

“They watched bin Laden from their safe house but bin Laden, or whoever they say he was, had no security of any kind, there were no guns, no weapons, nothing,” he continued “All they had there was a CIA facility next door filled with armed people… the house next door was either a door watching a horribly unarmed and helpless Osama bin Laden or they were the security officers protecting the compound with a phony bin Laden,” he said.

Duff further added that the real bin Laden died years go after having spent years in American hospitals receiving treatments for various ailments. He also dismissed as false the claims that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. “The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. department of justice has never been able to come up with a single shred of evidence that Osama bin Laden had any involvement in 9/11,” he noted. ”

Osama bin Laden had been dead for a decade. Confirmations received from the highest sources in the U.S. intelligence community confirm that Osama bin Laden’s body was recovered by Special Forces operating in Afghanistan in December 2001,”

Duff has written in his article entitled ‘Was Raymond Davis CIA’s Bin Laden Handler?’ published on veteranstoday.com May 9. “His body was frozen and kept in storage for a date when it would be of advantage to the United States to use it for maximum advantage,” he wrote. HJ/SM/MM

PRESS TV MAY 18 UPDATE (AFTER SECOND INTERVIEW)

 
The US operation that allegedly killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan has actually led to the death of a clone of the al-Qaeda leader, working under CIA operative Raymond Davis, an American editor says.

“The real bin Laden died years ago after receiving treatment in American hospitals for his various illnesses,” said Gordon Duff, senior editor of Ohio-based Veterans Today, in an interview with Press TV’s US Desk.

“His [bin Laden] body was frozen and kept in storage for a date when it would be of advantage to the United States to use it for maximum advantage,” Duff wrote in a May 9 article titled ‘Was Raymond Davis CIA’s Bin Laden Handler?’

According to the US intelligence community, bin Laden’s body was recovered in 2001 by American Special Forces in Afghanistan, Duff says.

“The CIA maintained a safe house at Abbottabad [where it] kept agents right next to the compound that ‘bin Laden’ was allegedly [killed] at,” Duff said.

Duff went on to say that the CIA facility next door to the alleged bin Laden’s compound was filled with armed agents possibly protecting the phony bin Laden.

Duff also emphasized on the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has failed to present any evidence linking bin Laden to the September 11 terrorist attacks on the US soil about ten year ago.

Analysts have raised serious questions as to why US officials did not allow for the application of a DNA test to formally confirm the identity of the corpse before his burial at sea.

NOVANEWS

By Sherwood Ross

Americans are so woefully ignorant of their own history that they cannot apply the lessons of the past to guide their foreign policy, the Dean of America’s only college of history says.

“When one considers our profound lack of knowledge of our own past, combined with our unparalleled military might as the world’s only superpower, it is easier to understand why countries as different as Mexico and Canada, Pakistan and New Zealand, look at us with wary eyes,” says historian Michael Chesson, dean of the American College of History and Legal Studies in Salem, N.H.

“We are the thousand pound gorilla,” Chesson continues. “Unfortunately, we can lash out as if we were both drunk and blind when provoked, whether by pesky foreign powers, or terrorists.”

Chesson cites the best-seller “Imperial Hubris”(Potomac Books) by Michael Scheuer about the early fighting in Afghanistan to support his argument that the U.S. needs a more informed citizenry.

“Americans will have to read more books, journals, newspapers, and online commentary from a variety olf sources, written from different points of view,” Chesson says. “Then we have to think about what it all means, and make decisions based on that information.”

He explains, “It is vital that we do a far better job of informing ourselves about the world than has been the case for much of our history,” because “Two branches of our national government are headed entirely by elected leaders. Over time what are the odds that their qualities and strengths will be better than the general level of awareness among the broad electorate?”

Chesson states further, “We must supplement our formidable hard power with the soft power available to us, but only if we husband it, use it wisely, and know how to produce more of it,” as former Assistant Secretary of Defense Joseph Nye wrote in his book, “The Paradox of American Power: Why The World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone”(Oxford University Press). Currently, Nye is dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.

“For America to fare better in a perilous world Nye says will require some self-restraint from Congress. That seems a dubious proposition,” Chesson observes. “It is, at best, one measure of how hard it is for a democratic republic to conduct foreign policy. A more constructive approach to our involvement in world affairs would also require some consistency from one presidential administration to the next, even when there is a transfer of power from one party to another.” Chesson’s comments appear on the history college’s Web site.

Created by the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, ACHLS offers junior and senior years of undergraduate study.  ACHLS provides students with a rigorous, affordable education and currently is offering free tuition to students entering this fall, a saving of $10,000. ACHLS also allows qualified students to combine their senior year of college with their first year of law school, a saving of time and tuition.

NOVANEWS

Al Jazeera

Obama gives up, AIPAC wins

Supporters of justice in the Middle East need to raise their voices, lest president hears only Israel’s shouting.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/201151783043474842.html

MJ Rosenberg

The pro-Israeli lobby drowns out any pro-Palestinian calls for change in American foreign policy [GALLO/GETTY]

On the surface it appears that president Obama has given up on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and, frankly, given the evidence, it is difficult imagining that there is something different beneath the surface. To wit:

Special Envoy George Mitchell resigned, clearly angry at the lack of support his peace efforts received from the White House – and his resignation letter was about as curt and cold as any in recent memory. The announcement of his resignation followed reports that the president’s Thursday speech on the Middle East will, amazingly, say virtually nothing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

A day after Mitchell’s resignation came news that the president had decided that he will speak at this month’s AIPAC conference, the traditional setting for pandering to the Israeli government and, more significantly, to Israel-centred political donors.

The most significant sign that the president has abandoned any pretence of being an “honest broker” in favour of gung-ho support for the status quo came in February, when Obama instructed UN ambassador Susan Rice to veto a Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement expansion.

The resolution incorporated Obama’s own policy on settlements, so the decision to veto it – the US cast the only no vote – sent a clear signal that, at least until after November 2012, the Obama administration intends to avoid deviation from the AIPAC/Netanyahu blueprint.

This seeming decision to go “all AIPAC, all the time” would be jarring even if 2011 were not the year of the Arab Spring. Just weeks ago, the administration was celebrating Arab democracy and even the fall of our long time ally, Hosni Mubarak. Now it is blatantly adopting a policy that deeply grieves the very Arab democrats it supposedly champions.

The lobby’s (and, apparently, the administration’s) response to that would be that the Arab Spring was not about Israel/Palestine, that not one demonstrator took to the streets to protest Israel’s continued occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem as well as the de facto occupation (and blockade) of Gaza.

Palestine: The ultimate non-democracy

And that is true. All the Arab revolutions were local. But, as the administration surely knows, the one non-local issue that all Arab democrats care about is the continued occupation. And why not?

After all, the ultimate in non-democracy is having one’s life controlled, not by a domestic despot, but by a foreign government.

The president knows that hatred for the occupation is common to all Muslims – Iranian, Indonesian, Egyptian, Iraqi, whatever, and with good reason (add to that list Israeli moderates, who hate what the occupation is doing, not only to Palestinians, but to their country).

Beyond all that, any US president has to consider what the US military thinks about the occupation. It’s not just general Petraeus who believes that the occupation is a threat to US national security or that it endangers our personnel throughout the Muslim world and our energy supplies. That is a common view among the brass and the civilians alike.

In short, there is nothing good about perpetuating the occupation, and president Obama knows it. On the contrary, the occupation (and the illegal settlements that are its symbol) is a dangerous blight on Arabs, Israelis, and the United States.

So what accounts for president Obama’s seeming policy of indifference?

That is a question that doesn’t need any answer beyond the fact that at the very moment, the White House is abandoning peacemaking – the president is rushing to AIPAC to deliver the news in person. America’s Middle East policy is all about appeasing a few dozen AIPAC-connected donors (no, it is not about the “Jewish vote”, which is consistently Democratic – average 75 per cent – based around domestic issues, not the Middle East).

The president seems to be going out of his way to make sure everyone understands that. It is as if he were saying, “With AIPAC donors – and Democrats in Congress who get their marching orders from AIPAC – what choice do I have? I’m boxed in.”

But why would he do that?

“I can’t hear you”

Why would he want to send the message that he can’t implement the policies he wants to because he is trapped by special interests? Just maybe, he wants our help.

In 2007, the day after Obama declared his candidacy for president, I met with him in his office (I was then working for Israel Policy Forum). Obama listened carefully while I explained why it was critical that he be an “honest broker” on Israel-Palestinian issues. Nothing I said, including my opinions of AIPAC’s influence, would surprise anyone who reads my columns.

The bottom line was that the occupation was terrible for the United States, for Israel, and most of all for the Palestinians, and that he should understand that the status quo lobbyists who defend everything Israel does are not representative of the Jewish community or anyone else.

Obama listened, cupped his ear, and said, “I can’t hear you.”

I didn’t understand; I was sitting right next to him.

He then said: “No, not literally. I mean that I don’t hear from people like you. But I hear from AIPAC [he then named the local AIPAC leader in Chicago] every week. I’m going to be president and, when I am, it is your job – you and all the people who feel the way you do – to make sure I hear that message. You cannot simply rely on the belief that you are right. You need to raise your voice so that I hear you and not just them.”

So maybe, just maybe, the president wants us to shout and holler about what appears to be a sell-out to AIPAC. After all, he is making no attempt to cover up what he’s doing or why he’s doing it. He only hears one voice.

Maybe Obama’s latest actions are a cry for help.

Yes, it’s just a theory. But it is infinitely better than thinking Obama actually believes that AIPAC’s status quo is in America’s interest. It just is not possible that this president could believe that.

It’s time to raise our voices so Obama can hear us, whether he still wants us to or not.

MJ Rosenberg is a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow at Media Matters Action Network. The above article first appeared in Foreign Policy Matters, a part of the Media Matters Action Network.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

=======================================

Al Jazeera Thursday, 19 May 2011 20:51

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/05/2011519164415837225.html

Reactions to Obama’s speech outlining his vision for the Middle East and North Africa.

President Obama touched upon a whole range of issues, from Israeli-Palestinian conflict to Syria and Iran [Reuters]

Reactions to Barack Obama’s speech on the Middle East and North Africa:

Robert Fisk – Renowned Journalist

It was the same old story… Israel cannot be deligitimised… No peace can be imposed on either party… It sounded like his pro-israeli speach to AIPAC.

It was a boring speech – very boring with lots of rhetoric about Arab revolutions which of course he did nothing to help.

Some of it was positively delusional! When he said we’ve broken the Taliban’s momentum – it’s delusional, it’s just not true.

Office of the Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu

Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of US commitments made to Israel in 2004, which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress.

Among other things, those commitments relate to Israel not having to withdraw to the 1967 lines which are both indefensible and which would leave major Israeli population centres in Judea and Samaria beyond those lines.

Prime Minister Netanyahu will make clear that the defence of Israel requires an Israeli military presence along the Jordan River.

Prime Minister Netanyahu will also express his disappointment over the Palestinian Authority’s decision to embrace Hamas, a terror organisation committed to Israel’s destruction, as well as over Mahmoud Abbas’s recently expressed views which grossly distort history and make clear that Abbas seeks a Palestinian state in order to continue the conflict with Israel rather than end it.

Saeb Erekat – Top Aide to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas

President Abbas expresses his appreciation to the efforts being exerted, the continuous efforts by president Obama with the objective of resuming the permanent status talks and the hope of reaching a final-status agreement in all core issues including Jerusalem and refugees.

Sami Abu Zuhri – Hamas spokesperson

We were expecting a lot more from Obama’s speech today regarding the Palestinians who suffer from the hardships of the occupation, and what the Israeli occupation does against the Palestinians. But Obama did not bring anything new.

What Obama needs to do is not to add slogans but to take concrete steps to protect the rights of the Palestinian people and the Arab nation.

The peoples of the region are not in need of Obama’s lectures. Obama reaffirmed his absolute support for the policies of the (Israeli) occupation and his rejection of any criticism of the Occupation.

We affirm that Palestinian reconciliation is a Palestinian affair and that the (peace) negotiations have proven to be pointless.

Hamas will never recognise the Israeli occupation under any circumstances.

Ezzedin Choukri-Fishere – Political Science Professor at the American University in Cairo

I think this goes substantially beyond what Obama said in his Cairo speech in 2009, where he merely set the tone for the new administration and talked about general principles of a new American policy towards the Arab world. I think this time he is coming up with a concrete indication of policy on the major issues the Arab world is facing. That is new and, in fact, it is about regaining leadership.

Essam al-Erian – Senior Member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt

A disappointing speech. Nothing new. American strategy remains as is. American cover for dictatorial presidents, in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain remains as is. Perhaps the sharpest tone was towards Libya. American promises are just promises. There is no decisive decision to immediately withdraw from Iraq or Afghanistan. Threatening Iran remains the same.

Shadi Hamid – Director of Research at the Brookings Center in Doha, Qatar (on Twitter)

My prediction on Obama’s (Middle East) speech: Arab leaders won’t like it much. Arab reformers won’t like it much.

This is the Obama style: Try to appeal to everyone & end up disappointing everyone.

Obama says US core interests align with Arab hopes. Well, why didn’t they align for five decades?

Obama says it will be US policy ‘to support reform across the region.’ Reform, of course, is not same thing as democracy.

Gigi Ibrahim  – Egyptian Activist (on Twitter)

‘Commitment to friends and allies’ — commitment to Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Abdulrahman Mostafa – Medical Student in Cairo, Egypt

Hopefully, we think that change in Egypt and the Arab world will change American policy by the power of people. And I think that people in the USA are starting to understand….

I think it should be emphasised that having aid for Egypt is something good, but also Egypt has it’s own foreign policy and I think the US should deal with Egypt not as a follower as the past, but as a partner. So if we have a common interest we can co-operate together to have our common interest and to exchange benefits.

Source: Al Jazeera and agencies