|
|
Traduisez :
Karzai confirme : Les forces des USA ont tué 16 civils
Dimanche 25 janvier 2009
Les milliers de villageois afghans à travers la province de Laghman se sont rassemblés pour protester contre le dernier incident des USA s'assemble les civils d'innocent de massacre. Les protestataires ont condamné les forces et le Président Hamid Karzai des USA ? le gouvernement de s, une demande cette s'assemble extrémité une opération militaire cela tué autour 1.100 civils dans 2008 seuls. Le dernier incident a commencé, comme le font tellement beaucoup, par les forces internationales prétendre avoir tué 15 militants et aucuns civils. Pourtant les villageois ont précisé que beaucoup de ? militants ? étaient les femmes et les enfants et ont rapporté l'autant de comme 21 corps civils ont trouvé à travers le secteur. Aujourd'hui, le Président Karzai confirmé que l'incursion des USA a en fait tué au moins 16 civils, et averti que le massacre continu des Afghans innocents est ? renforcement des terroristes. ? L'énorme péage civil dans sept-plus la guerre d'année a causé la tension considérable entre les forces internationales et le gouvernement de Karzai. Les rapports sont celui même pendant que les massacres minent la confiance en gouvernement de Karzai Les Etats-Unis observent déjà son éviction potentielle dans la prochaine élection. Ayez votre parole : Karzai confirme : Les forces des USA ont tué 16 civils Veuillez lire le notre signalisation des directives avant la signalisation. Alternativement vous pouvez discuter ce rapport ici. La guerre bereichern
Samedi 24 janvier 2009
SOLOMON HUGHES sur le MP faisant l'argent à partir de la guerre de `sur la terreur.' DAVID Miliband a indiqué que la guerre sur la terreur était une erreur, mais certains ne la regrettent pas. Les sociétés de valeurs mobilières privées comme le groupe 4 ont fait un monnayage. Maintenant, il veut écarter sa bonne fortune - ce mois, groupent-ils 4 que la sécurité a donné a ? position 50.000 à l'ancien ministre de travail John Reid en tant que « conseiller. » Ajustements de Reid dans ce travail à temps partiel quand il n'est pas occupé à trop représentant les bonnes gens d'Airdrie et de Shotts en tant que leur parlementaire. Group 4 has plenty of reasons to want access to the contact book of a former home and defence secretary - the firm now supplies the armed guards looking after British officials in Iraq and Afghanistan while locking up prisoners, asylum-seekers and “terror suspects” in Britain, so Reid is worth every one of the five million pennies that they are giving the man. Reid was once a Communist Party member, but abandoned Marxism in favour of new Labour. This is odd, because his career seems to illustrate the crudest and most determinist kind of Marxism. For years, Marxists have been grappling with the subtle and sophisticated ways in which the capitalist class dominates society, but Group 4 opted for a very unsubtle approach - the capitalists just hired Labour’s representative. Reid hasn’t always hawked his brawn for the money men. Back in 1992, Reid signed a House of Commons motion calling on Sir Norman Fowler to resign from the board of Group 4. The motion said that the House “regrets that the right honourable Member for Sutton Coldfield (Norman Fowler), chairman of the Conservative Party, has not seen fit to resign his directorship of another Group 4 company, Group 4 Securitas, and urges him to do so.” It added: “The government should suspend all further moves to privatisation within the criminal justice system.” Reid’s call for Fowler to resign from Group 4 and for the government to shun the firm came after the company let a number of prisoners escape from their vans on the way to court. Whizz forward a decade and a half and Reid, having demanded that Fowler abandon Group 4, has himself taken a job with the firm. In the meantime, Conservative and Labour governments have not stopped their “privatisation of the criminal justice system,” they have expanded it. Group 4 has men with truncheons in Britain and men carrying guns in Iraq. Nor has the firm become any less accident-prone. Group 4 Security prefers to be called G4S because, in ad people’s language, the brand is tarnished. Group 4 was even described as a “national laughing stock” by the government’s own lawyers in court in 2003 after a riot at an immigration detention centre that it ran which was later burned to the ground. Things haven’t improved since. Reid himself sent the firm to new frontiers, where the firm ran new fiascos. When Reid was home secretary, the Law Lords told him that just labelling foreigners “terror suspects” didn’t mean that he could lock them up without trial. Reid turned to Group 4 for help. It cobbled together something called “control orders,” a house arrest for these “terror suspects” administered by Group 4 and other private firms. Control orders were simultaneously too draconian and too lax - prisoners, including vulnerable men who had been tortured in their home countries, were tagged and monitored by Group 4. Those who stuck by the rules were pushed to the edge of mental illness by the isolation of the strict house arrest. At the same time, Group 4 allowed another prisoner to simply disappear. This may have been embarrassing for the firm and for Reid, but they manfully hid their red faces and entered into a new relationship when Reid left government. Group 4 has risen thanks to the crudest economic determinism - Reid, who authorised the signing of cheques for Group 4 as a minister, ends up getting cheques from the firm. Reid is not alone. A small squad of politicians worked to get Group 4 where it is today. First, Tory chairman Fowler helped the firm get into the prisons business in the 1990s. Group 4 tightened its grip on British jails last year when it took over rival private prisons firm GSL. It bought GSL from an investment company called Englefield Capital, which employs another Labour ex-minister, former defence secretary George Robertson, as an adviser. Group 4 then broke into the international mercenary trade by buying a company called Armor Group, whose armed men guard British officials in Iraq and Afghanistan. Up until this, Armor Group’s chairman had been another top politician - leading Tory MP Malcolm Rifkind. Twenty years ago, the idea that a private company would run our jails and wars would have looked like science fiction. By hiring politicians, the “security industry” made it a reality. You can read about this in my book War On Terror, Inc, available from all good booksellers. Rubbing the wrong bitsWE ALL like a bit of stimulation now and then, but is Gordon Brown rubbing the wrong parts? The banking crisis shows that a decade of Labour’s economic policy was wrong. Building an economy on financial services was a mistake. The government should have used the boom to broaden our economic base. Now, as banks threaten to drag the system down, Brown is chucking more and more of our cash in their hole. But the banks are refusing to lend. So, let the government use the banks that it owns as public utilities, lending where credit is needed, and let the others go to the wall. Don’t throw massive sums into the banks, use the money instead for direct investment in public works. Two facts highlight Brown’s timidity in clinging to crumbling free-market values. In the 1970s, Labour premier Harold Wilson set up a bank from scratch, the Girobank, which made banking available to ordinary people for the first time. Brown actually owns two banks, but won’t even give them as much social direction as the old Girobank. While Brown is reluctantly nationalising banks, Peter Mandelson is trying to privatise the Post Office, which was used to launch Wilson’s Girobank in the first place. Have Your Say: The war profiteers Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Airplot: Help Greenpeace swing the vote on Heathrow?
Saturday, January 24th, 2009
On Wednesday there will be a vote in parliament on a third runway at Heathrow. Ahead of this vote we urgently need your help to put pressure on Labour MPs to vote with their conscience and say NO to a third runway. We already have the support of the LibDems and Tory MPs. Send a letter to the 57 Labour MPs who have opposed Heathrow expansion. The government is treating us as if we’re stupid. They’re asking all of us to reduce our energy consumption while they build another runway at Heathrow. I think it’s the most egregious piece of hypocrisy I’ve seen in a long time. But 57 Labour MPs signed an Early Day Motion against airport expansion last autumn and now we need those same MPs to vote against a third runway in parliament on Wednesday. This won’t be a binding vote, but cross party opposition to the runway will put enormous pressure on the government. It will certainly be a big blow to the government’s insane plans to expand Heathrow. Please take a couple of minutes today to send a letter that will go to all 57 MPs who have opposed Heathrow expansion and ask them to stick to their principles at the vote next Wednesday. I joined the campaign because I want to stand in the way of airport expansion. There are now more than 30,000 of us and more are joining everyday. This is the first opportunity to show the government we?re not going to let this runway go ahead. But we also need to get a lot more people involved. Once you have emailed the MPs, please pass this email to your friends, family and colleagues and ask them to do the same. Thank you for joining with me to stop airport expansion, together we will make sure this runway doesn?t go ahead. Emma Thompson Have Your Say: Airplot: Help Greenpeace swing the vote on Heathrow? Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. BBC claims itself ?unbiased? for refusing Gaza Aid Appeal for Save the Children
Saturday, January 24th, 2009
International opinion of the British Broadcasting Corporation is set to plummet over their refusal to air a short appeal for the British umbrella aid group, the Disasters Emergency Commission ( DEC ).
The indefensible claim led to a knock on effect of other media outlets also refusing to air Gaza appeals, notably Sky News and ITN. The Disasters Emergency Commission is an umbrella organisation, created in 1963 to help administer and co-ordinate multiple charities funds and aid, so that they could be better targeted to those who are most in need. The BBC claim that they don?t wish to risk public opinion regarding their impartiality. A spokesperson said today: “The decision was made because of question marks about the delivery of aid in a volatile situation and also to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC’s impartiality in the context of (a) news story.” The BBC reneged on a 46 year old agreement dating back to 1963 in which they agreed to be part of the DEC?s ?Rapid Response Network?, giving airtime to help them fundraise for emergency appeals. The DEC consists of 13 member Aid agencies which include Save the Children, Help The Aged, Christian Aid, British Red Cross and Oxfam. It is believed that they are probably ?not impressed at the inhumanity? of the BBC?s decision. The BBC have been roundly criticised for many years for their bias and lack of criticism of their controllers, the British Government, who removed the top brass of the BBC under Thatcher?s conservative government during the 1980?s, accusing it of ?liberal bias?, better known as ?not following government propaganda?. Recently it was noted that callers to BBC Radio and also posters on the BBC website?s ?Have Your Say? were not allowed their say as most pro-Palestinian posts and calls were screened or moderated out. Meanwhile, a comparison of today?s news shows how unbiased they still are: BBC: ?Israel defends use of phosphorus? The Times report: ?Israel admits using white phosphorous in attacks on Gaza? The BBC have agreed to continue to use license payers fees to increase CEO?s wages, pay large sums of money for talentless presenters with speech impediments, while making sure that their drama output, like the recent ?Little Dorrit? and the recent remake of ?Survivors? continue to be under-funded, badly produced and contain no real acting ability or reason for existence. * Meanwhile, the Disasters Emergency Commission really does need your help to get aid to the suffering civilians of the Gaza strip, so I would beg you to go to their website and donate whatever you can to help your fellow human beings. http://www.dec.org.uk/index.html * It?s time that there was serious civil disobedience to refuse to pay BBC license fees just to be fed government propaganda and lies. ?Initiatrix 2009 Have Your Say: BBC claims itself ?unbiased? for refusing Gaza Aid Appeal for Save the Children Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Stop Guantanamo terror trials, says Obama
Wednesday, January 21st, 2009
Newly-installed President Barack Obama wasted no time in getting down to business today after his administration requested a halt to controversial military trials at Guantanamo Bay. Hours after his historic inauguration as the first black president of the United States, Mr Obama appeared to quickly honour his vow to act over the terror-suspect holding camp in Cuba. He has previously said he will close Guantanamo, home to widely criticised war-crimes trials created by former President George Bush and Congress in 2006. The suspension request came from the US Department of Defence, which said it was seeking a 120-day halt to the war crimes trials at the camp pending a review by Mr Obama. It was announced as the new president danced the night away with his wife at a series of inaugural balls, and as his new team put the brakes on all pending regulations that the Bush regime tried to push through in its last days. That order went out shortly after Mr Obama?s inauguration yesterday, in a memorandum signed by new White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. Aides had previously suggested that the new Commander-in-Chief would immediately launch into the job, with a raft of policy announcements expected by the end of the week. The 47-year-old former senator was sworn in as the 44th president of the United States in front of vast crowds of people in Washington yesterday, with millions more glued to TV coverage around the world. During his inaugural speech in Washington, Mr Obama alluded to the task before him. In an address which impressed rather than wowed, given its speaker?s known oratory skills, the president vowed to address the challenges that faced America, a county in ?the midst of crisis?, he said. Laying out the problems, Mr Obama said the country had a ?badly weakened? economy and was at war against ?a far-reaching network of violence and hatred?. He said: ?The challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. ?But know this, America ? they will be met.? Mr Obama invoked the spirit of America?s pioneers during the 20-minute address. It was, he said, ?the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things? who had carried the country ?up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom?. ?Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. He spoke in front of a Washington audience, estimated to be more than a million people. Many, many more were listening around the world to the new president?s words. Mr Obama appeared to acknowledge that work needed to be done to improve America?s tarnished image overseas. As such he pledged to seek ?a new way forward? with the Muslim world based on ?mutual interest and mutual respect?. He said he would ?begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan?. How he intends to achieve this is likely to be high up his agenda as he comes to grips with the job ahead of him. Today he is due to meet high-ranking military officials to discuss the Iraq war, a senior aide said. Mr Obama is also expected to assemble a team to look at ways of moving forward the stalled Middle East peace process. He recently told USA Today that he would address the issue on ?Day One? of his presidency. An announcement on the actual closure of Guantanamo Bay and a reversal of George Bush?s overseas abortion policy have also been put forward as early contenders for policy actions. The US military currently has charges pending against 21 men at Guantanamo and officials have said they intended to charge dozens more. Pre-trial hearings in two cases ? the trial of five men charged in the 9/11 attacks and Omar Khadr, a Canadian accused of killing a US soldier in Afghanistan ? were due to take place this week. But before setting to work on the nuts and bolts of running a country, Mr Obama will first attend a national prayer service in Washington. The Rev Dr Sharon Watkins will deliver the sermon at the multi-faith event - the first woman to do so at the traditional inauguration event. WalesOnline Have Your Say: Stop Guantanamo terror trials, says Obama Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Holder OK with FBI Searches of Bookstore, Library Records
Wednesday, January 21st, 2009
At confirmation hearing attorney general nominee voices support for Patriot Act provision authorizing secret FBI searches of reading records. President-elect Barack Obama’s nominee for attorney general has endorsed an extension of the law that allows federal agents to demand Americans’ library and bookstore records as part of terrorism probes, dismaying a national group of independent booksellers. ? Eric Holder said at his confirmation hearing Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he supports renewing a section of the USA Patriot Act that allows FBI agents investigating international terrorism or espionage to seek records from businesses, libraries and bookstores. If not renewed by Congress, the provision will expire at the end of 2009. The searches must be authorized by a court that meets secretly and has approved the government’s requests in nearly all cases, according to congressional reports. The target of the search does not have to be suspected of terrorism or any other crime. A permanent gag order that accompanies each search prohibits the business or library from telling anyone about it. Holder said he realizes the provision has been controversial and he will seek more information from department staff before making a final decision, if confirmed as attorney general. He didn’t elaborate on his support for the law, but said at another point in the hearing that his top priority would be to protect Americans from terrorism, using “every available tactic … within the letter and spirit of the Constitution.” “I was disappointed” that Holder supports the bookstore and library searches, “although maybe not entirely surprised,” Chris Finan, spokesman for the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, said Friday. The provision Holder wants Congress to renew, known as Section 215, “gives the government far too much power to conduct fishing expeditions in the records of bookstore customers and library patrons,” Finan said. “We never expected that the change of administration would mean we had any less of a fight on our hands.” Finan said the Justice Department has told Congress that it conducted only 42 searches nationwide from 2004 through 2007, the last year covered by congressional reports. The law does not require the department to describe the targets of the searches, and Finan said no breakdowns on bookstore or library searches are available because of the gag orders. Organizations of librarians and booksellers have denounced the law as an assault on reader privacy. Some libraries have posted signs warning patrons that their records are subject to government inspection, and many librarians now destroy files on borrowers who have returned their books. Opponents of the Patriot Act provision have lobbied Congress to require that agents seeking such records obtain grand jury subpoenas, based on evidence of wrongdoing, and defend them before a judge if the record-keeper objected. So far, their efforts have failed. Finan said the American Booksellers Association, which represents 2,000 independent bookstores, and allied groups of librarians, publishers and writers will instead try to soften the law along the lines of legislation that Obama supported in the Senate last year. Carried by Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., the bill would have allowed agents to obtain records of customers and library patrons only if they were actually suspected of terrorism, and would have authorized court challenges by keepers of the records. Have Your Say: Holder OK with FBI Searches of Bookstore, Library Records Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Israeli military says complete withdrawal from Gaza ?out of the question?
Wednesday, January 21st, 2009
By Julie Hyland? Israel continued to withdraw some of its troops from the Gaza Strip Tuesday, in moves timed to coincide with the inauguration of US President-elect Barack Obama. Announcing an end to Operation Cast Lead early Sunday morning, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had said his government intended to remove its forces “at the greatest possible speed.” The Israeli army has confirmed, however, that a “complete withdrawal is out of the question” at this time. A senior defence official stated Tuesday, “We are reducing the number of troops in the Gaza Strip, but the troops outside that territory remain on the alert so they can react rapidly if necessary.” Later unconfirmed reports said the Israeli navy had fired into Gaza in what was described as a “deterrent measure” and that a Palestinian was shot and wounded by Israeli gunfire near the Kissufim border crossing. No further details were available at the time of this writing. An estimated 1,300 Palestinians were killed in Israel’s 22-day offensive and more than 5,000 injured. The number of Palestinians dead and wounded is expected to rise as efforts begin to clear the rubble. As United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon began a tour of Gaza, journalists finally allowed access to parts of the territory reported massive damage. “Entire neighbourhoods have disappeared,” the BBC reported. The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics said at least 4,100 homes have been totally destroyed and 17,000 others damaged. About 1,500 factories and workshops, 20 mosques, 31 security installations and 10 water or sewage pipes were also damaged, it added. An estimated 50,800 people are homeless and 100,000 people have been displaced. Some 400,000 people are without running water and electricity is available for less than 12 hours a day. The UN said that 50 of its facilities had been damaged and 21 medical facilities. Speaking in front of the ruins of the UN food warehouse destroyed by Israel’s bombardment, Ban described the attack as “outrageous” and reiterated his call for a full investigation into the assault and “to make those people responsible accountable.” Statements supplied by Gaza residents to the human rights group B’Tselem told how the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) mowed down civilians attempting to surrender. According to one account, four members of the A-Najar family from the village of Khuza’a, east of Khan Yunis, were killed when they obeyed instructions from the IDF to evacuate their home. As they left in groups of two, waving white flags, soldiers opened fire, killing the family members. There is further evidence of Israel’s use of white phosphorus, illegal in heavily populated areas. The Guardian ran film footage shot by the International Solidarity Movement in Khoza’a, in the south of the Gaza Strip, showing clumps of the chemical burning on the ground. Christopher Cobb-Smith, a weapons expert for Amnesty International, said they have found “streets and alleyways littered with evidence, including still-burning wedges and the remnants of the shells and canisters fired by the Israeli army.” Hospital doctors reported treating many casualties with terrible burns consistent with phosphorus. John Ging, director of the UN relief agency UNRWA, said it was now vital to get basic supplies, such as food, medicine and fuel, into the territory. “We have a big recovery operation ahead of us, reconstruction–none of it will be possible of course, on any scale, until we get crossing points open.” Israel has allowed just 143 aid trucks into Gaza and has ruled out lifting its blockade for the foreseeable future. UN agencies have been told that they must “prove that material could not be used for arms, according to diplomats, that money would go directly to local contractors, and that Hamas would not be able to take credit for anything,” the Times of London reported. EU and UN urge support for AbbasWriting in the Guardian, Alastair Crooke, former security adviser to the European Union, complained of a “messy, ambiguous ?end’” to hostilities. The unilateral character of the ceasefire means Israel is beholden to little. Tel Aviv remains opposed to any discussions on the future of Gaza and the Palestinian people that involve Hamas. It is even regarded as having sidelined Egypt, the Arab state which had done the most to facilitate Israel’s offensive in the Gaza Strip. Egyptian Foreign Ministry official Hossam Zaki told the Jerusalem Post of his country’s disappointment that its mediation efforts were effectively bypassed by Israel. “We expected the Israeli side to behave in a different way,” he said. Israel’s declaration of a ceasefire was not taken “in consultation with Egypt, meaning that it did not choose to abide by the terms that we were able to negotiate with the Palestinians,” he complained. The sole agreement concluded by Israel was with Washington–the memorandum of understanding agreed jointly on Friday, committing the US to provide greater information-sharing, technical assistance and the use of other “assets” to prevent arms entering Gaza. While Israel is claiming victory, there is concern over the broader ramifications of its actions for the whole region. Throughout the three weeks of conflict, the Arab League was unable to agree on a unified stance on the offensive in Gaza, further discrediting it amongst the Arab masses. It was, in part, an effort to shore up the credentials of more overtly pro-Western regimes which they fear have been dangerously undermined by the Israeli action that saw the heads of Europe’s major powers gather in Sharm el-Sheikh on Monday. The leaders of France, Britain, Germany, Italy, Spain and Turkey attended the summit, hosted by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, where they called for the opening of border crossings, pledged humanitarian assistance to rebuild Gaza and promised to aid in policing its borders. In addition to boosting Mubarak in the face of popular hostility for his refusal to open Egypt’s borders with Gaza to fleeing refugees, the Financial Times said the summit “also provided an opportunity to try to shore up the credibility of Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA),” who addressed the gathering. To this end, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the European Union’s external relations commissioner, emphasised that any aid was conditional on Gaza being ruled by leaders acceptable to the EU. While she did not explicitly rule out Hamas, she suggested strongly that Abbas and the Palestinian Authority must retake control of the territory. Similarly, at an economic summit of the Arab League in Kuwait on Tuesday, Ban urged the 17 heads of state to rally “under the leadership of President Abbas.” Concerns over “internationalising” the ceasefireIsrael has also ruled out any aid to Gaza while Hamas remains in power, and is said to be considering passing responsibility for reconstruction to the World Bank, UNRWA or the PA. “We are trying to figure out ways to reconstruct Gaza without Hamas,” an Israeli official said. But behind apparent agreement vis-a-vis Hamas is the potential for future conflict going far beyond Israel/Palestine. Egypt and Jordan were the only Arab countries in attendance at the Sharm el-Sheikh conference on Sunday. And a closed-door session at the Arab Economic Summit on Tuesday failed to reach a common agreement on the ceasefire or even the setting up of an expected Gaza reconstruction fund. Kuwait’s official news agency KUNA blamed “the uncompromising stances taken by some countries,” while others spoke of the League fracturing between a “Doha-Syria axis” and an alliance led by Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Israel and the US were also absent from the Sharm el-Sheikh meeting. Subsequently Israel dismissed French proposals made at the gathering for an international conference “to create a Palestinian state.” “France and Egypt have been pushing the idea of an international conference for years, but it is not going anywhere,” a senior Israeli diplomatic official, speaking anonymously, said. Adding to concerns were the comments made by Charles Heyman, editor of Armed Forces of the United Kingdom. The Associated Press reported that Heyman had “been told by people with knowledge of the discussions that officials in Brussels are talking behind the scenes about the possibility of deploying an EU naval force to keep arms shipments out of Gaza.” While technically possible, “it is a very difficult task,” Heyman said. “This is one of those desperate jobs where both sides will probably hate them for it.” The main danger for any EU force, he continued, “would be a breakdown in communications with the Israeli Navy.” “They will have to work out between them very effective rules of engagement and lines of command or it could go drastically wrong,” he added. Have Your Say: Israeli military says complete withdrawal from Gaza ?out of the question? Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Time to Get to Work
Wednesday, January 21st, 2009
By Robert Scheer? So, let?s now heed the words of our new president and set aside childish things. Presumably that includes the $450 worth of designer Obama T-shirts that I got in return for a campaign contribution made two days before the election in a sudden panic that he yet might lose. That battle has been won, and the sight of the disgraced Dick Cheney being wheeled off the stage of history as Obama recommitted America to the vision of the Founders, who, ?faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man,? was nothing short of thrilling. Tuesday was welcome theater, as profound as it gets, particularly in the unity of race demonstrated so visibly to ourselves as well as the rest of the world. In that sense the presidency of Barack Obama will always be marked as an enormous winner, even when things, as he predicted, at times go wrong. But today, as Obama has declared, begins a new era of responsibility and accountability, and it is time for this columnist to get back to work. My concern is with the nation?s two most serious flashpoints?the economic bailout and the war in Afghanistan?and on both the early actions of the Obama team have been far from reassuring. Instead of signaling a sharp break from the failures of the Bush administration in these two areas, the early indication from Obama is more of the same. ?Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some,? he said. But why then has he backed a bailout program that rewards the greediest of bankers while ignoring struggling homeowners? ?Accountability for the Troubled Asset Relief Program? is the title of the second report of the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP), which Congress created to monitor the disbursement of $700 billion in bailout funds. That report concludes: ?The panel still does not know what the banks are doing with taxpayer money.? This is because of what the panel of experts called ?significant gaps in Treasury?s monitoring of taxpayer money e.g. asking financial institutions to account for what they have done with taxpayer funds.? As the panel noted: ?For Treasury to take no steps to use any of this money to alleviate the foreclosure crisis raises questions about whether Treasury has complied with Congress?s intent that Treasury develop a ?plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners.??? Yet Obama successfully lobbied for a quick payout of the second installment. Obamaniacs should take to their crackberries to demand that something be done for homeowners before the last dollar of TARP evaporates. As Obama said in his inauguration speech, ?a nation cannot prosper long when it only favors the prosperous,? but that is what the bailout, which Treasury secretary nominee Timothy Geithner helped craft, has been all about. On the foreign policy front, similar vigilance is called for, particularly regarding the determination of the new administration to sink deeper into what surely is a quagmire in Afghanistan. Obama already has committed to a major increase in U.S. troops on the battle front, where our main role has been to prop up the enormously corrupt and ineffectual government in Kabul. The only justification for entering even more aggressively into the civil war in that country is the simplistic identification of the Taliban with the remnants of Osama bin Laden?s gang. The drawing of that link was never accurate: The Taliban is an outgrowth of an indigenous movement, originally stocked with CIA arms and cash, and even when bin Laden had the support of the Afghan group he was getting most of his money from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which along with Pakistan made up the nations that granted the Taliban diplomatic recognition. Why make the Taliban our permanent enemy while coddling the state players who sponsored it? In language that echoed the hysteria of the Bush-era neoconservatives, Obama stated on Tuesday, ?Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.? Nope, as Obama has acknowledged on other occasions, it?s far more complex than that. Yesterday?s enemy can be tomorrow?s ally, as demonstrated by the fact that our economic solvency is now in the hands of the Chinese Communist government that was once our most feared enemy. The good news is that we have a big-brain president. The question is: Will he use it? I will not deny that I shed some tears watching the inauguration. It was mostly wonderful, incredibly so, but now in the morning after, and as Obama requested, it?s responsibility that we should be looking for. Have Your Say: Time to Get to Work Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Take the banks from the bosses
Tuesday, January 20th, 2009
No more public money without public control As economic recession tears into Britain, millions of us spend our nights fearing for the future. More than half of all workers are worried that they might be on the dole by the end of the year. Despite this, Gordon Brown has made it clear that working people are not his priority. The government will not be offering us any chances to have our debts cleared. Instead it is the bankers who are again to benefit from Brown?s charity. This week the government offered guarantees of up to ?200 billion to lenders who think their debts will not be repaid. Brown hopes this will encourage the banks to lend more money to people and businesses. But there are no guarantees that his plan will work. Even as the government announced its plans the largely state-owned Royal Bank of Scotland lost 70 percent of its value. Brown?s latest handout follows last year?s ?287 billion cash injection ? the ?radical? action that was supposed to put an end to the banking crisis. Yet even after receiving such sums, the banks continued to refuse to lend on the scale the government had hoped for. Bank bosses insist that they must be allowed to run ?their? businesses without interference, even as they suck up more public money. Yet this will lead to a deepening of the crisis. Instead, Brown should replace the directors of all the banks that have taken public money with representatives who are accountable to the public. At the very least the government could insist on an end to the threat of home repossession and debt collectors. Doing so would mean we get ?something in return for billions of pounds of our money. Source http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=16938 Have Your Say: Take the banks from the bosses Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. VIDEO: Bailout Bait & Switch
Tuesday, January 20th, 2009
If there was ever proof that the federal government and the banking industry are working to protect the interest of each other, here it is. First the 2005 pro-banking bankruptcy “overhaul”, not this. Granted, there was some well-meaning intent behind this bailout of the banking system, there was also obviously some scheming behind the scenes which allowed for some fine-printing & insertion of “loopholes.”
|
 |
Create Your Own Reality?
Subliminal Secrets Exposed Never Be Lied To Again! What You Aren't Supposed To Know |
By Sameer Dossani “Foreign Policy In Focus — January 16, 2009
Editor: Emily Schwartz Greco
DOSSANI: The Israeli government and many Israeli and U.S. officials claim that the current assault on Gaza is to put an end to the flow of Qassam rockets from Gaza into Israel. But many observers claim that if that were really the case, Israel would have made much more of an effort to renew the ceasefire agreement that expired in December, which had all but stopped the rocket fire. In your opinion, what are the real motivations behind the current Israeli action?
CHOMSKY: There’s a theme that goes way back to the origins of Zionism. And it’s a very rational theme: “Let’s delay negotiations and diplomacy as long as possible, and meanwhile we’ll ‘build facts on the ground.’” So Israel will create the basis for what some eventual agreement will ratify, but the more they create, the more they construct, the better the agreement will be for their purposes. Those purposes are essentially to take over everything of value in the former Palestine and to undermine what’s left of the indigenous population.
I think one of the reasons for popular support for this in the United States is that it resonates very well with American history. How did the United States get established? The themes are similar.
There are many examples of this theme being played out throughout Israel’s history, and the current situation is another case. They have a very clear program. Rational hawks like Ariel Sharon realized that it’s crazy to keep 8,000 settlers using one-third of the land and much of the scarce supplies in Gaza, protected by a large part of the Israeli army while the rest of the society around them is just rotting. So it’s best to take them out and send them to the West Bank. That’s the place that they really care about and want.
What was called a “disengagement” in September 2005 was actually a transfer. They were perfectly frank and open about it. In fact, they extended settlement building programs in the West Bank at the very same time that they were withdrawing a few thousand people from Gaza. So Gaza should be turned into a cage, a prison basically, with Israel attacking it at will, and meanwhile in the West Bank we’ll take what we want. There was nothing secret about it.
Ehud Olmert was in the United States in May 2006 a couple of months after the withdrawal. He simply announced to a joint session of Congress and to rousing applause, that the historic right of Jews to the entire land of Israel is beyond question. He announced what he called his convergence program, which is just a version of the traditional program; it goes back to the Allon plan of 1967. Israel would essentially annex valuable land and resources near the green line (the 1967 border). That land is now behind the wall that Israel built in the West Bank, which is an annexation wall. That means the arable land, the main water resources, the pleasant suburbs around Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, and the hills and so on. They’ll take over the Jordan valley, which is about a third of the West Bank, where they’ve been settling since the late 60s. Then they’ll drive a couple of super highways?through the whole territory ? there’s one to the east of Jerusalem to the town of Ma’aleh Adumim which was built mostly in the 1990s, during the Oslo years. It was built essentially to bisect the West Bank and are two others up north that includes Ariel and Kedumim and other towns which pretty much bisect what’s left. They’ll set up check points and all sorts of means of harassment in the other areas and the population that’s left will be essentially cantonized and unable to live a decent life and if they want to leave, great. Or else they will be picturesque figures for tourists ? you know somebody leading a goat up a hill in the distance ? and meanwhile Israelis, including settlers, will drive around on “Israeli only” super highways. Palestinians can make do with some little road somewhere where you’re falling into a ditch if it’s raining. That’s the goal. And it’s explicit. You can’t accuse them of deception because it’s explicit. And it’s cheered here.
DOSSANI: In terms of U.S. support, last week the UN Security Council adopted a resolution calling for a cease fire. Is this a change, particularly in light of the fact that the U.S. did not veto the resolution, but rather abstained, allowing it to be passed?
CHOMSKY: Right after the 1967 war, the Security Council had strong resolutions condemning Israel’s move to expand and take over Jerusalem. Israel just ignored them. Because the U.S. pats them on the head and says “go ahead and violate them.” There’s a whole series of resolutions from then up until today, condemning the settlements, which as Israel knew and as everyone agreed were in violation of the Geneva conventions. The United States either vetoes the resolutions or sometimes votes for them, but with a wink saying, “go ahead anyway, and we’ll pay for it and give you the military support for it.” It’s a consistent pattern. During the Oslo years, for example, settlement construction increased steadily, in violation of what the Oslo agreement was theoretically supposed to lead to. In fact the peak year of settlement was Clinton’s last year, 2000. And it continued again afterward. It’s open and explicit.
To get back to the question of motivation, they have sufficient military control over the West Bank to terrorize the population into passivity. Now that control is enhanced by the collaborationist forces that the U.S., Jordan, and Egypt have trained in order to subdue the population. In fact if you take a look at the press the last couple of weeks, if there’s a demonstration in the West Bank in support of Gaza, the Fatah security forces crush it. That’s what they’re there for. Fatah by now is more or less functioning as Israel’s police force in the West Bank. But the West Bank is only part of the occupied Palestinian territories. The other part is Gaza, and no one doubts that they form a unit. And there still is resistance in Gaza, those rockets. So yes, they want to stamp that out too, then there will be no resistance at all and they can continue to do what they want to do without interference, meanwhile delaying diplomacy as much as possible and “building the facts” the way they want to. Again this goes back to the origins of Zionism. It varies of course depending on circumstances, but the fundamental policy is the same and perfectly understandable. If you want to take over a country where the population doesn’t want you, I mean, how else can you do it? How was this country conquered?
DOSSANI: What you describe is a tragedy.
CHOMSKY: It’s a tragedy which is made right here. The press won’t talk about it and even scholarship, for the most part, won’t talk about it but the fact of the matter is that there has been a political settlement on the table, on the agenda for 30 years. Namely a two-state settlement on the international borders with maybe some mutual modification of the border. That’s been there officially since 1976 when there was a Security Council resolution proposed by the major Arab states and supported by the (Palestinan Liberation Organization) PLO, pretty much in those terms. The United States vetoed it so it’s therefore out of history and it’s continued almost without change since then.
There was in fact one significant modification. In the last month of Clinton’s term, January 2001 there were negotiations, which the U.S. authorized, but didn’t participate in, between Israel and the Palestinians and they came very close to agreement.
DOSSANI: The Taba negotiations?
Yes, the Taba negotiations. The two sides came very close to agreement. They were called off by Israel. But that was the one week in over 30 years when the United States and Israel abandoned their rejectionist position. It’s a real tribute to the media and other commentators that they can keep this quiet. The U.S. and Israel are alone in this. The international consensus includes virtually everyone. It includes the Arab League which has gone beyond that position and called for the normalization of relations, it includes Hamas. Every time you see Hamas in the newspapers, it says “Iranian-backed Hamas which wants to destroy Israel.” Try to find a phrase that says “democratically elected Hamas which is calling for a two-state settlement” and has been for years. Well, yeah, that’s a good propaganda system. Even in the U.S. press they’ve occasionally allowed op-eds by Hamas leaders, Ismail Haniya and others saying, yes we want a two-state settlement on the international border like everyone else.
DOSSANI: When did Hamas adopt that position?
CHOMSKY That’s their official position taken by Haniya, the elected leader, and Khalid Mesh’al, their political leader who’s in exile in Syria, he’s written the same thing. And it’s over and over again. There’s no question about it but the West doesn’t want to hear it. So therefore it’s Hamas which is committed to the destruction of Israel.
In a sense they are, but if you went to a Native American reservation in the United States, I’m sure many would like to see the destruction of the United States. If you went to Mexico and took a poll, I’m sure they don’t recognize the right of the United States to exist sitting on half of Mexico, land conquered in war. And that’s true all over the world. But they’re willing to accept a political settlement. Israel isn’t willing to accept it and the United States isn’t willing to accept it. And they’re the lone hold-outs. Since it’s the United States that pretty much runs the world, it’s blocked.
Here it’s always presented as though the United States must become more engaged; it’s an honest broker; Bush’s problem was that he neglected the issue. That’s not the problem. The problem is that the United States has been very much engaged, and engaged in blocking a political settlement and giving the material and ideological and diplomatic support for the expansion programs, which are just criminal programs. The world court unanimously, including the American justice, agreed that any transfer of population into the Occupied Territories is a violation of a fundamental international law, the Geneva Conventions. And Israel agrees. In fact even their courts agree, they just sort of sneak around it in various devious ways. So there’s no question about this. It’s just sort of accepted in the United States that we’re an outlaw state. Law doesn’t apply to us. That’s why it’s never discussed.
Sameer Dossani, a Foreign Policy In Focus contributor, is the director of 50 Years is Enough and blogs at shirinandsameer.blogspot.com
|
Create Your Own Reality?
Subliminal Secrets Exposed Never Be Lied To Again! What You Aren't Supposed To Know |
The Guardian has obtained vivid footage of the effect of white phosphorus allegedly used by Israel during a bomb attack on Gaza?last week.
The film was made by Fida Qishta, a camerawoman working for the International Solidarity Movement, a non-governmental organisation operating in Gaza. It was shot on Wednesday 14 January in Khoza’a, east of Khan Younis in the south of the Gaza Strip.
It shows clumps of the burning chemical on the ground as locals try to put it out by covering it with dust, mud and grass. The chemical, which locals describe as phosphorus, fails to go out and continues to burn through the debris piled upon it. As they kick it about, it subdivides into smaller lumps and continues to burn.
Evidence of white phosphorus in Gaza?Link to this video??
The use of white phosphorus as a weapon ? as opposed to its use as an obscurant and infrared blocking smoke screen ? is banned by the United Nation’s third convention on conventional weapons, which covers the use of incendiary devices. Though Israel is not a signatory to the convention, its military manuals reflect the restrictions on its use in that convention.
A second film reveals the impact of the white phosphorus on the human body. A 15-year-old boy is shown in a Gaza hospital receiving treatment for burns to his back and right arm which a doctor explains were caused by the chemical, which appears to have eaten into his flesh in several places.
Lying on his hospital bed, the boy tells how he was sitting with his family in their four-storey house when an Israeli bomb hit, killing his sister with shrapnel.
His testimony follows an earlier film by Qishta which contains graphic descriptions of attacks by Israeli forces in the same area.
Amnesty International said today that Israel has committed a war crime by using phosphorous over Gaza’s densely populated residential neighbourhoods. The human rights organisation also said they had fresh evidence of its use.
“Yesterday, we saw streets and alleyways littered with evidence of the use of white phosphorus, including still burning wedges and the remnants of the shells and canisters fired by the Israeli army,” said Christopher Cobb-Smith, a weapons expert who is in Gaza as part of a four-person Amnesty International fact-finding team. “White phosphorus is a weapon intended to provide a smokescreen for troop movements on the battlefield. It is highly incendiary, air burst and its spread effect is such that it that should never be used on civilian areas.”
|
Create Your Own Reality?
Subliminal Secrets Exposed Never Be Lied To Again! What You Aren't Supposed To Know |
?
?
?
This week’s military hearings could be the last at Guantanamo - President-elect Barack Obama has said he would close the offshore prison and many expect him to suspend the military tribunals and order new trials in the United States.
Ramzi Binalshibh and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed architect of the terrorist attacks, were unapologetic about their roles.
“We did what we did; we’re proud of Sept. 11,” announced Binalshibh, who has said he wants to plead guilty to charges that could put him to death. The judge must first determine if he is mentally competent to stand trial.
Mohammed shrugged off the potential death sentence for the murder of nearly 3,000 people in the Sept. 11 attacks.
“We are doing jihad for the cause of God,” he said.
AP
|
Create Your Own Reality?
Subliminal Secrets Exposed Never Be Lied To Again! What You Aren't Supposed To Know |
NEW YORK - As an estimated two million celebrants converge on the U.S. capital for the inauguration festivities of President-elect Barack Obama Tuesday, the mood among human rights groups and some religious leaders is somewhat more sombre.
They are calling on Obama to use his first hundred days in office to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay and repudiate the policies of President George W. Bush on an array of issues ranging from detainee torture and rendition to warrantless wiretapping and signing statements.?
But with the nation facing the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, it is unclear whether human rights will become the top priority of the Obama administration and its allies in Congress.
Nonetheless, such leading organisations as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Centre for Constitutional Rights, and Human Rights First are demanding that the president-elect take the lead in effecting speedy action.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) wants the Obama administration to close the CIA’s secret detention centres permanently, apply to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) the rules used by the U.S. military to prevent coercive interrogation, close the Guantanamo detention centre, repatriate or prosecute all detainees, and ensure that prosecutions are conducted in regular courts, not the “substandard” military commissions.
Kenneth Roth, executive director of HRW said, “Barack Obama must seize back the US leadership in global human rights squandered by outgoing President George Bush in Guantanamo Bay and other scandals.”
Last week, the group issued a 564-page report on the state of human rights around the world. It charged that governments opposing basic rights, including those in Russia and China, had rushed to fill a vacuum left by the United States.
It blamed Bush’s “abandonment of long-held principles, including opposition to torture, in the U.S. war against Islamist militants,” but said Obama “could repair the damage once he takes office on Jan. 20″.
“There is an enormous need for the Obama administration to redeem America’s reputation,” Roth added.
At the same time, a coalition of equally prominent groups issued a similar “Human Rights Call to Action” at a summit in Washington last week. It demanded that the Obama administration put an end to “torture, arbitrary detention, and extraordinary rendition, including closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay and rejecting preventive detention models; ending surveillance abuses, attacks on dissent, and targeting of immigrant groups and other communities of color; and ensuring human rights, civil rights and civil liberties.”
The summit included the American Arab Anti Discrimination Committee, the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International USA, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Constitution Project, Human Rights First, Human Rights Watch, the National Lawyers Guild, the Partnership for Civil Justice, the Torture Abolition Survivors Support Coalition, the US Human Rights Network, and Witness Against Torture
Similar demands are being made by a number of religious leaders and organisations.
The National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT) is urging Obama to issue an executive order ending torture as one of his first official acts in office. A letter to the president-elect, signed by close to three dozen prominent religious leaders representing the country’s diverse faith traditions, said, “Such a step will help the United States to regain the moral high ground and restore our credibility within the international community at this critical time.”
NRCAT also joined a number of other groups in calling for “an investigation of torture policies and practices since 9/11.” Rev. Richard L. Killmer, its executive director, told IPS, “In order to create safeguards to make sure that torture does not happen again, it is important to understand what happened. NRCAT supports an independent non-partisan committee of inquiry with subpoena power and sufficient funding to do a thorough investigation and issue a comprehensive report.”
He added, “I think about my seven grandchildren. I can imagine that some day they will say that the United States used to torture, but we don’t do that anymore. The challenge for our nation is to develop sufficient safeguards so that we don’t torture anymore. We need to understand what happen so that those safeguards can be created.”
Another group of prominent religious leaders presented the Obama administration with what it called a “Come Let Us Reason Together” Agenda. As part of a multi-issue declaration, the group asserted that “The use of torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment against prisoners is immoral, unwise, and un-American.”
Leaders of the group represent such organisations as Third Way, Public Religion Research, Evangelicals for Human Rights, Evangelicals for Social Action, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, and Faith in Public Life.
As these organisations went public with their demands, pressure appeared to be growing for a comprehensive independent investigation of human rights abuses allegedly committed by the Bush administration. But when ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos pressed Obama about it on the television programme “This Week”, Obama said he was “still evaluating” the situation but added, “My orientation is going to be moving forward.”
However, on Obama’s transition website, Change.gov, the top-rated publicly-submitted question asked the incoming president whether he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate “the gravest crimes of the Bush Administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping.”
Other powerful players are taking the view that questions about the Bush administration’s torture policies are so serious they can be answered only by a bipartisan, in-depth investigation. Among them is Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, who introduced a bill to establish a blue-ribbon commission to investigate Bush’s alleged abuse of executive war powers and civil liberties. The commission would be similar to the panel that investigated the terrorist attacks of Sep. 11, 2001.
The pressure on the Obama team escalated last week when a senior Bush administration official admitted that Guantanamo interrogators and guards had tortured one of the detainees, Mohammed al Qahtani, a Saudi national accused of planning to take part in the Sep. 11 attacks.
The official, Susan Crawford, a retired judge who oversees the military tribunals for Guantanamo Bay inmates, told The Washington Post, “We tortured Qahtani. His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that’s why I did not refer the case” for prosecution.
According to press reports, Qahtani had proved impervious to standard military interrogation in 2002 when former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorised special methods to break his will.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) described the admission as “stunning” but said the Bush administration was still planning, on its final full day in office, to prosecute other detainees who had been tortured.
Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have said that the United States does not torture. But Cheney has admitted publicly that a technique known as waterboarding - which simulates drowning - was administered to three detainees.
Bush Administration officials, including the president, vice president, and Attorney General Michael Mukasey, do not acknowledge that waterboarding constitutes torture. But Obama’s nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder, testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, unequivocally declared, “waterboarding is torture”.
The significance of the phrase “The First Hundred Days” stems from the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who took office during the Great Depression. In 1933, he called Congress back from a recess to hold a special emergency session, during which more than 15 bills - the heart of FDR’s New Deal - were passed and signed into law. The hundred day mantra has been the gold standard for U.S. presidents ever since.
?
|
Create Your Own Reality?
Subliminal Secrets Exposed Never Be Lied To Again! What You Aren't Supposed To Know |
With the approval of parliament, our government is planning to hold more information about us than ever before. It wants a national identity database of every UK citizen, identity cards for many UK residents, DNA records kept for millions of innocent people, and records kept of emails sent (although not their contents), web-pages visited and phone calls made. In arguing that these measures are needed for the protection of society, they assure us that “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear”.
It has now emerged that the government has drawn up proposals to exclude MPs’ expenses from the Freedom of Information Act (Leaders, 17 January). This despite the fact that the existing law has exposed irregularities in how MPs are using their expenses. This double standard is concerning in and of itself. That it is happening during an economic downturn when we are all being expected to tighten our belts is nothing short of outrageous. That it happens 18 months after Gordon Brown launched his premiership by announcing that parliament should be covered by the Freedom of Information Act is deeply worrying.
MPs will have an opportunity to pass or block the Freedom of Information Order this week. If they pass it, they will do the reputation of parliament tremendous harm. We urge them to see sense and block this regressive measure.
Peter Facey Unlock Democracy, Maurice Frankel Campaign for Freedom of Information, Matthew Elliott TaxPayers’ Alliance, Roger Smith Justice, Phil Booth NO2ID, Anthony Barnett OurKingdom, Neil O’Brien Policy Exchange, Guido Fawkes Order-Order.com, Louise Christian, Stuart Weir Democratic Audit, Sunny Hundal Liberal Conspiracy, Pete Myers EnougthsEnougth.org, Neal Lawson Compass,Simon Davies Privacy International, Henry Porter, Ken Ritchie Electoral Reform Society, Barry White Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom, John Kampfner Index on Censorship, Prof AC Grayling, Prof David Miller SpinWatch, Nick Mole PAN UK, Tony Curzon Price Open Democracy, John Jackson
ArchiveThe views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
Loading ...