TOO MANY 9-11 COMMISSION QUESTIONS STILL UNANSWERED

September 8th, 2009

Allen L Roland

When Pandora's Box is finally fully opened on the deceptions and abuses of power by the Cheney/Bush administration ~ the 9/11 conspiracy and cover-up will stand alone as the most treasonous act in American history. Here are 40 experts, including Commission members, who share their misgivings about the 9/11 Commission and the questions left unanswered:

The resignation Sunday of longtime Bay Area activist Van Jones as a White House environmental adviser left many progressives, including myself, rightfully angry at the Obama administration for crumbling to conservative criticism of Jones' controversial past comments and actions ~ particularly regarding 9/11. Jones resigned amid a furor over his signature on a 2004 petition rightfully questioning the government's actions around the Sept.11, 2001 terrorist attacks. A petition that I and many other Progressive leaders proudly signed and still support.

As Gandhi once said ~ An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because very few choose to see or acknowledge it.

So let's set the record straight, Van Jones was not alone in his misgivings about the government's actions around the 9/11 attacks and most certainly it's response ~ as alluded to in the obviously deeply flawed 9/11 Commission report.

Here are 40 experts, including the Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean, Former Governor of New Jersey and Vice Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Homeland Security Advisory Council ~ sounding off in short quotes about their misgivings with the 9/11 commission and the far too many questions that are still UNANSWERED.

9/11 REVISITED AND QUESTIONED

Summarized from www.patriotsquestion911.com.

Senator Max Cleland – Former member of the 9/11 Commission, resigned in December 2003 "I, as a member of the [9/11] Commission, cannot look any American in the eye... It is a national scandal... this White House wants to cover [9/11] up."

Senator Mark Dayton ~ Member, Senate Committee on Armed Services and Homeland Security "[NORAD] lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 Commission...the most gross incompetence and dereliction of responsibility and negligence"

Congressman Ron Paul - Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee "the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation"

Congressman Curt Weldon - "[9/11 Commission] there's something very sinister going on here... something desperately wrong... This involved what is right now the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people"

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney - Member of the House Armed Services Committee "the [9/11] Commission ran up against obstruction by the administration and non-cooperation from government agencies... the errors and omissions immediately jumped out at us"

Director of the FBI, Louis Freeh – "[9/11 Commission] findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself"

Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts, PhD - "Distinguished national and international scientists and scholars present massive evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11 "terrorist attack" has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in the Middle East... We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to "pancake" at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false"

Assistant Secretary of Housing, Catherine Austin Fitts - "Regarding 9/11 "The official story could not possibly have happened... It’s not possible. It’s not operationally feasible... The Commission was a whitewash. "

U.S. Army Intelligence officer, Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice, John Loftus ~ "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence"

Foreign Service Officer, George Kenney - " I cannot believe, much as I might like to, the standard account of 9/11"

Foreign Service Officer, J. Michael Springman - "Fifteen of the nineteen people who allegedly flew airplanes into buildings in the United States got their visas from the same CIA Consulate at Jeddah"

Deputy Attorney General, State of Pennsylvania, Philip J. Berg, Esquire - "The official story of what actually took place on 9/11 is a lie. "

Major General U.S. Army, Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, Albert Stubblebine ~ "I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon?"

Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps – Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center - "I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that's accurate"

Col. Robert Bowman, U.S. Air Force, Director of Advanced Space Programs, PhD Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering -" the official 9/11 story is impossible .. There is a cover up .. high levels of our government don't want us to know what happened .. highly placed individuals in the administration .. Dick Cheney .. the very kindest thing we can say about George W Bush .. is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder "

Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force, aircraft accident investigator ~ "I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident... The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11, 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from view .. with all the evidence readily available at the pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged .. the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history "

Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army ~ "Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 "when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile."

Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force, fighter pilot, commercial pilot flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777 ’s. Had previously flown Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC ~"The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple...[Regarding Flight 77]"The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles... The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77"

Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force, Office of the Secretary of Defense, staff of the Director of the National Security Agency ~ "It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics...There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked Pentagon, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage one would expect from the impact of a large airliner... this visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the Sec of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a ' missile ' ... I saw nothing of significance at the point of contact ~ no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon .. all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected was not evident .. the same is true with regard to the damage we expected .. but I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 0r 40 minutes, with the roof remaining relatively straight .. The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would have expected if a missile had struck the Pentagon "

Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, Barbara Honegger, MS ~ "The US military, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11...A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, high−speed 270−degree dive towards the Pentagon that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti−aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building...Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response system"

Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, PhD, U.S. Army, U.S. Army Intelligence Officer ~ "I knew from September 18, 2001, that the official story about 9/11 was false. ... [A]nomalies poured in rapidly: the hijackers' names appearing in none of the published flight passenger lists, BBC reports of stolen identities of the alleged hijackers or the alleged hijackers being found alive, the obvious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2...and WTC7...not hit by an airplane...the lack of identifiable Boeing 757 wreckage at the Pentagon"

Capt. Eric H. May, U.S. Army, Intelligence officer ~ "I view the 911 event ...as a matter that implies either...A) passive participation by the Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down or B) active execution of a plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an invasion of the Middle East"

Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA, responsible for preparing the President’ Daily Brief, U.S. Army Intelligence Officer, Raymond L. McGovern ~ " I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a joke...just as Hitler in 1933 cynically exploited the burning of the parliament building, the Reichstag, this is exactly what our President did in exploiting 9/11...making a war of aggression on a country that he knew had nothing to do with 9/11...that’s certainly an impeachable offense...But compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited."

National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis, William Christison ~ "there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them...this all was totally an inside job… I have since decided that....at least some elements in this US government had contributed in some way or other to causing 9/11 to happen or at least allowing it to happen... The reason that the two towers in New York actually collapsed and fell all the way to the ground was controlled explosions rather than just being hit by two airplanes. … All of the characteristics of these demolitions show that they almost had to have been controlled explosions... I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all... It's a monstrous crime"

U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer, case officer CIA. Robert David Steele ~ "I am forced to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to indict (not necessarily convict) Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others...This is, without question, the most important modern reference on state-sponsored terrorism, and also the reference that most pointedly suggests that select rogue elements within the US Government, most likely led by Dick Cheney with the assistance of George Tenet, Buzzy Kronguard, and others close to the Wall Street gangs, are the most guilty of state-sponsored terrorism...I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I'm concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition"

CIA Case Officer, Specialist in the Middle East, Directorate of Operations, Awarded Career Intelligence Medal, Robert Baer ~ " Regarding the opinion there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government, "There is that possibility, the evidence points at it."
Counter-terrorism expert in the Security Division of the federal Aviation Administration. Team leader of the FAA's Red ( Terrorism ) Team in the Federal Air Marshall program, Coast Guard officer, Bogdan Dzakovic ~ "At worst, I think the 9/11 Commission Report is treasonous."

Minister of Justice, West Germany, Horst Ehmke, PhD - "Terrorists could not have carried out such an operation with four hijacked planes without the support of a secret service."

State Secretary, Federal Ministry of Defense, West Germany, Andreas von Buelow, PhD - "The official story is so inadequate and far-fetched that there must be another one...This is unthinkable, without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry." President of Italy, Francesco Cossiga ~ "[9/11] could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and flight security personnel."

General Leonid Ivashov, Chief of Staff, Russian armed forces, Ministry of Defense ~ "Only secret services and their current chiefs – or those retired but still having influence inside the state organizations – have the ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation [9/11] of such magnitude...Osama bin Laden and "Al Qaeda" cannot be the organizers nor the performers of the September 11 attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders."

Foreign Minister of Egypt, Mohamed Hassanein Heikal ~ "Bin Laden does not have the capabilities for an operation [9/11] of this magnitude. When I hear Bush talking about al-Qaida as if it was Nazi Germany or the communist party of the Soviet Union, I laugh because I know what is there. Bin Laden has been under surveillance for years: every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaida has been penetrated by American intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, Egyptian intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation that required such a degree of organization and sophistication."

Chief of Staff, Pakistani Army, General Mirza Aslam Beg ~ "The information which is now coming up, goes to prove that involvement by the ‘rogue elements’ of the U.S. military and intelligence organization is getting more obvious. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda definitely do not have the know-how and the capability to launch such operations involving such high precision coordination, based on information and expertise."

European Parliament, Committee on Security and Defense, Giulietto Chiesa ~ regarding 9-11 "Billions of people were given only one explanation....which is entirely false....everyone who dares to question it is treated as if he was a fool."

French Army Intelligence and artillery officer, Col. Pierre-Henri Bunel, Expert in the effects of artillery weapons and explosives ~ Regarding Department of Defense photos of the Pentagon on 9/11 "Image of the impact on the Pentagon is very instructive as to the nature of the explosion. ... It corresponds to a detonation of an explosive with high energetic power. The explosion does not correspond to a deflagration of kerosene...suggests a single engine flying vehicle much smaller in size than an airliner...resembles the effects of anti-concrete hollow charges that I have been able to observe on a number of battlefields...lead me therefore to think that the detonation that struck the building was that of a high-powered hollow charge used to destroy hardened buildings and carried by an aerial vehicle, a missile."

Safety Engineer and accident Analyst, National Safety Technology Authority, Finland, Heikki Kurttila, PhD ~ "Conclusion: The observed collapse time of WTC 7 was 6.5 seconds. That is only half a second longer than it would have taken for the top of the building to fall to the ground in a vacuum, and half a second shorter than the falling time of an apple when air resistance is taken into account. ... The great speed of the collapse and the low value of the resistance factor strongly suggest controlled demolition."

Counter-Terrorism Officer, MI5 (Britain), David Shayler – regarding 9-11 "The available evidence indicates that people in key positions in the FBI, the State Department, the CIA and so on were not loyal to the Constitution; that they saw an opportunity in plans laid down by genuine Islamic terrorists to carry out an operation that would shock the world and would therefore justify U.S. adventurism in the middle East, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq."

Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean, Former Governor of New Jersey - "FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue...We, to this day, don't know why NORAD told us what they told us...It was just so far from the truth."

Vice Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Homeland Security Advisory Council ~ "we got started late; we had a very short time frame...we did not have enough money...We had a lot of people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access to documents and to people. ... So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail"

9/11 Commissioner, Timothy J. Roemer, PhD, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence - "that panel members so distrusted testimony from Pentagon officials that they referred their concerns to the Pentagon's inspector general...We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"

Senior Counsel, 9/11 Commission, John J. Farmer, Jr., Former Attorney General, NJ, Former Commissioner of the State Commission of Investigations ~ Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described...The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years"

The truth always goes through three stages as will the eventual unmasking of the 9/11 cover up ~

First ~ it is ridiculed.

Second ~ it is violently opposed.

Third ~ It is accepted as being self evident and we are daily drawing closer to stage three .

Allen L Roland
http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2009/09/08.html

Freelance columnist Allen L Roland is available for comments , interviews and speaking engagements ( allen@allenroland.com )

Allen L Roland is a practicing psychotherapist, author and lecturer who also shares a daily political and social commentary on his weblog and website allenroland.com He also guest hosts a monthly national radio show TRUTHTALK on www.conscioustalk.net

-###-

Allen Roland’s weblog: http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/
Website: www.allenroland.com
ONLY THE TRUTH IS REVOLUTIONARY

OUTCRY IN AMERICA AS PREGNANT WOMEN WHO LOSE BABIES FACE MURDER CHARGES

Women's rights campaigners see the creeping criminalisation of pregnant women as a new front in the culture wars over abortion

• Ed Pilkington in New York
• guardian.co.uk, Friday 24 June 2011


Across the US, more and more prosecutions are being brought against women who lose their babies. Photograph: Alamy

Rennie Gibbs is accused of murder, but the crime she is alleged to have committed does not sound like an ordinary killing. Yet she faces life in prison in Mississippi over the death of her unborn child.

Gibbs became pregnant aged 15, but lost the baby in December 2006 in a stillbirth when she was 36 weeks into the pregnancy. When prosecutors discovered that she had a cocaine habit – though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby's death – they charged her with the "depraved-heart murder" of her child, which carries a mandatory life sentence.

Gibbs is the first woman in Mississippi to be charged with murder relating to the loss of her unborn baby. But her case is by no means isolated. Across the US more and more prosecutions are being brought that seek to turn pregnant women into criminals.

"Women are being stripped of their constitutional personhood and subjected to truly cruel laws," said Lynn Paltrow of the campaign National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW). "It's turning pregnant women into a different class of person and removing them of their rights."

Bei Bei Shuai, 34, has spent the past three months in a prison cell in Indianapolis charged with murdering her baby. On 23 December she tried to commit suicide by taking rat poison after her boyfriend abandoned her.

Shuai was rushed to hospital and survived, but she was 33 weeks pregnant and her baby, to whom she gave birth a week after the suicide attempt and whom she called Angel, died after four days. In March Shuai was charged with murder and attempted foeticide and she has been in custody since without the offer of bail.

In Alabama at least 40 cases have been brought under the state's "chemical endangerment" law. Introduced in 2006, the statute was designed to protect children whose parents were cooking methamphetamine in the home and thus putting their children at risk from inhaling the fumes.

Amanda Kimbrough is one of the women who have been ensnared as a result of the law being applied in a wholly different way. During her pregnancy her foetus was diagnosed with possible Down's syndrome and doctors suggested she consider a termination, which Kimbrough declined as she is not in favour of abortion.

The baby was delivered by caesarean section prematurely in April 2008 and died 19 minutes after birth.

Six months later Kimbrough was arrested at home and charged with "chemical endangerment" of her unborn child on the grounds that she had taken drugs during the pregnancy – a claim she has denied.

"That shocked me, it really did," Kimbrough said. "I had lost a child, that was enough."

She now awaits an appeal ruling from the higher courts in Alabama, which if she loses will see her begin a 10-year sentence behind bars. "I'm just living one day at a time, looking after my three other kids," she said. "They say I'm a criminal, how do I answer that? I'm a good mother."

Women's rights campaigners see the creeping criminalisation of pregnant women as a new front in the culture wars over abortion, in which conservative prosecutors are chipping away at hard-won freedoms by stretching protection laws to include foetuses, in some cases from the day of conception. In Gibbs' case defence lawyers have argued before Mississippi's highest court that her prosecution makes no sense. Under Mississippi law it is a crime for any person except the mother to try to cause an abortion.

"If it's not a crime for a mother to intentionally end her pregnancy, how can it be a crime for her to do it unintentionally, whether by taking drugs or smoking or whatever it is," Robert McDuff, a civil rights lawyer asked the state supreme court.

McDuff told the Guardian that he hoped the Gibbs prosecution was an isolated example. "I hope it's not a trend that's going to catch on. To charge a woman with murder because of something she did during pregnancy is really unprecedented and quite extreme."

He pointed out that anti-abortion groups were trying to amend the Mississippi constitution by setting up a state referendum, or ballot initiative, that would widen the definition of a person under the state's bill of rights to include a foetus from the day of conception.

Some 70 organisations across America have come together to file testimonies, known as amicus briefs, in support of Gibbs that protest against her treatment on several levels. One says that to treat "as a murderer a girl who has experienced a stillbirth serves only to increase her suffering".

Another, from a group of psychologists, laments the misunderstanding of addiction that lies behind the indictment. Gibbs did not take cocaine because she had a "depraved heart" or to "harm the foetus but to satisfy an acute psychological and physical need for that particular substance", says the brief.

Perhaps the most persuasive argument put forward in the amicus briefs is that if such prosecutions were designed to protect the unborn child, then they would be utterly counter-productive: "Prosecuting women and girls for continuing [a pregnancy] to term despite a drug addiction encourages them to terminate wanted pregnancies to avoid criminal penalties. The state could not have intended this result when it adopted the homicide statute."

Paltrow sees what is happening to Gibbs as a small taste of what would be unleashed were the constitutional right to an abortion ever overturned. "In Mississippi the use of the murder statute is creating a whole new legal standard that makes women accountable for the outcome of their pregnancies and threatens them with life imprisonment for murder."

Miscarriage of justice

At least 38 of the 50 states across America have introduced foetal homicide laws that were intended to protect pregnant women and their unborn children from violent attacks by third parties – usually abusive male partners – but are increasingly being turned by renegade prosecutors against the women themselves.

South Carolina was one of the first states to introduce such a foetal homicide law. National Advocates for Pregnant Women has found only one case of a South Carolina man who assaulted a pregnant woman having been charged under its terms, and his conviction was eventually overturned. Yet the group estimates there have been up to 300 women arrested for their actions during pregnancy.

In other states laws designed to protect children against the damaging effects of drugs have similarly been twisted to punish childbearers.

• guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2011

MURDOCH'S MOTHER BACKS CARBON PRICE

On Wednesday 15 June 2011, 5:56 EST

A group of prominent Australians has published an open letter calling for a price on carbon to help deal with climate change.

The letter is signed by four former Australians of the year - including Professor Fiona Stanley, Ian Kiernan, Professor Pat McGorry and Sir Gustav Nossal.

It is also signed by Dame Elisabeth Murdoch, the philanthopist and mother of News Corporation boss Rupert Murdoch.

Last month, Australian actress Cate Blanchett fronted an advertising campaign for a carbon price.

Professor David de Kretser, a former governor of Victoria, organised the letter and says he hopes it leads to climate change action "to ensure that we have an environment and a planet which actually is there for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren." The letter says a carbon price is fundamental to reducing emissions and driving low-carbon technologies.

Sir Gustav says he expects to cop some criticism for publicly supporting a price on carbon.

He says he is no expert on climate change, but has followed scientific developments closely.

"I think it's important in a free and democratic country like Australia for people, who for whatever reason have achieved a little prominence in their lives, to speak out, to make their views heard, then carefully to listen to dissenting views, so the debate goes on," he said.

The group says it is confident that given the incentives, sustainable industries will flourish.

A SLOP BUCKET IN EVERY HOME: ANOTHER U-TURN AS COALITION SAYS ALL FAMILIES WILL RECYCLE FOOD SCRAPS

By Steve Doughty

Last updated at 11:44 PM on 14th June 2011

Compulsory: Every home in the UK will be forced to use a slop bucket to recycle food scraps under a radical government proposal

Every home in the country will be ordered to use a slopbucket under Coalition plans set out yesterday.

The compulsory recycling of food scraps is the most radical in a series of ‘green’ schemes promoted by Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman.

It marks yet another U-turn for the Coalition. Almost exactly a year ago, Mrs Spelman said categorically: ‘The Government has no plans to force households to put food into slopbuckets.’

The fresh climbdown was revealed as the minister confirmed a retreat on the oft-repeated Tory promise to restore weekly bin collections, revealed by the Daily Mail on Saturday.

Mrs Spelman’s call for all food waste to be recycled raises the prospect of families having to save all of what she referred to as ‘smelly waste’ for separate collection, while the rest of their rubbish is picked up once a fortnight.

It came in her long-awaited Waste Review, which committed the Coalition to ‘a zero-waste economy’ and aims to make it the ‘greenest ever’ Government.

Labour ministers backed away from the slopbucket idea before last year’s general election after a cool public reaction when the first councils tried the scheme.

One such authority, Newcastle-under-Lyme in Staffordshire, insists its residents use no fewer than nine separate bins, bags and buckets to satisfy its recycling requirements.

Mrs Spelman’s plans include persuading manufacturers and producers to use less packaging, asking families to throw away less uneaten food, and encouraging the spread of litter bins adapted for recycling.

But they have revealed a deep split in the Cabinet, with Communities Secretary Eric Pickles openly furious at the way the Environment Secretary has ditched the promise to bring back weekly bin collections.

Mrs Spelman explained the retreat on weekly collections was a matter of money. She said: ‘In Opposition you don’t have a chance to see the Government’s books. You don’t see how much the Government is overspent. When we came in we found the situation was worse than we thought. I think people will understand that.’

Ministers have said that bringing back weekly collections would cost £132.5million a year.

Deep split: The slop bucket proposal was introduced by Caroline Spelman in the Waste Review, who has already left Eric Pickles furious with measures such as not re-introducing weekly bin collections

However, Mrs Spelman’s plans involve supervision of rubbish policy by two quangos, the Waste and Resources Action Programme and Keep Britain Tidy. Abolishing those two bodies would alone save taxpayers around £50million a year.

The Environment Secretary also blamed the EU for directives which will mean big fines for councils that do not meet recycling and landfill targets in 2013.

Instead of bringing back weekly collections of all waste, Mrs Spelman wants ‘smelly waste’ to be collected separately and then used in a recycling process called ‘anaerobic digestion’.

The process has been known about for more than 150 years, but has never been used on a large scale.

It produces a ‘digestate’ material which, under current technology, is too polluted to be used on a large scale for its main potential purpose, as fertiliser for farmers.

The review acknowledged that kitchen slopbuckets were unpopular but said: ‘There are a number of ways in which households themselves may be able to treat some of their food waste, including composting, food waste digesters, or at-sink disposal units.’

It also proposed reducing the powers of council inspectors to enter homes and ending the £1,000 fines for those who break bin rules.

But local authority ‘bin police’ will still be able to levy on-the-spot fines, currently from £75 to £110, on those who breach recycling regulations.

Alongside the calls for more intensive compulsory recycling, the review did contain a pledge to ‘work with councils to meet households’ reasonable expectations for weekly collections, particularly of smelly waste’.

But last night Mr Pickles’s supporters claimed the wording had appeared in the waste review only as a result of pressure from the Communities Secretary.

And in the Commons, Labour’s environment spokesman Jamie Reed described the Environment Secretary’s ministry as ‘the political equivalent of the mad woman in the attic’.

Town hall chiefs have claimed they were forced to introduce fortnightly collections and ever more recycling bins to avoid paying a Landfill Tax.

Under the measure, introduced by John Major’s Government in 1996, councils are penalised for every ton of rubbish they bury.

It went up dramatically under Labour and now stands at £56 a ton. The Coalition has pledged to increase the tax, designed to help Britain meet the EU Landfill Directive, by £8 a year.

Town where families put out NINE bins

Residents in Newcastle-under-Lyme are already being forced to follow the strict new recycling regime – with households juggling nine separate bins.

The containers include a silver slopbucket for food waste, which is then tipped into a green outdoor bin for kerb-side collections, a pink bag for plastic bottles, a green bag for cardboard, and a white bag for clothing and textiles.

Strict regime: Residents in Newcastle-under-Lyme are being forced to put out nine separate bins for collection

Retired teacher Sylvia Butler said residents like herself, who live in a terraced house with no garden, were struggling to accommodate the bins.

The 59-year-old said: ‘I have had to take my brown bin down to my allotment – there simply isn’t room in my back yard to house it.’

Since the scheme was introduced, only food waste is collected each week. All other rubbish has to be stored for a fortnight.

Pictured above, the bins are, from left, food (grey bin kept in kitchen), food (green outdoor bin), tin cans, cardboard, plastics, clothing, paper, general waste and garden waste.

Young Family's Dream TURNS INTO A NIGHTMARE DUE TO ENVIRONMENTAL EXTREMISM

PART 1

PART 2

HIDDEN GREEN TAX IN FUEL BILLS: HOW £200 STEALTH CHARGE IS SLIPPED ON TO YOUR GAS AND ELECTRICITY BILL

By David Derbyshire

Last updated at 12:44 AM on 9th June 2011

Hidden green taxes now make up a fifth of every household’s gas and electricity bills, energy campaigners warned last night.

Cash strapped families pay an average of £200 a year in stealth levies to subsidise Britain's massive expansion of wind farms, solar panels and 'environmentally friendly' heating schemes.

Yesterday outraged campaigners called for an end to the secret subsidies and demanded power companies reveal how much their customers are paying for climate change policies .

Hidden green taxes make up a fifth of households' gas and electricity bills, energy campaigners warned

The call came as the former head of the civil service, Lord Turnbull, demanded that politicians ‘stop frightening us and our children’ about the threat of global warming.

He demanded that Whitehall and ministers consider the damaging economic impact of blindly following the ‘climate change agenda’.

The attack on green taxes also came as one of Britain’s biggest power companies unveiled a round of price rises that will add nearly £200 to the average family bill.

Scottish Power blamed soaring wholesale prices for the 19 per cent increase in gas prices, and a 10 per cent rise in the cost of electricity.

But Dr Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said the soaring price of fuel was also the result of Britain’s ‘stubborn but wrong headed commitment to renewable energy’.

He said: ‘So called green stealth taxes are already adding 15 to 20 per cent to the average domestic power bill and even more to business users’.

Scottish Power has blamed soaring wholesale prices for the 19 per cent increase in gas prices, and a 10 per cent rise in the cost of electricity

Lord Turnbull demanded that politicians 'stop frightening us and our children' about global warming

The typical UK household spends £608 a year on gas and another £424 on electricity. Dr Peiser says green stealth taxes make up between £154 and £206 of that bill. For couples with large families - and large fuel demands - the figure is far higher.

‘And yet, despite the growing cost of these taxes, you won’t find any mention of them at all on your gas and electricity bills,’ he said.

‘That, of course, suits the Government down to the ground. If it raised the huge sums required to encourage renewable energy and limit carbon emission through general taxation it would make the Government itself very unpopular.

‘But by doing it through electricity and gas bills, the Government has cleverly ensure that it’s the power companies that take the blame.’

Under the Climate Change Act, the Government is legally bound to cut Britain’s C02 emissions by 34 per cent by 2020 and 50 per cent by 2025.

To meet its targets – the toughest in the world – the Government is encouraging the building of 10,000 wind turbines. It also wants power companies to install £7billion worth of smart meters in homes.

Government wants companies to install £7bn worth of smart meters in homes

The meters record precisely how much gas and electricity a household is using and show how much it is costing, hopefully encouraging households to use less energy.

The meters send this information back to the utility firm, making estimated bills unnecessary.

The drive for wind turbines is being subsidised by the Renewable Obligation – a scheme that forces power companies to buy a proportion of their energy from renewable sources such as wind.

The scheme artificially inflates the cost of coal, oil and gas power, and subsidises green power, making investment in costly wind farms profitable. The cost is passed on in fuel bills.

A second scheme, the European Emission Trading Scheme, forces energy companies and heavy industry to offset greenhouse gas emissions with ‘carbon credits’ – permits that allow them to generate a certain amount of carbon dioxide.

Energy companies and heavy industry can offset greenhouse gas emissions with 'carbon credits'

The scheme has been hit by scandals including tax fraud, the re-sale of used carbon credits and the theft of millions of emission permits.

Once industries have used up their free allocation of credits, they must buy them on the open market – inflating the cost of energy even more.

Bills are pushed up further by the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target – which forces suppliers to subsidise home insulation and new boilers.

Bills are also inflated by the Feed In Tariffs – a scheme that encourages homes and small businesses to install wind turbines and solar panels by guaranteeing a fixed, high price for electricity they sell to the National Grid.

Dr Peiser said: ‘The Government has to come clean and force the power companies to make their bills fully transparent.

‘Only then will it be possible to see if a power company has been raising its prices unfairly and change supplier. And only then will the true cost of the Government’s mad rush towards renewable energy become clear.’

DR. DAVID EVANS, CARBON MODELER, SAYS, "YOU'VE BEEN HAD" AT PERTH "CARBON TAX" PROTEST

Interview with Swiss banker reveals Bilderberg 2011 plans for internet CENSORSHIP ARE COMING

by NewWorldOrder on June 7, 2011

In an interview with a prominent Swiss banker by WeAreChange on the 30th of May 2011, the deeply interconnected relations between high level management of Swiss banks and the Bilderberg club are exposed. It becomes clear that Bilderberg uses Swiss banks for money laundering activities, funding of government overthrows, killings and bankrupting countries.

Josef Ackermann, CEO of Deutsche Bank and member of the Bilderberg steering committee, is named as one of the important figures with plans to censor the internet and shut down one of the last places where free speech interferes with their plans for complete control.

Find the full interview below:

Q: Can you tell us something about your involvement in the Swiss banking business?
A: I have worked for Swiss banks for many years. I was designated as one of the top directors of one of the biggest Swiss banks. During my work I was involved in the payment, in the direct payment in cash to a person who killed the president of a foreign country. I was in the meeting where it was decided to give this cash money to the killer. This gave me dramatic headaches and troubled my conscience. It was not the only case that was really bad but it was the worst.

It was a payment instruction on order of a foreign secret service written by hand giving the order to pay a certain amount to a person who killed the top leader of a foreign country. And it was not the only case. We received several such hand written letters coming from foreign secret services giving the order to payout cash from secret accounts to fund revolutions or for the killing of people. I can confirm what John Perkins has written in his book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”. There really exists just a system and Swiss banks are involved in such cases.

Q: Perkins book is also translated and available in Russian. Can you tell us which bank it is and who was responsible?
A: It was one of the top three Swiss banks at that time and it was the president of a country in the third world. But I don’t want to give out to many details because they will find me very easily if I say the name of the president and the name of the bank. I will risk my life.

Q: You can’t name any person in the bank either?
A: No I can’t, but I can assure you this happened. We were several persons in the meeting room. The person in charge of the physical payment of the cash came to us and asked us if he is allowed to payout such a big amount in cash to that person and one of the directors explained the case and all others said ok you can do it.

Q: Did this happened often? Was this kind of a slush fund?
A: Yes. This was a special fund managed in a special place in the bank were all the coded letters came in from abroad. The most important letters were hand written. We had to decipher them and in them was the order to pay a certain amount of cash from accounts for the assassination of people, funding revolutions, funding strikes, funding all sorts of parties. I know that certain people who are Bilderbergers were involved in such orders. I mean they gave the orders to kill.

Q: Can you tell us in what year or decade this happened?
A: I prefer not to give you the precise year but it was in the 80’s.

Q: Did you have a problem with this work?
A: Yes, a very big problem. I could not sleep for many days and after a while I left the bank. If I give you too many details they will trace me. Several secret services from abroad, mostly English speaking, gave orders to fund illegal acts, even the killing of people thru Swiss banks. We had to pay on the instructions of foreign powers for the killing of persons who did not follow the orders of Bilderberg or the IMF or the World Bank for example.

Q: This is a very startling revelation that you are making. Why do you feel the urge to say this now?
A: Because Bilderberg is meeting in Switzerland. Because the world situation is getting worse and worse. And because the biggest banks in Switzerland are involved in unethical activities. Most of these operations are outside the balance sheet. It is a multiple of what is officially declared. Its not audited and happening without any taxes. The figures involved have a lot of zeros. Its huge amounts.

Q: So its billions?
A: Its much more, its trillions, completely unaudited, illegal and besides the tax system. Basically it’s a robbery of everybody. I mean most normal people are paying taxes and abiding by the laws. What is happening here is complete against our Swiss values, like neutrality, honesty and good faith. In the meetings I was involved in, the discussions where completely against our democratic principles. You see, most of the directors of Swiss banks are not locals anymore, they are foreigners, mostly Anglo-Saxon, either American or British, they don’t respect our neutrality, they don’t respect our values, they are against our direct democracy, they just use the Swiss banks for their illegal means.

They use huge amounts of money created out of nothing and they destroy our society and destroy the people world wide just for greed. They seek power and destroy whole countries, like Greece, Spain, Portugal or Ireland and Switzerland will be one of the last in line. And they use China as working slaves. And a person like Josef Ackermann, who is a Swiss citizen, is the top man at a German bank and he uses his power for greed and does not respect the common people. He has quite a few legal cases in Germany and also now in the States. He is a Bilderberger and does not care about Switzerland or any other country.

Josef Ackermann, CEO of Deutsche Bank

Q: Are you saying, some of these people that you mention will be at the up-coming Bilderberg meeting in June in St. Moritz?
A: Yes.

Q: So they are currently in a position of power?
A: Yes. They have huge amounts of money available and use it to destroy whole countries. They destroy our industry and build it up in China. On the other hand they opened up the gates in Europe for all Chinese products. The working population of Europe is earning less and less. The real aim is to destroy Europe.

Q: Do you think that the Bilderberg meeting in St. Moritz has symbolic value? Because in 2009 they where in Greece, 2010 in Spain and look what happened to them. Does this mean Switzerland can expect something bad?
A: Yes. Switzerland is one of the most important countries for them, because there is so much capital here. They are meeting there because apart from other things they want to destroy all values that Switzerland stands for. You see it’s an obstacle for them, not being in the EU or Euro, not totally controlled by Brussels and so on. Regarding values I am not talking about the big Swiss banks, because they are not Swiss anymore, most of them are lead by Americans. I am talking about the real Swiss spirit that the common people cherish and hold up.

Sure it has symbolic value, as you said, regarding Greece and Spain. Their aim is to be a kind of exclusive elite club that has all the power and everybody else is impoverished and down.

Q: Do you think that the aim of Bilderberg is to create a kind of global dictatorship, controlled by the big global corporations, were there are no sovereign states anymore?
A: Yes and Switzerland is the only place left with direct democracy and its in their way. They use the blackmail of “too big to fail” as in the case of UBS to put our country in big debt, just like they did with many other countries. In the end maybe they want to do with Switzerland what they did with Iceland, with all the banks and the country bankrupt.

Q: And also bring it in to the EU?
A: Of course. The EU is under the iron grip of Bilderberg.

Q: What do you think could stop this plan?
A: Well that’s the reason I speak to you. Its truth. Truth is the only way. Put a light on this situation, expose them. They don’t like to be in the spotlight. We have to create transparency in the banking industry and in all levels of society.

Q: What you are saying is, there is a correct side to the Swiss banking business and there are a few big banks that are misusing the financial system for their illegal activities.
A: Yes. The big banks are training their staff with Anglo-Saxon values. They are training them to be greedy and ruthless. And greed is destroying Switzerland and everybody else. As a country we have a majority of the most correct operating banks in the world, if you look at the small and midsize banks. Its just the big ones who operate globally that are a problem. They are not Swiss anymore and don’t consider themselves as such.

Q: Do you think it is a good thing that people are exposing Bilderberg and showing who they really are?
A: I think the Strauss-Kahn case is a good chance for us, because it shows these people are corrupt, sick in their minds, so sick they are full of vices and those vices are kept under wraps on their orders. Some of them like Strauss-Kahn rape women, others are sado maso, or pedophile and many are into Satanism. When you go in some banks you see these Satanist symbols, like in the Rothschild Bank in Zurich. These people are controlled by black-mail because of the weaknesses they have. They have to follow orders or they will be exposed, they will be destroyed or even killed. The reputation of Strauss-Kahn is not only killed in the mass media, he could be killed also literally.

Q: Since Ackermann is in the steering committee of Bilderberg, do you think he is a big decision maker there?
A: Yes. But there are many others, like Lagarde, wo will probably be the next IMF head, also a member of Bilderberg, then Sarkozy and Obama. They have a new plan to censor the internet, because the internet is still free. They want to control it and use terrorism or what ever as a reason. They could even plan something horrible so that they have an excuse.

Internet censorship is coming

Q: So that is your fear?
A: Its not only a fear, I am certain of it. As I said, they gave orders to kill, so they are capable of terrible things. If they have the feeling they are losing control, like the uprising now in Greece and Spain and maybe Italy will be next, then they can do another Gladio. I was close to the Gladio network. As you know they instigated terrorism paid by American money to control the political system in Italy and other European countries. Regarding the murder of Aldo Moro, the payment was done thru the same system as I told you about.

Q: Was Ackermann part of this payment system at a Swiss bank?
A: (S m i l e) … you are the journalist. Look at his career and how fast he made it to the top.

Q: What do you think can be done to hinder them?
A: Well there are many good books out there that explain the background and connect the dots, like the one I mentioned by Perkins. These people really have hit men that get paid to kill. Some of them get their money thru Swiss banks. But not only, they have a system set up all over the world. And to expose to the public these people that are prepared to do anything to keep control. And I mean anything.

Q: Thru exposure we could stop them?
A: Yes, telling the truth. We are confronted with really ruthless criminals, also big war criminals. Its worse then genocide. They are ready and able to kill millions of people just to stay in power and in control.

Q: Can you explain from your view, why the mass media in the west is more or less completely silent regarding Bilderberg?
A: Because there is an agreement between them and the owners of the media. You don’t talk about it. They buy them. Also some of the top media figures are invited to the meetings but are told not to report anything they see and hear.

Q: In the structure of Bilderberg, is there an inner circle that knows the plans and then there is the majority who just follow orders?
A: Yes. You have the inner circle who are into Satanism and then there are the naive or less informed people. Some people even think they are doing something good, the outer circle.

Q: According to exposed documents and own statements, Bilderberg decided back in 1955 to create the EU and the Euro, so they made important and far reaching decisions.
A: Yes and you know that Bilderberg was founded by Prince Bernard, a former member of the SS and Nazi party and he also worked for IG Farben, who’s subsidiary produced Cyclone B. The other guy was the head of Occidental Petroleum who had close relations to the communists in the Sowjetunion. They worked both sides but really these people are fascists who want to control everything and everybody and who gets in their way is removed.

Q: Is the payment system you explained outside of normal operations, compartmentalized and in secret?
A: In those Swiss banks the normal employees don’t know this is happening. Its like an own secret department in the bank. As I said these operations are outside of the balance sheet, with no supervision. Some are situated in the same building, others are outside. They have their own security and special area where only authorized people can enter.

Q: How do they keep these transactions out of the international Swift system?
A: Well some of the Clearstream listings where true in the beginning. They just included fake names to make people believe the whole list is fake. You see they also make mistakes. The first list was true and you can trace a lot of things. You see, there are people around that discover irregularities and the truth and they tell it. Afterwards of course there are law suits and these people are forced to shut up.

The best way to stop them is to tell the truth, put the spot light on them. If we don’t stop them we will end up as their slaves.

Q: Thanks you for this interview.

Full Credits go to WeAreChange

http://bilderberg2011.com/bilderberg-agenda/interview-with-swiss-banker-reveals-bilderberg-2011-plans-for-internet-censorship-are-coming/

TERROR ATTACK THREATENS MULTICULTURALISM

AAPJune 7, 2011

A terrorist attack in Australia would significantly damage the country's vibrant multicultural community, federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland says.

While the threat of terrorism was small, an attack would be extremely damaging to community harmony, Mr McClelland said on Tuesday.

He was speaking at a conference about the decade since the attacks of September 11, 2001, hosted by the United States Studies Centre in Sydney.

Australia had not been immune to the planning and activities of violent extremists in the past ten years, Mr McClelland said.

"Since 2000, there have been four major terrorist plots disrupted in Australia," he said.

In that time, 23 people had been convicted on charges relating to terrorism plots and 38 had been charged.

"Significantly, 37 of the 38 people prosecuted are Australian citizens and 21 of the 38 were born in Australia.

"For this reason, the government has focused on the risk of vulnerable individuals in Australia becoming radicalised to the point of being willing to use violence."

Mr McClelland mentioned the US government's belief that the country's 'melting pot' culture meant it was immune to recruiters trying to radicalise American citizens.

"We too in Australia have a vibrant multicultural community and those who would commit extreme acts are very small ... they are active but fortunately very small," he said.

"But the damage they could do, not only to our physical environment - and of course loss of life and injury would be a tragedy - but what they would do to that community harmony and that vibrant multicultural community would be another thing altogether."

Addressing the causes of radicalisation leading to violent extremism was a priority for the federal government, Mr McClelland said.

A unit in the attorney-general's department was dedicated to engage with community leaders "from a range of religious, ethnic and cultural backgrounds", he said.

These community leaders had expressed concern that they had "the most to lose" in the event of a terrorist attack.

Since 2001, the Australian government had increased the national security budget from $18 billion to $33 billion, he added.

WAR IN PAKISTAN: CHINESE ULTIMATUM WARNS WASHINGTON AGAINST ATTACK

US, PAKISTAN NEAR OPEN WAR; CHINESE ULTIMATUM WARNS WASHINGTON AGAINST ATTACK

Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
TARPLEY.net
May 20, 2011

China has officially put the United States on notice that Washington’s planned attack on Pakistan will be interpreted as an act of aggression against Beijing. This blunt warning represents the first known strategic ultimatum received by the United States in half a century, going back to Soviet warnings during the Berlin crisis of 1958-1961, and indicates the grave danger of general war growing out of the US-Pakistan confrontation.

“Any Attack on Pakistan Would be Construed as an Attack on China”

Responding to reports that China has asked the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty in the aftermath of the Bin Laden operation, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu used a May 19 press briefing to state Beijing’s categorical demand that the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan must be respected.” According to Pakistani diplomatic sources cited by the Times of India, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China.” This ultimatum was reportedly delivered at the May 9 China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, where the Chinese delegation was led by Vice Prime Minister Wang Qishan and State Councilor Dai Bingguo.¹ Chinese warnings are implicitly backed up by that nation’s nuclear missiles, including an estimated 66 ICBMs, some capable of striking the United States, plus 118 intermediate-range missiles, 36 submarine-launched missiles, and numerous shorter-range systems.

Support from China is seen by regional observers as critically important for Pakistan, which is otherwise caught in a pincers between the US and India: “If US and Indian pressure continues, Pakistan can say ‘China is behind us. Don’t think we are isolated, we have a potential superpower with us,’” Talat Masood, a political analyst and retired Pakistani general, told AFP.²

The Chinese ultimatum came during the visit of Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani in Beijing, during which the host government announced the transfer of 50 state-of-the-art JF-17 fighter jets to Pakistan, immediately and without cost.³ Before his departure, Gilani had stressed the importance of the Pakistan-China alliance, proclaiming: “We are proud to have China as our best and most trusted friend. And China will always find Pakistan standing beside it at all times….When we speak of this friendship as being taller than the Himalayas and deeper than the oceans it truly captures the essence of our relationship.”⁴ These remarks were greeted by whining from US spokesmen, including Idaho Republican Senator Risch.

The simmering strategic crisis between the United States and Pakistan exploded with full force on May 1, with the unilateral and unauthorized US commando raid alleged to have killed the phantomatic Osama bin Laden in a compound at Abottabad, a flagrant violation of Pakistan’s national sovereignty. The timing of this military stunt designed to inflame tensions between the two countries had nothing to do with any alleged Global War on Terror, and everything to do with the late March visit to Pakistan of Prince Bandar, the Saudi Arabian National Security Council chief. This visit had resulted in a de facto alliance between Islamabad and Riyadh, with Pakistan promising troops to put down any US-backed color revolution in the kingdom, while extending nuclear protection to the Saudis, thus making them less vulnerable to US extortion threats to abandon the oil-rich monarchy to the tender mercies of Tehran. A joint move by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to break out of the US empire, whatever one may think of these regimes, would represent a fatal blow for the fading US empire in South Asia.

As for the US claims concerning the supposed Bin Laden raid of May 1, they are a mass of hopeless contradictions which changes from day to day. An analysis of this story is best left to literary critics and writers of theatrical reviews. The only solid and uncontestable fact which emerges is that Pakistan is the leading US target — thus intensifying the anti-Pakistan US policy which has been in place since Obama’s infamous December 2009 West Point speech.

Gilani: Full Force Retaliation to Defend Pakistan’s Strategic Assets

The Chinese warning to Washington came on the heels of Gilani’s statement to the Pakistan Parliament declaring: “Let no one draw any wrong conclusions. Any attack against Pakistan’s strategic assets, whether overt or covert, will find a matching response…. Pakistan reserves the right to retaliate with full force. No one should underestimate the resolve and capability of our nation and armed forces to defend our sacred homeland.”⁵ A warning of full force retaliation from a nuclear power such as Pakistan needs to be taken seriously, even by the hardened aggressors of the Obama regime.

The strategic assets Gilani is talking about are the Pakistani nuclear forces, the key to the country’s deterrent strategy against possible aggression by India, egged on by Washington in the framework of the US-India nuclear cooperation accord. The US forces in Afghanistan have not been able to conceal their extensive planning for attempts to seize or destroy Pakistan’s nuclear bombs and warheads. According to a 2009 Fox News report, “The United States has a detailed plan for infiltrating Pakistan and securing its mobile arsenal of nuclear warheads if it appears the country is about to fall under the control of the Taliban, Al Qaeda or other Islamic extremists.” This plan was developed by General Stanley McChrystal when he headed the US Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. JSOC, the force reportedly involved in the Bin Laden operation. is composed of Army Delta Force, Navy SEALs and “a high-tech special intelligence unit known as Task Force Orange.” “Small units could seize [Pakistan’s nukes], disable them, and then centralize them in a secure location,” claimed a source quoted by Fox.⁶

Obama Has Already Approved Sneak Attack on Pakistan’s Nukes

According to the London Sunday Express, Obama has already approved an aggressive move along these lines: “US troops will be deployed in Pakistan if the nation’s nuclear installations come under threat from terrorists out to avenge the killing of Osama Bin Laden… The plan, which would be activated without President Zardari’s consent, provoked an angry reaction from Pakistan officials… Barack Obama would order troops to parachute in to protect key nuclear missile sites. These include the air force’s central Sargodha HQ, home base for nuclear-capable F-16 combat aircraft and at least 80 ballistic missiles.” According to a US official, “The plan is green lit and the President has already shown he is willing to deploy troops in Pakistan if he feels it is important for national security.”⁷

Extreme tension over this issue highlights the brinksmanship and incalculable folly of Obama’s May 1 unilateral raid, which might easily have been interpreted by the Pakistanis as the long-awaited attack on their nuclear forces. According to the New York Times, Obama knew very well he was courting immediate shooting war with Pakistan, and “insisted that the assault force hunting down Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to fight its way out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police officers and troops.”

The Shooting Has Already Started

The shooting between US and Pakistani forces escalated on Tuesday May 17, when a US NATO helicopter violated Pakistani airspace in Waziristan. Pakistani forces showed heightened alert status, and opened fire immediately, with the US helicopter shooting back. Two soldiers at a Pakistani check post on the border in the Datta Khel area were wounded.⁸

Possible Pakistani retaliation for this border incursion came in Peshawar on Friday, May 20, when a car bomb apparently targeted a 2-car US consulate convoy, but caused no American deaths or injuries. One Pakistani bystander was killed, and several wounded. In other intelligence warfare, Ary One television reported the name of the CIA station chief in Islamabad, the second top US resident spook there to have his cover blown in six months.

US Envoy Grossman Rejects Pakistani Calls To Stop Border Violations

US Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman, the replacement for the late Richard Holbrooke, on May 19 arrogantly rejected Pakistani calls for guarantees that no more Abottabad-style unilateral operations would be mounted in Pakistan.⁹ In refusing to offer such assurances, Grossman claimed that Pakistani officials had never demanded respect for their border in recent years.¹⁰

In the midst of this strategic crisis, India has gone ahead with inherently provocative scheduled military maneuvers targeting Pakistan. This is the “Vijayee Bhava” (Be Victorious) drill, held in the Thar desert of north Rajastan,. This atomic-biological-chemical Blitzkrieg drill involves the Second Armored Corps, “considered to be the most crucial of the Indian Army’s three principal strike formations tasked with virtually cutting Pakistan in two during a full-fledged war.”¹¹

The Nation: A CIA-RAW-Mossad Pseudo-Taliban Countergang

One way to provide the provocation needed to justify a US-Indian attack on Pakistan would be through an increase in terrorist actions attributable to the so-called Taliban. According to the mainstream Pakistani media, the CIA, the Israeli Mossad, and the Indian RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) have created their own version of the Taliban in the form of a terrorist countergang which they control and direct. According to one account, “Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives have infiltrated the Taliban and Al-Qaeda networks, and have created their own Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) force in order to destabilize Pakistan.” The former Punjab Regional Commander of the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), retired Brigadier General Aslam Ghuman, commented: “During my visit to the US, I learned that the Israeli spy agency Mossad, in connivance with Indian agency RAW, under the direct supervision of CIA, planned to destabilize Pakistan at any cost.”¹² Was this countergang responsible for last week’s double bombing in Waziristan, which killed 80 paramilitary police?

According to the same account, Russian intelligence “disclosed that CIA contractor Raymond Davis and his network had provided Al-Qaeda operatives with chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, so that US installations may be targeted and Pakistan be blamed….” Davis, a JSOC veteran himself, was arrested for the murder of two ISI agents, but then released by the Pakistani government after a suspicious hue and cry by the State Department.

CIA Claims The New Al Qaeda Boss Lives in Waziristan

If the US needs a further pretext for additional raids, it will also be easy to cite the alleged presence in Waziristan of Saif al-Adel, now touted by the CIA as bin Laden’s likely successor as boss of al Qaeda.¹³ It is doubtless convenient for Obama’s aggressive intentions that Saif al-Adel can be claimed to reside so close to what is now the hottest border in the world, and not in Finsbury or Flatbush.

In the wake of the unauthorized May 1 US raid, the Pakistani military chief General Kayani had issued his own warning that similar “misadventures” could not be repeated, while announcing that US personnel inside Pakistan would be sharply reduced. In the estimate of one ISI source, there are currently about 7,000 CIA operatives in country, many of them unknown to the Pakistani government. US-Pakistan intelligence sharing has reportedly been downgraded. In response to Kayani’s moves, the CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks once again showed its real nature by attempting to discredit the Pakistan commander with dubious US cable reports that he had demanded more Predator drone attacks, not fewer, in recent years.

Especially since Obama’s West Point speech, the CIA has used Predator drone attacks to slaughter civilians with the goal of fomenting civil war inside Pakistan, leading to a breakup of the country along the ethnic lines of Punjab, Sind, Baluchistan, and Pushtunistan. The geopolitical goal is to destroy Pakistan’s potential to be the energy corridor between Iran and China. Selig Harrison has emerged as a top US advocate for Baluchistan succession.

Since May 1, six reported US Predator drones attacks have slain some 42 Pakistani civilians, goading public opinion into a frenzy of anti-US hatred. In response, a joint session of the Pakistani parliament voted unanimously on May 14 to demand an end to American missile strikes, calling on the government to cut NATO’s supply line to Afghanistan if the attacks should continue.¹⁴ Since the Karachi to Khyber Pass supply line carries as much as two thirds of the supplies needed by the Afghanistan invaders, such a cutoff would cause chaos among the NATO forces. All of this points to the inherent insanity of provoking war with the country your supply line runs through.

US Wants to Use Taliban Boss Mullah Omar Against Pakistan

The State Department dropped all preconditions for negotiating with the Taliban back in February, and the US is now reported by the Washington Post to be talking with envoys of Mullah Omar, the legendary one-eyed leader of the Quetta Shura or Taliban ruling council. It is apparent that the US is offering the Taliban an alliance against Pakistan. US regional envoy Grossman is hostile to the Pakistanis, but when it comes to the Taliban he has been nicknamed “Mr. Reconciliation.”¹⁵ By contrast, the US is said to be determined to assassinate the head of the Haqqani network using a Bin Laden-type raid. The Pakistanis are equally determined to keep the Haqqani as an ally.

If China stands behind Pakistan, then Russia might be said to stand behind China. Looking forward to the upcoming June 15 meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Chinese President Hu praised Sino-Russian relations as being “at an unprecedented high point,” with an “obvious strategic ingredient.” In a press conference this week, Russian President Medvedev was obliged indirectly to acknowledge that the much-hyped Obama “reset” with Russia had amounted to very little, since the US ABM missile program in Romania and the rest of eastern Europe, so obviously directed against Russia, means that the START treaty is of dubious value, thus raising the specter of a “new Cold War.” Given the NATO assault on Libya, there would be no UN resolution against Syria, said Medvedev. Putin has been right all along, and Medvedev is trying to imitate Putin to salvage some chance of remaining in power.

Are We in July 1914?

The crisis leading to World War I began with the Sarajevo assassinations of June 28, 1914, but the first major declaration of war did not occur until August 1. In the interim month of July 1914, large parts of European public opinion retreated into a dreamlike trance, an idyllic la-la land of elegiac illusion, even as the deadly crisis gathered momentum. Something similar can be seen today. Many Americans fondly imagine that the alleged death of Bin Laden marks the end of the war on terror and the Afghan War. Instead, the Bin Laden operation has clearly ushered in a new strategic emergency. Forces which had opposed the Iraq war, from MSNBC to many left liberals of the peace movement, are variously supporting Obama’s bloody aggression in Libya, or even celebrating him as a more effective warmonger than Bush-Cheney because of his supposed success at the expense of Bin Laden. In reality, if there were ever a time to mobilize to stop a new and wider war, this is it.

---

References

¹ http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/china-asks-us-to-respect-paks-sovereignty-independence/articleshow/8454577.cms

² “China-Pakistan alliance strengthened post bin Laden,” AFP, May 15, 2011,http://www.sundaytimes.lk/index.php/analysis/7546-china-pakistan-alliance-strengthened-post-bin-laden

³ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=3

⁴ http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/05/08/Gilani-China-best-most-trusted-friend/UPI-96101304911435/

⁵http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/pakistani_pm_regrets_unilateral_GAOWNTpBXGJaJtwzWaZu0K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=

⁶ Rowan Scarborough,”U.S. Has Plan to Secure Pakistan Nukes if Country Falls to Taliban, Fox News, May 14, 2009.

⁷ “US ‘To Protect Pakistan,” London Sunday Express, May 15, 2011,http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/246717/US-to-protect-Pakistan-

⁸ http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/17/us-pakistan-nato-idUSTRE74G0PS20110517

⁹ “US refuses to assure it will not act unilaterally,”http://thenews.jang.com.pk/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=15758

¹⁰ “No US assurance on unilateral ops,” http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/20-May-2011/No-US-assurance-on-unilateral-ops

¹¹ “Getting leaner and meaner? Army practices blitzkrieg to strike hard at enemy,” Times of India, May 10, 2011, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-05-10/india/29527731_1_three-strike-corps-army-and-iaf-transformational

¹² “CIA has created own Taliban to wreak terror havoc on Pakistan, claims Pak paper,” ANI, May 12, http://my.news.yahoo.com/cia-created-own-taliban-wreak-terror-havoc-pakistan-091621821.html

¹³ “New al-Qaeda chief in North Waziristan,” May 19, 2011

¹⁴ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43033985/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

¹⁵ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8519535/US-steps-up-face-to-face-peace-talks-with-Taliban.html