Sunday, February 14, 2010

"Iraq should thank Obama and George W. Bush"

Image of US Vice President Joseph Biden stolen [from here]

"Iraq should thank Obama and George W. Bush", is close to what Joe Biden actually said on CBS "Face the Nation", just moments ago. What???!!!

If I were an Iraqi citizen, I'd be wishing for the good old days with Saddam in charge. A bunch of lying empire builders and CIA operatives used their tried, and true, standard manipulation to engineer the occupation of Iraq. The Iraqi people would not have to be thankful for the "help" rebuilding their country if it hadn't been blown back to the Stone Age with millions suffering and dying horrifically. Yes, "Thank you America".

Do you remember the whole "Yellow Cake" and the WMD's bullcrap? So, when wasn't the American Government lying?

This biggest problem the US has is its Kangaroo Courts with 9 Stooges at the head of a "Supreme Court". The Monarchy of Abuse is about lying and cover ups from the top down. Judges from the lowest levels are bought and paid for. Cases are rigged from the county up. So, almost no matter what a US President does wrong down to a cop on the beat to a Town Hall clerk, to a state worker patching cracks in the highway, their all basically immune from legitimate investigations and prosecution, unless their set up as the "Patsy" or break ranks.

If I hadn't have believed the absolute lie of being able to live the American Dream if you are from average roots and all the bullcrap propaganda of how free and wonderful the US is, I could have had a life, a family, owned a home, and retired in comfort OUTSIDE THE US. Instead I've lived [this nightmare].

I don't have any beef with Americans lied into fighting for CIA druglords, banksters, war corporations, and their corrupt politician friends, I have it with the bleepholes who lied to them. I don't have beefs with the American people, I have beefs with those who are wrecking lives one family at a time.

That is why when I hear a talking head jackass politician like Biden spewing his garbage, smiling, and thinking he is believable, I just cringe ...

* * * *


* * * *

American Corporatism is tied to the Defense Industry. Our US Government in a nutshell:

Chris Hedges: Fighting corporate rape of US (Feb. 13, 2010 Upload)

Text with video:

American journalist and Pulitzer winner Chris Hedges told RT the United States has developed a new form of corporate totalitarianism.


Chris Hedges talks about an American in America being charged, detained. Not for committing any illegal acts, not for inspiring others to act illegally, just arrested and detained in Gitmo like conditions in the USA for what he believes!!!! Welcome to the NEW AMERICA.

* * * *

What Do Empires Do?
By Michael Parenti

From ancient times to today, empires have always been involved in the bloody accumulation of wealth. If you don't think this is true of the United States then stop calling it "Empire." And when you write a book about how it wraps its arms around the planet, entitle it "Global Bully" or "Bossy Busybody," but be aware that you're not telling us much about imperialism

* * * *

If we Americans are quiet we are considered good by our current US regime. If we the people are outspoken, we are considered bad by the our US government. The below might be in store for us here in the US if we don't start doing more to legally make change. Four uniformed Connecticut State Police Officers committed perjury at a rigged trial saying I never asked to make a complaint against the police informant who attacked me on my property after threatening my life and stalking me for weeks. I got sentenced to a year in prison for "this offense", so the below smells like complete bullshit from the American Government side.

The below [found here]

Aafia Siddiqui: Bad Verdict is Un-American

On February 3, a Department of Justice press release headlined “Aafia Siddiqui Found Guilty in Manhattan Federal Court of Attempting to Murder US Nationals in Afghanistan and Six Additional Charges.”

At her scheduled May 6 sentencing, she “faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison on each of the attempted murder and armed assault charges; life in prison on the firearms charge; and eight years in prison on each of the remaining assault charges. SIDDIQUI faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 years in prison on the firearms charge.”

On February 3, New York Times writer CJ Hughes headlined: “Pakistani Scientist Found Guilty of Shootings,” convicting her on all seven counts, including attempted murder – “capping a trial that drew notice for its terrorist implications as well as its theatrics,” but omitting convincing evidence of Siddiqui’s innocence. Instead, Hughes said she was arrested with “instructions (in her purse) on making explosives and a list of New York landmarks, including the Statue of Liberty, the Brooklyn Bridge and the Empire State Building.” Her defense team acknowledged their existence, but Siddiqui denied packing them or knowing of their origin. She later suggested she copied them from a magazine, planned no terrorist acts, nor did her indictment claim them.

Hughes also said she “raised suspicions when she and her three children vanished in Pakistan in 2003.” She didn’t vanish. Her mother said she “left the family home in Gulshan-e-lqbal in a taxi on March 30, 2003 to catch a flight for Rawalpindi, but never reached the airport.” Pakistani intelligence agents abducted her, turned her over to US authorities, after which her long ordeal of secret imprisonment, interrogations, and years of brutalizing torture began, even though she wasn’t charged.

Her son Mohammed was later released on condition he say nothing. Her other two children, Maryam and Suleman, disappeared and may have been killed.

In May 2004, Pakistan’s Interior Minister confirmed she was turned over to US authorities in 2003 after no link between her and Al Qaeda was established. In 2006, Amnesty International called her one of many of the “disappeared” in America’s “war on terror.” In 2007, a Ghost Prisoner Human Rights Watch report suggested she was held in secret CIA detention.

In February 2008, the Asian Human Rights Commission said she was brought to Karachi and severely tortured to secure her compliance as a government witness against Khalid Shiekh Mohammed, the alleged 9/11 mastermind, related to Siddiqui through marriage to his nephew. He reportedly “gave her up” after capture on March 1, 2003, after which she and her children disappeared.

The charges were bogus and outrageous. Yet, on September 2, 2008, the Justice Department (DOJ) indicted her “on charges related to her attempted murder and assault of United States nationals and officers and employees.” According to Michael Garcia, US Attorney for the Southern District of New York (in his same day press release):

On July 18, 2008, “a team of United States servicemen and law enforcement officers, and others assisting them, attempted to interview Aafia Siddiqui in Ghazni, Aghanistan, where she had been detained by local police the day before….unbeknownst to the United States interview team, unsecured, behind a curtain — Siddiqui obtained one of the United States Army’s M-4 rifles and attempted to fire it, and did fire it, at another United States Army officer and other members of the United States interview team….Siddiqui then assaualted one of the United States Army interpreters, as he attempted to obtain the M-4 rifle from her. Siddiqui subsequently assaulted one of the FBI agents and one of the United States Army officers, as they attempted to subdue her.”

Left unexplained was how this frail, weak, 110-pound woman, confronted by three US Army officers, two FBI agents, and two Army interpreters, inexplicably managed to assault three of them, get one of their rifles, open fire at close range, hit no one, and only she was severely wounded.

According to her attorney, Elaine Whitfield Sharp:

“how did this happen? And how did she get shot? I think you can answer that, can’t you (and question the outrageous charges against her)?”

During proceedings, another defense lawyer, Linda Moreno, said no forensic evidence proved the rifle Siddiqui allegedly used had been fired since no bullets, shell casings, or bullet debris were recovered and no bullet holes detected.

Garcia didn’t explain, nor about her abduction, torture and repeated raping at Bagram prison, Afghanistan where, as Prisoner 650, she was called the “Gray Lady of Bagram” because her screams were heard for years. Nor did he discuss her physical and emotional destruction. She was a pawn in America’s “war on terror,” used, abused, now convicted, and facing life in prison when sentenced, a victim of gross injustice.

Some Background

A Pakistani national, Siddiqui is deeply religious, attended MIT and Brandeis University where she earned a doctorate in neurocognitive science, married a Boston physician, raised money for charities, did volunteer work, distributed Korans to inmates in area prisons, and did nothing out of the ordinary. Yet the UK Times Online called her “Al-Qaeda woman.” For ABC News, she was “Mata Hari,” and the Justice Department targeted her as a terrorist, a woman guilty only of being Muslim in America at the wrong time.

When seized, the FBI said she was a potential “treasure trove” of information on terrorist suspects, sympathizers, or sleepers in America and overseas. CIA officer John Kiriakou called her “the most significant capture in five years,” and an unnamed counterterrorism official said she’s “a very dangerous person, no doubt about it.” FBI Director Robert Mueller said she’s “an Al Qaeda operative and facilitator.” He and the others lied.

Those who knew her recalled she was very small, quiet, polite, and shy, barely noticeable in a gathering. However, she’d say what was needed when necessary. Her fellow students described her as soft-spoken, studious, religious, but not extremist or fundamentalist. She taught Muslim children on Sundays, and was dedicated to helping oppressed Muslims worldwide. She spoke publicly, sent emails, gave slideshow presentations, and raised donations as part of her faith, activism, and sincerity. Yet she was targeted as “a high security risk” despite no evidence then or now to prove it.

Siddiqui is innocent of all charges, yet the DOJ claimed she was involved in biochemical warfare. In fact, she devised a computer program, enlisted adult volunteers to watch various objects move randomly across the screen, then reproduce what they recalled. The idea was to learn how well they retained information after viewing it on a computer. It had nothing to do with terrorism, biochemical warfare, or blowing up New York targets, charges never appearing in her indictment.

Siddiqui’s Trial and Conviction

Against her lawyers’ advice, she spoke publicly for the first time, despite the risk and her frail condition. She explained her academic work, her post-doctorate teaching, her interests that included studying the capabilities of dyslexic and other impaired children, then recounted her ordeal.

After being abducted, she agonized over the fate of her children. In US custody, the relevant incident leading to her indictment went as follows:

– at one point, she was tied down;

– then untied;

– left behind a curtain;

– peaked through it; and

– an American soldier shot her in the stomach;

– another in her side;

– then violently threw her to the floor unconscious.

She vaguely remembered being on a stretcher, placed in a helicopter, and getting a blood transfusion. She emphatically denied seizing and firing a weapon.

Under cross-examination, she said she was given the bag with incriminating documents, didn’t know its contents or whether handwriting on them was hers. She explained her repeated torture at Bagram, the effects of the strong medications given her, and at one point said, “If you were in a secret prison, or your children were tortured,” after which she was forcibly removed from court and the proceedings continued without her.

According to media reports, these revelations were “outbursts.” On January 25, New York Times writer CJ Hughes reported numerous “disruptions….plagu(ing) the trial. Monday (January 25) was hardly an exception. The defendant was ejected from (court) – not once, but twice (for) loudly proclaiming her innocence.” On January 19, she “had several outbursts in previous court appearances, raising questions about her competency to stand trial.”

On February 4, AP writer Tom Hays said “True to form, Aafia Siddiqui did not go quietly,” called her comments “combative,” then claimed the prosecution presented “compelling testimony.”

On February 5, the Islamophobic headlined “How a ‘Nice American Girl’ Became a Jihadist,” saying “veiled Muslim women can be very aggressive, murderously so.”

On February 3, the New York Daily News headlined, “Lady Al Qaeda Aafia Siddiqui convicted of attempted murder.” Writer Alison Gendar accepted DOJ’s charges as fact and added some of her own, saying:

“She grabbed a rifle at an ‘Afghan police station’ (she was at Bagram) and started shooting at the Americans sent to grill her. She was shot by the soldier whose weapon she swiped. (In 2008, she was) caught in ‘Afghanistan’ with ‘2 pounds of poisonous chemicals.’ (During the trial), she disrupted the proceedings several times with ’strange outbursts.’ “

An August 22, 2008 Fox News report said “emails obtained by show messages sent by Siddiqui (during her time at MIT) soliciting money for Al-Kifah Refugee Center – a known Al Queda charitable front tied to Usama bin Laden and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.”

After a three week trial and two days of deliberation, a federal jury of eight women and four men convicted her on all charges, including attempted murder, armed assault, discharging a firearm during a violent crime, and assaulting US officers and employees. As a result, she potentially faces life in prison at her May 6 sentencing. It’s not confirmed, but her lawyers may appeal given the bogus charges, long detention, and brutalizing torture, leaving her a shell of her former self, so physically and emotionally shattered she was in no condition to stand trial.

After the verdict, headlined “US verdict sparks Pakistan protests,” saying thousands in several cities rallied in her defense. Her relatives spoke publicly condemning the decision, her sister Fauzia saying “we’re proud to be related to her. America’s justice system, the establishment, the war on terror, the fraud of the war on terror, all of those things have shown their own ugly faces.”

Her mother, Ismat said “I did not expect anything better from an American court. We were ready for the shock and will continue our struggle to get her released.” Pakistan’s foreign ministry spokesman, Abdul Basit, said the government would try “to get her back to Pakistan and we would do everything possible and we’ll apply all possible tools in this regard.”

Al Jazeera’s Islamabad correspondent, Kamal Hyder, explained the public disappointment “for failing to find a diplomatic way out and getting (her) back home, because they feel she was innocent.” She was missing for five years like “many hundreds of (others who’ve) disappeared from Pakistan – still not accounted for – and now that Dr. Aafia’s case has come up, that’s likely to be a rallying point for the anti-American sentiment.”

The UK-based Cageprisoners spokesman, Asim Qureshi, said “The case of Aafia Siddiqui carries great significance in terms of the ability of the Obama administration to administer justice. Already we have seen a blanket refusal to look at the facts of her detention prior to 2008. This verdict will only confirm what many already believe, that it is impossible for Muslim terrorism suspects to receive a fair trial in the US.”

Defense lawyer Elaine Whitfield Sharp called the verdict unjust, in her opinion “based on fear….not fact,” and the result is the continued ordeal of an innocent woman facing a potential life sentence.

Carefully orchestrated, the trial proceeded like numerous others, targeting innocent victims because of their faith, ethnicity, prominence, benevolent charity, activism, or other reasons for political advantage, ending with convictions and punitive incarcerations against innocent defendants, guilty of being Muslims in America at the wrong time when we’re all just as vulnerable.

In a manipulated climate of fear, the same process repeats, using bogus charges, secret evidence, enlisted witnesses to cooperate, the defense prohibited from introducing exculpatory evidence, and proceedings carefully scripted to intimidate juries to convict.

Justice is again denied, Siddiqui another victim, a human tragedy, portrayed by the dominant media as a jihadist, and getting public sentiment to agree because disturbing truths are carefully suppressed.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at

Also visit his blog site at and listen to the Lendman News Hour on Monday – Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening. Aafia Siddiqui: Victimized By American Injustice By Stephen Lendman, 08 February, 2010

* * * *

If America was lied into wars from Pearl Harbor, before and after, what do you think happened on September 11, 2001? The below video doesn't have much to do with the USS Liberty incident, but has a lot to do with the facts of average Americans being lied into war, over and over.

USA Has A History Of Attacking Themselves To Go To War!

I found the video on the Kenny's Side Show Blog

* * * *

* * * *

The below [found here]

Feb. 14, 2010

One Economist's View of Davos

Presented With A Once-In-Generation Chance To Fix Global Finances, The World's Most Powerful People Went Skiing

(CBS) Written by CBS MoneyWatch's Mark Thoma

The big idea behind the World Economic Forum in Davos is that many of the world's most important problems, such as reforming the financial sector and curtailing greenhouse gases, can't be resolved without cooperation on a global scale. The forum that just ended was a great opportunity for government officials, central bankers, representatives of the financial industry, and members of the business community to signal that they are strongly committed to working together to prevent another global financial crisis. In my view, they blew it.

The most important regulatory changes that are needed to reform the financial sector are limits on leverage ratios and increased capital requirements (which generally amount to the same thing). These changes must be international so that banks can't use foreign subsidiaries to get around domestic regulations. They’re masters at exploiting such loopholes-at considerable risk to the rest of us. For example, AIG's London division "took advantage of light-touch British regulation to rake in profits" in the words of this Forbes article. The profits didn't last, however, and the division lacked capital reserves when losses began to mount. You know how the story ended: with U.S. taxpayers left holding a $182 billion bag.

Increased global capital requirements are just the start. The world also needs a procedure for liquidating large, international banks that get into trouble, as well as increased transparency, liquidity provisions, and common accounting standards.

Everyone in power in the financial sector knows all this. During this year's Forum, there was a closed-door meeting of government regulators, finance ministers, central bankers, and bank executives to discuss some of these issues. But while some positive notes came out of the meeting, there was no action. On the positive side, there was general agreement on the need to establish a resolution fund that can be used to wind down important banks that get into trouble, and there was some progress on establishing capital and liquidity requirements.

But there was disagreement about how to pay for the resolution fund and, importantly, about the general direction that reform should take, with the U.S., as you might expect, pushing for a more market-based approach to regulation. In addition, while Europe acknowledges the need for a global approach to regulation, "participants were skeptical of any cross-border body that would impinge on national sovereignty," according to this Reuters article.

You can see why the Europeans feel that way. The sovereign debt problems that the PIIG countries (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain) are currently experiencing illustrate the downside of cross-border regulation.

The PIIGS desperately need a currency devaluation to help with their problems, but that is not what is needed in most of the other countries in the European Union. But with a common currency, the European Union can only have a single, unified monetary policy. These tensions are putting the European Union under considerable pressure, the most since its inception. I think the EU and the Euro will survive, since Eurozone economies get too much benefit from having a single currency. But the problems the EU is having now will make Europeans think twice before committing to one-size-fits-all regulatory policies in the future. Unfortunately, that’s what for the world needs today to prevent another global crisis.

The annual World Economic Forum at Davos bills itself as "committed to improving the state of the world by engaging leaders in partnerships." Davos was an excellent opportunity to demonstrate unity and international commitment to reforming the financial sector. Instead, participants at Davos failed to do any of this and simply revealed the growing divisions among nations.

The financial system remains vulnerable to another collapse, so there is no choice but to push forward on financial regulation. The key will be finding a way to impose tough international regulations while still allowing individual countries enough flexibility to address domestic issues. This is a very difficult problem, but it can be solved with hard work and a commitment to a cooperative solution. While the memories of the crisis are still fresh, the movers and shakers at Davos this year had a rare opportunity to do the work and make the commitment. They failed.

  • Play CBS Video Video Davos: World Economic Forum

    Nowhere in the world can such a concentration of power be found than at the World Economic Forum's meeting in Davos, Switzerland. Scott Pelley gets an inside look.

  • Video Web Extra: The Davos Glance

    Sir Martin Sorrell on the peculiar behavior of the rich and powerful at the World Economic Forum.

  • Video Web Extra: Camp Billionaire

    Sir Martin Sorrell, CEO of the world's largest advertising agency, talks about why he's come to Davos for a quarter century.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

View My Stats