Joerie, joerie, botter en brood,
as ek jou kry, slaat ek jou dood

Tuesday, May 31, 2011


Obama's UK-Fest : Vision of a War Without End

by Felicity Arbuthnot

May 31, 2011

Part One.

"The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power, and all the beauty that wealth e'er gave, Awaits alike the inevitable hour, the paths of glory lead but to the grave." Thomas Gray (1716-1771.)

It was quite a week for America's Nobel Peace Laureate President. After a speech to AIPAC, there was the major, pre-UK arrival "interview" with the BBC's political commentator, Andrew Marr. Less an interview, in fact than a breathlessly adoring audience.

Marr began by referring to: " .. that extraordinary moment when you knew you had got bin Laden", and that: "there was something personal about it." No mention that of course there was also something very illegal about it.

Obama responded with his nation's "extraordinary trauma" after the tragedy of 9/11, without reflection, of course, on the "extraordinary trauma" the U.S., has inflicted on other nations (starting with its own First Nation) since its inception. If taking the official 11th September story at face value, cause and effect might have entered a Capitol Hill mind - and that of an interviewer, but no, naval gazing ruled.

That the SEALS were: "... able to perform" the murders "without casualties, was extraordinary." What happened to that crashed helicopter and, as yet, unconfirmed claims of body parts scattered around? Marr didn't ask.  

Obama went in to Hollywood mode. It was: "In the pitch of night, on a moonless night." The assassins did not know: "whether somebody had a bomb strapped to them." No query from the BBC's intrepid interviewer as to why people living quietly for six years (we are told) their children playing with pet rabbits, would retire for the night wrapped in an explosive device instead of a nightshirt.

After "marvelling" at an act of astonishing violence (and seemingly illegal entry in to Pakistan air space and country) the President was treated to possibly one of the most partisan comments in the history of broadcasting:

"Because it would presumably have been very difficult for America to take this man and put him on trial with all the hullabaloo of attorneys and PR characters and the interrogation and so forth. It would have been a difficult thing to do."

"That wasn't our number one consideration", responded the former law Professor, chillingly illuminatingly. Marr made no queries as to legalities and no comment.

"We've killed more terrorists on Pakistan soil than any where else ... but there's more to do, said the Lord High Executioner. Looking around U.S., global slaughters, that must be quite a record. Close down the law schools, save money on legal training - redundant. Pity about the "collateral damage", the farmers scratching subsistence living, the children, the mothers, deemed "terrorists" by drone operating, computer-wired youth, six thousand miles away.

"I had (said) when I was running for Presidency, that if I had a clear shot at bin Laden ..."

"You'd take it" enthused Marr.

"That we'd take it", confirmed President Nobel.

The: "If I had a clear shot ...", has a certain irony from the man who arrived in Britain two days later with 1,500 bodyguards, agents, aides, medics, armour plated Cadillac One flown in, twenty four vehicles to shield his convoy - and £10 million spent for a barbecue and a three day visit. So fearful was the wishful sharp shooter, it seems, that it was demanded that the glass in the Obama's suite in the heavily fortified Buckingham Palace be removed and replaced to their specification.

As the U.S., and British body bags returned from Afghanistan continue to mount, the BBC's audience learned that troop levels had been: "plussed up" and that: "the Taliban is now back on its heels." The occasional minor glitch of entire prisons inmates escaping, U.S., bases under attack, supply convoys routinely incinerated in industrial numbers (he didn't put it quite like that) had been because the U.S., had been: "distracted by the war in Iraq."

Surely a moment to comment that this was a "distraction" which was both illegal, had comprehensively ruined a civil society, largely destroyed a land of eye watering beauty and ancientest of histories - and of course, those figures again: up to one a half million dead, one million widows nearly five million orphans and nearly five mllion displaced. An apocalyptic "distraction." Marr's lack of address to this enormity was deafening.

Reconcilliation in Afghanistan, said the President, might be possible: " ... on terms that are consistent with our values." It was of course not put to the President that, as with much of the world, values, culture, beliefs, history, priorities in Afghanistan, are a planet away from those of the United States.

Much has been made of Barack Obama's reference in his AIPAC speech the same day, of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders. In fact there was so many caveats, ducks and dives, that it was a fact barely worth mentioing. Marr added more obstacles: "... the rockets fired by Hamas." No mention of the weapons of mass destruction sold by the U.S., to Israel, used to devastating effect, for decade, after decade. Jerusalem and the Palestinian right to return to their own land, was : "a problem." Hamas: " ... must renounce violence." And Israel? Marr did not ask.

Turning to the upheavels in the Middle East (don't mention North Africa and Libya - it was'nt) Marr asked grovellingly: "As the most powerful man in the world, what's your message to those people?"

The "message" was, to say the least, bordering on delusion: " ... power and the moral force of non-violence has proven itself in the United States ... the United States stands on the side of those who (seek change) through non-violent means ... But as long as people adhere to the principle that violence, typically, is not going to bring about the sort of changes they seek, then the United States is going to be strongly supportive ..."

The entire jungle in the room, elephants included, were the United States bombs and missiles raining down on Libya - and a stated aim that if the country's leader became another assassination victim in the bombings, so what, too bad.

He concluded with:"Most of my day-to-day work is consumed by how we can deliver on the promise of the American dream to ordinary people. And so we are very proud of what we did with bin Laden." 

Andrew Marr missed the tsunami of contradictions and they moved on to the impending state visit - why bother asking if there was any truth in former Presidential Advisor, Jack Caravelli's claim, that the U.S., had: " ... drawn up plans to take over Pakistan if the country moves towards 'fanatical Islam' " (read: continues to be mightily fed up with the way it is being treated by its U.S., "ally" and decided it has had enough.)

But after all, this was the man who trilled of Tony Blair, at the time of the illegal invasion of Iraq that: " ... tonight he stands as a larger man and a stronger Prime Minister as a result." Adding that his judgement had been vindicated and that Baghdad had been taken "without a bloodbath." 

The great London PR-fest follows.

RSA 50

Monday, May 30, 2011


* Hierdie ook:



SATURDAY, MAY 28, 2011

The Fake ICC & the Globalist Strategy of Tension

Fake globalist-funded court using fake evidence from fake globalist-funded NGOs.

by Tony Cartalucci

Bangkok, Thailand May 28, 2011 - Russia's President Medvedev, according to the Australian, has "endorsed calls for Colonel Gaddafi to leave office and offered to help to negotiate his exit. " It is a move that has "surprised and delighted" both London and Washington after Russia's initial protest against the extralegal military action that was executed upon an Iraq War-style pack of lies.

This apparent backpedaling by Russia coincides with increased bombardments of Libya's capital of Tripoli and calls by France and Britain to send in helicopter gunships in an effort to increase the level of murder and mayhem in order to force the Libyan government to meet "concessions." The contrived globalist International Criminal Court (ICC), has also attempted to place pressure upon Libya through an "arrest warrant" targeting Qaddafi.

An Entirely Fake Court

The "arrest warrant" issued by the ICC is based on evidence acquired from "30 missions to 11 States, and through interviews with a large number of persons, including key insiders and eyewitnesses." The ICC itself notes that the "unprecedented cooperation" it has received has come from "States and organizations, none of which are currently working in Libya." Undeterred by their admittedly tenuous investigation, they go on to provide an enumerated list of their "evidence."
The global elite's vast resources, derived from their control of
a fiat currency system, enables them to create convincing facades
like the ICC to further perpetuate their illegitimate, criminal agenda.
Pictured above is the ICC headquarters, as impressive architecturally
as it is illegitimate in any sense of natural legality.

A look over this "evidence" presented by the "Office of the Prosecutor" reveals an amateurish, almost desperate attempt aimed at the Libyan leader. The entire basis of the "Prosecutor's" case is built upon reports taken from BBC, AlJazeera, the London Guardian, New York Times, the US State Department's Broadcasting Board of Governors-run Voice of America, the globalist-funded Human Rights Rights Watch, and the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), among many, many others.

Perhaps depending entirely on their self-appointed authority, slick logo, tall headquarters, and official looking website, the ICC hopes no one actually looks at the "evidence" or realizes that the same corporate-financier interests are the driving forces behind both the fake ICC and the fake NGOs and corporate-funded media organizations that have supplied it with "evidence." It should be noted that even the BBC, along with AlJazeera and many other corporate-funded media organizations have conceded, albeit buried deeply within their reports on both Libya and Syria, that their sources cannot be verified as it is based on 2nd information conveyed via "activist groups." It should also be noted that the "Arab Spring's" opposition and these "activist groups" are also globalist-funded
The International Criminal Court itself claims to be, "an independent, permanent court that investigates and prosecutes persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes." A visit to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) site reveals just who is behind the ICC, who is actively promoting it and networking with the ICC's various NGO partners, and the fact that all involved boast the same financial and political supporters.

The CICC claims to include, "2,500 civil society organizations in 150 different countries working in partnership to strengthen international cooperation with the ICC; ensure that the Court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal; and advance stronger national laws that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide." The CICC however, also is "deeply appreciative of the generous support" provided by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the Fortune 500-lined John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, George Soros' Open Society Institute, and Humanity United. 
Humanity United in turn boast partnerships with the globalist co-conspirators of BBC World Service Trust, NED/Open Society/US State Department-funded Benetech, George Soros' Open Society Institute, and the NED-funded Solidarity Center which mobilized Egypt's labor unions just as the US-stoked unrest began to falter. These "generous supporters" are literally the same organizations that have built up the very "civil society organizations" the CICC is "working in partnership" with.

In other words, fake globalist-funded civil society organizations form a fake globalist-funded coalition, which in turn are supplying a fake globalist-funded court with evidence to further what is entirely a self-serving, politically motivated agenda using "humanity" as a mere and increasingly flimsy pretense. It is an entire network contrived out of thin air with fiat currency, and lent legitimacy by the myriad of corporate-financier owned media operations, such as BBC, AlJazeera, CNN, Fox News, VOA, and the myriad of other "sources" cited by the ICC's "Prosecutor's Office" in regards to Libya.

Indeed, the "International Criminal Court" is entirely fake, created by perhaps the most egregious criminals ever to have walked the earth, not to ensure "justice" in any sense we are familiar with, but to augment the self-proclaimed authority and legitimacy the global elite insist we are all beholden to. We are not beholden to it, not by any stretch of the imagination, nor are we beholden to any other contrivance operating in the name of "international arbiter." We have our local, state/provincial governments, within the nation-state. What appears beyond the nation-state are self-serving, multi-national corporate-financier conglomerations that transcend boarders, usurp national sovereignty and authority, and betray any sense of our innate, inalienable individual sovereignty by insisting their "international institutions" supersede all that falls beneath them.

Climbing out of the Globalist Strategy of Tension 

Sovereignty and indeed the future of free humanity depends on our individual reassertion of our rights and responsibilities to sustain ourselves, our communities, our states/provinces, and our nation-states. We cannot depend on the Russians or the Chinese to act as the counterbalance to the global-elite because the Russians and the Chinese, through their participation in the IMF, the United Nations, and even the International Criminal Court - all entirely contrived by the global elite - for whatever reason, have fallen directly into a "strategy of tension." Russia's latest flip-flop regarding Libya defies the hopes of those who saw the nation as a dependable counterbalance. Russia's actions now serve to grant the globalist-praising, terrorist usurpers of Libya's rebellion an entire nation to despoil on behalf of Washington and London - perhaps even Moscow now, based on some behind-the-scenes deal.
By participating in these illegitimate "international institutions" the nation-states we live under are granting the transnational elite legitimacy they would otherwise not have. It is impossible to discern whether the Russians or Chinese are participating in such farcical "international institutions" as part of a Machiavellian strategy, hidden complicity to an emerging global government, or for short-sighted, self-serving interests.

What we can be sure of is our own commitment to our own interests and agenda on a local, county, and state/provincial level. Thus, we the people, be we Americans, Russians, or Chinese, must ourselves act as the counterbalance to the global-elite's unwarranted influence. Balking the Anglo-American corporate-financier oligarchs does not guarantee other oligarchs will not rise and take their place elsewhere. Only by committing to a new paradigm of local sovereignty, where state/provincial, and national power is beholden to self-sufficient people on a local level instead of multi-national corporations on a global level, do we end entirely the threat of any sort of global-elite lording over us.
Sun Tzu in the "Art of War" once said, "therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him." The ideal scenario for the globalists is for us to continue responding to their provocations on their terms. And whether we agree or disagree with their agenda, as long as we use their contrived institutions to contest them - we continue granting them more legitimacy regardless of the outcome of our protests. This is the ultimate strategy of tension, playing out daily on a global level, ensnaring well-intentioned but ignorant servants of the globalist agenda, as well as informed proponents of freedom and sovereignty alike.

By turning our backs entirely on the global-elite's institutions, their ploys, their causes, their wars, and their false political dichotomies, and instead imposing our own will, on a local level, cutting off entirely the source of the global-elite's power (our complicity), we force them to react to the imposition of our own will. The Tenth Amendment movement is the very embodiment of this in modern day practice, with the "Food Sovereignty" movement and now Texas' battle against the TSA's usurpation of state and local law enforcement in their airports taking the front line. Regular Americans from across the country are leaving the corporate-pundit guided debates and taking action, guided not by some political agenda, but rather their own innate sovereignty.

It starts with something as simple as planting your own garden, the piecemeal boycotting and replacement of all multi-national corporations, participation in our local government and the growing alternative media, and it results in the seizure of the unwarranted influence that has allowed a group of criminal international bankers to contrive their own international army, an international court, and the ability to wage war against entire nation-states with absolute impunity.


SUNDAY, MAY 29, 2011

Encircling Russia with US Bases

by Stephen Lendman

In 1991, after the Soviet Union dissolved, everything changed but stayed the same. As a result, today's stakes are far greater, presenting much larger threats to world peace.

In America, neocons are still dominant. Obama is more belligerent than Bush, waging four wars and various proxy ones. The Israeli Lobby, Christian Right, and other extremist elements drive them. Conflict is preferred over diplomacy. 

Congressional majorities support Washington's imperial agenda, including global militarization against potential challengers and America's main rivals - China and Russia, encircling them belligerently with bases and strategic weapons. It's a policy fraught with danger.

NATO has 28 member states, including 10 former Soviet Republics and Warsaw Pact countries. Prospective new candidates include Georgia, Ukraine, and potentially others later to more tightly encircle Russia and China.

At the same time, the Middle East and parts of Eurasia have been increasingly militarized with a network of US bases from Qatar to Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond - a clear breach of GHW Bush's promise to Mikhail Gorbachev that paved the way for unifying Germany in 1990 and dissolving the Soviet Union.

Washington's promises, of course, aren't worth the paper they're written on, a hard lesson many nations later learn painfully.
Moreover, the Pentagon has an expanding network of 1,000 or more global bases, including secret and shared ones for greater control. In fact, at a time no nation threatens America, trillions of dollars are spent anyway for what military planners call "full spectrum dominance" over all land, surface and sub-surface sea, air, space, electromagnetic spectrum and information systems with enough overwhelming power to fight and win global wars against any adversary, including with nuclear weapons preemptively.
Encroaching Belligerently Near Russia's Borders
In late summer 2009, Obama suspended Bush administration plans for interceptor missiles in Poland and advanced tracking radar in the Czech Republic, both NATO members. Purportedly targeting Iran and other "rogue states," they, in fact, very much aimed at Russia, what new ones will do when installed.

At issue is assuring first strike capability, preventing or diminishing retaliation if America attacks Russia or China, a potentially catastrophic possibility under any scenario, but especially if nuclear war erupts.

For now, according to Obama, Washington will pursue "stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and America's allies," including Poland and the Czech Republic. Tactics alone may change, not hardline imperial policies.

Last September, Defense Secretary Gates explained a four-phase missile shield plan, including deploying Aegis class warships in the Eastern Mediterranean equipped with SM-3 anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite interceptors, followed by upgraded land and sea versions when available.

Moreover, stationing SM-3s in Bulgaria, Romania, and Poland were announced. Last summer, in fact, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) interceptors and about 100 US troops were sent to eastern Poland, close to Russia's Kaliningrad region, 200 miles from its border.

This same capability was installed in the Persian Gulf, including supplying regional allies with longer range Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile systems, the strategy being to have in place impenetrable interceptors from the Baltic to the Arabian, Black and Red Seas. 
In addition, a warning system is planned for the Czech Republic and other countries as well as centrally controlled missile interceptors - from Southern and Eastern Europe through the Middle East to close to Russia's borders, too close perhaps for comfort.

Instead of abandoning Bush's scheme, Obama's plans a far more extensive, sophisticated, flexible, mobile system to be developed through 2020. Included is nearly doubling the number of Aegis class warships to 38 by 2015, equipped with state-of-the-art missile interceptors.

As a result, America's front line capability will shift from Eastern Germany through the Middle East to the Black Sea and other strategic waterways to the Caucasus and Russia proper, encroaching on Moscow with new Eastern European bases in Bulgaria, Romania and Poland.

It represents the most significant US presence there since WW II. Currently, only limited troop numbers are involved up to 150 or so permanently, but expect an expanded presence ahead.

Last March, in fact, Secretary of State Clinton said Washington will deploy missile interceptor elements and F-16s in Poland. Russia expressed concern, Dmitry Rogozin, its permanent NATO representative, saying US plans complicate dialogue regarding creating a joint European anti-ballistic missile system, adding:

"Mrs. Clinton's statement contradicts the foundational relationship (between the) Russian Federation and NATO signed in 1997, (stipulating) that NATO must not strengthen the military structure close to the borders of Russia."

A Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement also expressed concern, saying:

"We have known about plans regarding (an) anti-ballistic missiles system long ago and we plan to (react in response) in the network of the EuroABM project. As for the idea of (US) Air Force base deployment, it requires an additional explanation."

In late April, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin reacted as well, saying:

"The expansion of NATO infrastructure towards our borders is causing us concern. NATO is not simply a political bloc. It is a military bloc. No one cancelled the agreements on how the bloc reacts to external threats. It is a defense structure," but it's acting aggressively.

In a post-G-8 Summit press conference, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said:

"I am not satisfied with the American side's reaction to my proposals and with NATO's reaction in general. Why? Because we are wasting time. Even though I spoke about the year 2020 yesterday as a deadline, (the) year when the construction of a four-stage system of the so-called adaptive approach ends. After 2020, if we do not come to terms, a real arms race will begin."

Perhaps much sooner as he's gotten no assurances that Russia isn't being targeted. As a result, he added:

"When we ask for the name of the countries that the shield is aimed at, we get silence. When we ask if the country has missiles (able to strike Europe), the answer is no."

So "who has those type of missiles" interceptors wish to deter? "We do. So we can only think that this system is being aimed against us."

He and other Russian officials worry about it expanding to Ukraine and Georgia with missile interceptors, attack aircraft, and US troops on its borders, threatening its security.

Obama in Poland

On May 28, Obama met with Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski and Prime Minister Donald Tusk, discussing, among other issues, reaffirming a US military presence with "American boots on the ground," including a permanent aerial detachment of F-16s and C-130 transport planes.

White House national security official Liz Sherwood-Randall said:

"What we will be doing is rotating trainers and aircraft to Poland so they can become more inter-operable with NATO. It will be a small permanent presence on the ground and then a rotational presence that will be more substantial."

On May 28, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said:

"To the east of the Oder River (dividing Germany and Poland), American forces will appear, and this at a time when America is reducing its overall military presence in Europe."

In fact, redeployment with interceptor missiles, other offensive weapons, and boots on the ground close to Russia's borders, not reduction, is planned, what clearly has Moscow officials alarmed.
On May 29, however, Obama disingenuously downplayed those concerns, reaffirming mutual defense and inviting Russia to participate in European missile defense plans, saying:

"I am very proud of (America's) reset process (with Russia). We believe missile defense is something where we can cooperate with Russia....This will not be a threat to the strategic balance."

Concerned Russian officials very much disagree, Vladimir Putin's earlier sentiment likely again being discussed.

In February 2007, in response to US planned missile defense then, he said:

"NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders. (It) does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represent a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have a right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact?"

At the time, his comments drew a storm of US media Russia bashing, as well as an article by this writer titled, "Reinventing the Evil Empire," saying:

Russia is back, proud and re-assertive, not about to roll over for America, especially in Eurasia. For Washington, it's back to the future with a new Cold War, but this time for greater stakes and much larger threats to world peace.

It's especially true during economic hard times, especially with austerity policies addressing them when social stimulus is needed, provoking spreading discontent for change.

As a result, Western powers may invent threats to distract people, waging greater war for imperial dominance, Russia and China perhaps directly threatened this time.


Obama’s Imperial Offensive

Sunday, May 29, 2011


Libyan Epiphany: Tomahawks Trump Teachers

     Events of the past week crystallized the profound hypocrisy and immorality of the American body politic.  If you’ve retained any semblance of your humanity, after decades of desensitization at the hands of the military-industrial mafia and their titillating lapdog media, you could not escape the glaring epiphany of a nation with disturbing priorities.
     Japan suffered a natural disaster of historic magnitude, is battling an epic nuclear meltdown just as the world was reassured that nuclear power was safe, and struggles to feed its population – especially the elderly in nursing homes.  The US has seven large military bases in Japan.  The country’s largest ports remain open and undamaged.  Yet, instead of focusing every resource at our disposal on the Japanese cataclysm, the Obama Administration – at the urging of colonial masters Britain and France – decided to bomb Libya.
     Our erudite and eager-to-please cowboy President pulled a Butch Cassidy and tried to hide out in South America, apparently unaware that most of that continent enjoys better relations with Libya than with the US.  American exceptionalism was in short supply.  But the empirical band played on. 
     Republicans – who had busied their fat little fingers (between large slices of American pie) laying waste to unions – quickly abandoned their months-long collective tirade on the merits of fiscal conservatism.  While Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker gleefully handed out pink slips to teachers, General Dynamics demonically ramped up production of its Tomahawk missiles.  Defense and oil stocks soared.   
     Each Tomahawk that blasts a depleted-uranium hole in Libya costs the US taxpayer $1.5 million.  As of today, the bill for decimating and decapitating the Libyan people came to $112 million – a small price to pay for a good old fashioned genocide.  Rest assured there won’t be a peep out of Republicans as the Pentagon bounces checks to a familiar array of war profiteers.    
     If education was a national priority, by my calculations we could have instead paid 2,240 teachers $50,000/year and come out even on the Tomahawk expenditure.
     But education is not a national priority.  Neither is helping faithful ally Japan – whose citizens are tired, scared and starving.  Instead, deficit-be-damned, our national priority is to bend over and lick the filthy blood-stained boots of the Rothschild-led City of London-based banking/oil/insurance/reinsurance/mining/agribusiness/pharmaceutical/, which will now steal Libya’s petroleum - on our dime. 
     This cabal seeks to depopulate the planet of useless eaters, monopolize its resources and amplify its own hegemony by throwing the entire global economy into the speculative realm on its various stock exchanges.  They are financial parasites who destroy the wealth of all others while enhancing their own.
     Under the auspices of yet another “madman-elimination” Crusade, America was again led by the nose down a well-worn path to serve as Hessianized mercenary force for these self-declared Illuminati bankers.   
     As if to foreshadow the Libyan madness, the day before Operation Odyssey Dawn commenced, NASA fired a Taurus XL rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.  The rocket misfired and plummeted into the Pacific Ocean, taking a cool $424 million beneath the waves with it.  The boys making space toys, “fiscally-conservative” by a country mile, simply returned to their sandboxes to build more rockets – on your dime.
     Were it not for the gravity of the situation, this March madness would all be quite comical.  But the stakes are high, especially for America.
     Republican words do not match their deeds.  They could care less about budget deficits.  They enjoy kicking around the weak while licking the boots of the wealthy.  These grateful un-rich climbers with callous-free hands love to bash workers while bending over for corporate bosses.  Better still to place a yellow ribbon on a minivan and feel patriotic about writing yet another gazillion dollar check to General Dynamics or some other Illuminati defense subsidiary.  They are Pavlov’s dogs and they are cowards.  Their much-vaunted “American values” do not exist.  They are yes-men in the service of City of London bankers.  And they are destroying our nation.
     President Butch Cassidy, most Democrats, and what pathetically passes for the “American left” didn’t fare much better during this time of epiphany.  Naïve is the word that comes to mind.  From the very beginning of the Gaddafi demonization redux, liberals took the bait.  It was cool to make fun of Gaddafi.  It felt good to be on the winning side.  The star-gazers felt a colonial duty – even a moral imperative – to intervene in Libya on behalf of…well the Libyans. 
     It didn’t matter that the “peaceful opposition” had fighter planes, RPGs and SAMs.  No big deal that many belonged to al Qaeda of the Mahgreb.  The media – both corporate and “alternative”– told Americans that these CIA/MI6/Mossad surrogates were the good guys and by God that was good enough for the sheeple.
     But altruistic intentions fail when intellectual rigor, historical astuteness and political theory are lacking.  Let’s face it.  Americans are increasingly dumb about the world.  It’s what happens when education takes a back seat to the military-industrial complex. 
     Yet larger cracks have emerged in the neo-colonial house of cards.  Our alchemical dominion over nature has proven tenuous and downright lethal as the Fukushima reactors continue to spew radiation.  Our dependence on Middle East oil has taken center stage. 
     We spurn progressive world leaders and support Gulf State kings, just as pan-Arab revolution gathers momentum and threatens to sweep these medieval relics aside.  Are European monarchs next?  How can America, a nation founded by revolution against monarchy and which fancies itself the very bedrock of democracy in the world, support monarchy in any form in the 21st century?
     Maybe the reason the whacko right-wing cries for “American exceptionalism” is because they know we longer are exceptional.  If we really were, we wouldn’t need to go around blathering about it.  We would show some humility, lose our worn-out free market dogma and just BE exceptional.
     Events of the past week – both despite and because of their gruesomely hypocritical nature – can result in a quantum leap in the revolutionary consciousness of humankind if only we are able to grasp their significance.
     Maybe Americans need more time off so they can travel abroad more.  Maybe if they supported unions they would get that time off to travel.  Maybe if they traveled more and shopped less, helping Japan would be a national priority and bombing Libya would be considered the absurdity that it is.


Affirmative Action 

South Africa is the only country in the world  where affirmative action is in the favor of the MAJORITY, who have complete political control. 

The fact that the political majority requires affirmative action to protect them against a 9% minority group is testament to a complete failure on their part to build their own wealth-making structures, so that their only solution is to take from others.

(Dankie Hennie)



Dit zogenaamde “Witkruis-monument” bevindt zich tussen Potgietersrus en Pietersburg in Zuid-Afrika.
Het monument werd ingehuldigd op 6 juni 2004 en is samengesteld uit ongeveer 1200 stalen kruisjes van  +/- 7kg,  één kruisje voor elke vermoorde plaasboer en/of familielid in de periode 1994-2004.  (‘Plaas’ is het Afrikaanse woord voor een –min of meer grote- hoeve.)
Volgende week wordt dit monument aangevuld met de kruisjes voor de vermoorde boeren in de periode 2004-2011. Het aantal kruisen moet bijna worden verdubbeld, op 3 en 4 juni a.s. worden er inderdaad bijna 2000 kruisjes bij geplaatst. Vanzelfsprekend (?) zijn deze moordpartijen op blanke boeren in Zuid-Afrika voor onze weldenkende pers niet interessant genoeg  voor enig nieuws hierover.
Geef toe, ’n voetballer of tennisser die zijn enkel heeft verstuikt, is veel en veel belangrijker…


The Secret Wars of the Saudi-Israeli 


As an old Chinese proverb says, crisis can be used as an opportunity by some. 

Tel Aviv, Washington and NATO are taking advantage of the upheavals in the Arab World. Not only are they fighting against the legitimate aspirations of the Arab people, they are manipulating  the Arab geo-political landscape as part of their strategy to control

Sectarian Conflicts in Egypt: A Means to Weaken the Egyptian State

Egypt is ruled by a counter-revolutionary military junta. Despite the increasing assertiveness of the Egyptian people, the old regime is still in place. Yet, its foundations are becoming shakier as the Egyptian people become more radical in their demands. 

Like in the Mubarak era, the military regime in
Cairo is also allowing sectarianism to spread in Egypt in an effort to create divisions within Egyptian society. In early-2011 when Egyptians stormed government buildings they discovered secret papers that showed that the regime was behind the attacks on Egypt’s Christian community.

Recently, so-called  Salafist extremists have attacked Egyptian minorities including Christians but also Shiite Muslims. Egyptian activists and leaders in the Coptic and Shia community are pointing their fingers at the military junta in
Cairo, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.

The Egyptian military junta, Tel Aviv, and the Al-Sauds are all part of an ominous alliance. This grouping is the backbone of the 
U.S. imperial structure in the Arab World. They are dependent on Washington. They prevail inasmuch as the U.S. remains dominant in Southwest Asia and North Africa.

The Al-Sauds are now working with
Washington in Egypt to establish a supposedly Islamic government. This is being done through political parties that the Al-Sauds have funded and helped organize. The new so-called Salafist movements are primary examples of this. It also appears that the Muslim Brotherhood or at least branches of it have been co-opted. 

The Saudi-Israeli
Alliance and the Politics of Division  

The ties of the Al-Sauds to Tel Aviv have in recent years become increasingly visible and pervasive. This secret Israeli-Saudi alliance exists within the context of a broader Khaliji-Israeli alliance. The alliance with 
Israel is formed through strategic cooperation between the ruling families of Saudi Arabia and the Arab sheikhdoms in the Persian Gulf. 

Together Israel and the Khaliji ruling families form a frontline for Washington and NATO against Iran and its regional allies. The alliance also acts on behalf of
Washington to destabilize the region. The roots of chaos in Southwest Asia and North Africa are this Khaliji-Israeli alliance.

In line with the
U.S. and the E.U., it is the alliance formed by Israel and the Khaliji rulers that has worked to create ethnic divisions between Arabs and Iranians, religious divisions between Muslims and Christians, and confessional divisions between Sunnis and Shiites. It is the “politics of division” or “fitna” that has also served to keep the Khaliji ruling families in power and Israel in its place. Israel and the Khaliji ruling families would not survive without the regional fitna.

The Al-Sauds and Tel Aviv are the authors of the Hama-Fatah split and the estrangement of
Gaza from the West Bank. They have worked together in the 2006 war against Lebanon with a view to crushing Hezbollah and its political allies. Saudi Arabia and Israel have also cooperated in spreading sectarianism and sectarian violence in Lebanon, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Iran, and now Egypt.

Israel and the Khaliji monarchies serve Washington in its objective to ultimately neutralize Iran and its allies, as well as any form of resistance against the U.S. in Southwest Asia and North Africa. This is why the Pentagon has been heavily arming Tel Aviv and the Khaliji sheikhdoms. Washington has also been setting up missile shields aimed at Iran and Syria in Israel and the Arab sheikhdoms.



The alliance between the Khaliji sheikhdoms and
Israel has been instrumental in creating a wave of Iranophobia in the Arab World. The ultimate objective of Iranophobia is to transform Iran in the eyes of Arab public opinion, into an enemy of the Arab people, thereby distracting attention from the real enemies of the Arab World, namely the neo-colonial powers which occupy and control Arab lands. 

Iranophobia is a PsyOp, an instrument of propaganda. The strategic objective is to isolate
Iran and reconfigure the geo-political landscape of Southwest Asia and North Africa. Moreover, Iranophobia has been used by the Khaliji ruling families, from the U.A.E. to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, as a pretext for the repression of their own people, who are demanding basic freedoms and democratic rights in the sheikhdoms. 

The March 14
Alliance in Lebanon, which is a collection of Khaliji-U.S. clients and Israeli allies, has also used Iranophobia and the “politics of division” to try to attack Hezbollah and its political allies in Lebanon The objective is to weaken and undermine Lebanese-Iranian and Lebanese-Syrian ties. The March 14 Alliance, specifically the Hariri-controlled Future Movement, has imported into Lebanon the so-called Salafist fighters of Fatah Al-Islam with the objective of getting them to attack Hezbollah. The Future Movement has also had a role in the Israeli-Saudi-U.S. project to destabilize Syria and remove it from the Resistance Bloc.