The inflammatory statement that Israel should be "wiped off the map" attributed to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, "was never made" by him, a distinguished Canadian economist says. In a recently released book, entitled: Towards A World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War. To begin with, says Professor Michel Chossudovsky of the University of Ottawa, the words were not those of Ahmadinejad, when he uttered them on October 25, 2005. Rather, he was quoting the late Ayatollah Khomeini, and the point of Khomeinis thrust was not to wipe Israel, the nation,"off the map", but to change the Israeli regime, which is far different. "The rumor was fabricated by the American media with a view to discredit Iran's head of state and providing a justification for waging an all-out war on Iran," Chossudovsky writes. Examining the actual quote word by word, Ahmadinejad said in Farsi: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." Readers will recognize the word "rezhim-e" which translates into English as "regime" and will note that the word "Israel" does not appear in the quotation. What Ahmadinejad did use was the specific phrase "rezhim-e" which is a reference to "the regime occupying Jerusalem." As for wiping Israel "off the map," the word "map" is "nagsheh," and it was not contained anywhere in Ahmadinejad's speech. "Nor was the western phrase wipe off ever mentioned," Chossudovsky writes. "Yet we are led to believe that Irans President threatened to wipe Israel off the map, despite never having uttered the words map, wipe out, or even Israel." The full Ahmadinejad quote translateddirectly into English is "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time!
A NATO airstrike in the eastern Afghan province of Logar has killed 18 people, including women and children, local officials report. A NATO spokesperson said a team had been deployed to investigate the claims of civilian casualties. Local officials said on Wednesday that the pre dawn strike on a house in eastern Logar province killed five women, seven children and six men, some of whom may have been militants. AFP news agency also released a photo with victims piled into the back of a vehicle. Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai issued a statement on Thursday, saying all 18 people killed in a NATO air strike on Wednesday were civilians. The Afghan president has called the incident "unacceptable." NATO forces insist that at least some of the victims were militants and have sent an assessment team to investigate the case. Local villagers are now reportedly driving the bodies to the capital of Logar province to protest the NATO strike, which they say hit a house in the district of Baraki Barak. ISAF released a statement, confirming a pre-dawn operation aimed at the capture of a Taliban leader in Logar. "During the operation, insurgents attacked the Afghan and coalition troops with small-arms fire and a grenade," said the NATO statement. In response, alliance forces "returned fire and requested a precision airstrike." Meanwhile, multiple blasts killed 22 people and wounded at least 50 others, as three suicide bombers blew themselves up in the southern city of Kandahar on Wednesday. One bomber detonated a three-wheeled motorbike filled with explosives,police said. Then, as people rushed to assist the wounded, two other bombers walked up to the scene and blew themselves up. The attack took place about five kilometers from the main gate of a massive military installation run by NATO, and some 500 meters from an Afghan military base.
Hold the phone, anti-war activists. President Obama says that American troops are done with Operation Iraqi Freedom and their episode in Afghanistan is almost over. Now, though, it looks like the US is calling its operation in Pakistan an actual war. Only one day after American officials announced that US troops executed an alleged al-Qaeda higher-up with a drone strike in Pakistan, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters on Wednesday that America's fair-weather ally is indeed serving as a battlefront in the War on Terror. "We are fighting a war in the FATA, we are fighting a war against terrorism," Secretary Panetta said this week. Panetta was referring to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, a region in northwest Pakistan that is currently the scene of American airstrikes. Since well before the top-secret raid and execution of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden brought US troops into Pakistan, the American military has tried time and time again to sugarcoat its activities overseas. Despite being an at-one-time top ally of the United States, Pakistani officials have continuously condemned the US over Uncle Sam's continuing air strikes with unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones. Now, after years of trying to re-develop those deteriorating ties with Pakistan, the United States' top military man flatly called his country's operations in FATA an actual war. To put it simply, this might not be good news for anyone. While Panetta's comment came only a day after the Pentagon confirmed that al-Qaeda's "number-two in command," Abu Yahya al-Libi,was executed with a drone strike in the FATA region, it also coincides, coincidently, with a statement made by another former CIA official. Robert Greiner, the one-time head of the CIA's counter-terrorism center, tells reporters this week that America's mishandling of drone attacks is creating a safe haven for terrorists.
A newly discovered United States military document appears to outline an already underway comprehensive drone program within the United States that includes sections on "Target Training" and "Force Protection". Obama loves those drones. He has made them a personal priority above all else. The question that is also the answer to so much of this then -is WHY? So having Obama so oddly focused, not just focused, he gets excited visually. The guy gets off on it and he ain't even hiding that fact anymore, but some are repulsed by it. They've done video reviews you know, of the missions. The drones. The kills. The president you mean? He watches videos of the drone attacks? Yeah, like it was, like it was porn. I can't emphasize. I don't think I'm painting a clear enough picture here for you of how this thing has people really freaking out inside the administration. It's good on one hand, because it's got more of them willing to talk, but the fact it's gotten this bad, these drones, an American president who has the video sent up to his personal study so he can watch them over and over again. As I said, it was like porn. I can't emphasize. I don't think I'm painting a clear enough picture for you how this thing has people really freaking out inside the administration. It's good on one hand because it's got more of them willing to talk, but the fact is it's gotten this bad!
A shocking new tactic is emerging on the battlefield in the War on Terror, which involves first bombing targets, which is then followed by the bombing of first responders attempting to help the victims of first bombings, and then finally bombing the funeral were people are gathering to mourn the victims. Obama's new tactic of targeting funerals and first responders attempting to help the victims of first bombings, and then finally bombing the funeral where people are gathering to mourn the victims. Obama's new tactic of targeting funerals and first responders was first revealed in a shocking report from The Bureau of Investigative Journalism in February. At that time the tactic of bombing funerals or first aid responders was first revealed in a shocking report from The Bureau of Investigative Journalism in February. At that time, the tactic of bombing funerals or first aid responders was known only to have been used separately from each other. The three-day bombing spree, that started this Saturday in Pakistan establishes a pattern in which the repeated use of these tactics in conjunction with an attempt to flush out a single target from hiding. The bombings so far are confirmed to have killed at least 27 people and started with two separate attacks. The first was the dropping of 6 bombs on two individuals said riding a motor bike. The second attack involved bombing a mosque during worship, in an attack that destroyed nearby houses, which followed multiple strikes on homes the previous day. When police and first responders attempt to retrieve the wounded from the wreckage, they were bombed. When private gatherings to mourn the dead were held, the public funeral was bombed by the Americans, and those gatherings were bombed as well.
At the end of World War Two, German army generals denied any knowledge of the Holocaust and the massive atrocities committed on the Eastern front. They were lying. Between 1942 and 1945, British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) recorded no fewer than 64,427 private conversations between captured German generals and other senior officers while held in the comfortable accommodations of Trent Park house in the north London suburb of Cockfosters. As it turned out, the conversations were only of limited usefulness toward the conduct of the war, but they did supply a wealth of information on the nature of the Nazi regime and the actions and opinions of the highest ranking officers in the German military. Sonke Neitzel, a professor at the University of Manz, has edited a volume of key extracts from the tape-recorded discussions, "Tapping Hitler's Generals. Transcripts of Secret Conversations 1942-45." Over the three years during which the recordings were made, the mass murder of Jews, the shooting of hostages, the burning down of churches filled with victims and a range of other war crimes against Russian and Ukrainian civilians are acknowledged and described. There is no longer any doubt about the complicity of the German general staff in some of the most horrendous atrocities of the 20th century. Why did they do it? Contrary to the conventional wisdom, many German officers favored the rise of Adolf Hitler because he promised to increase their own power and prestige. Not surprisingly, the subsequent reluctance of German generals to challenge Hitler's atrocities stemmed largely, not from fear, but from the risk of losing that power and prestige.
The secretary of the Russian Security Council has warned against the consequences of an Israeli strike on Iran, calling for the resumption of talks over Tehran's nuclear energy program. Nikolai Patrushev told the Rossiya-24 TV channel on Tuesday that the consequences of a military attack on Iran will be "absolutely negative" for Israel and many neighboring countries. He urged the international community to continue negotiations with Iran, rejecting claims that diplomacy has been exhausted over the Iranian nuclear issue. It is wrong to conclude that all opportunities and all the existing potential have been exhausted. Negotiations should continue, Patrushev said. The Russian official also said that Moscow acknowledged Tehran's right to develop peaceful nuclear energy. This comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday blasted Western powers for faling to halt Iran's nuclear energy program. Netanyahu said that the demands that the P5+1 placed on Iran during the recent negotiations were inadequate. "The Iranians were only asked to stop 20 percent enrichment of uranium. That doesn't stop their nuclear program in any way. It actually allows them to continue their nuclear program," he said. Iran and the P5+1, Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States plus Germany, wrapped up their latest meeting in Baghdad on May 24 after two days of negotiations. Both sides agreed to hold another round of talks in Moscow on June 18-19. A day before the latest round of the talks in Baghdad, Netanyahu had urged the world powers in the P5+1 group to "show determination, not weakness" and take a tougher stance on Iran. Israel has repeatedly threatened Iran wit a military option in a bid to force the Islamic Republic to halt its peaceful nuclear program, which has been closely monitored by inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The Chicago Summit sealed the withdrawal plan of the US/NATO/ISAF from Afghanistan. Although all present there tried to put up a very brave face, yet it was obvious to all and sundry that the US/NATO/ISAF combine was leaving the Afghan Theater of War, but hardly as victors! Victors in war have a different body language and a certain spring in their gait. None was apparent in Chicago and least of all among Americans. They appeared to be embittered, frustrated, irritated, agitated, angry, fuming, writhing in some sort of internal agony. It came across as the pain of defeat, of failure. They seemed to be in too big a hurry to bring this colossal misadventure to a close. ASAP. Anyone, read Pakistan, who was not playing ball or helping an orderly retreat from the region was unceremoniously and summarily snubbed and sidelined! The Afghan campaign has been a resounding failure for the US and its coterie of submissive allies. Its failure has been epitomized by not only whittling down of the Afghan campaign's strategic aims and objectives but also by an unseemly desire to egress from the region. The failures of this sorry Afghan campaign are multifaceted: Geopolitical Failure: By occupying the Central position in the region, the US had intended to contain China, sit at the under-belly of the Central Asian Republics and by implication Russia's, and deny them all an approach to oil rich Iran, the ME, the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf. By its departure by 2014, these grand objectives will go even further beyond reach: The US has also failed to install India as its regional plenipotentiary in Afghanistan!
A team of anthropologists found a mysterious burial in the jungle near the city of Kigali Rwanda (Central Africa). The remains belong to gigantic creatures that bear little resemblance to humans. Head of research group believes that they could be visitors from another planet who died as a result of a catastrophe. According to the scientists, they were buried at least 500 years ago. At first, researchers thought that they came across the remains of ancient settlements, but no signs of human life have been found nearby. The 40 communal graves had approximately 200 bodies in them, all perfectly preserved. The creatures were tall, approximately 7 feet. Their heads were disproportionately large and they had no mouth, nose or eyes. The anthropologists believe that the creatures were members of an alien landing, possibly destroyed by some terrestrial virus to which they had no immunity. However, no traces of the landing of the spacecraft or its fragments were discovered. This is not the first such finding: In the summer of 1937, a group of Chinese scientists led by Professor Chi Putei surveyed the caves of Mount Bayan-Kara-Ula. Inside they found skeletons with excessively large heads and puny bodies. Nearby there were 176 stone plates. In the center of each plate there was a hole from which a spiral groove spread out to the perimeter with some characters on it. In addition, the cave walls were covered with pictures of the rising sun, moon and stars, with many painted dots or small items, slowly approaching the mountains and the earth's surface.
In an opinion piece for DW's Transatlantic Voices column, James K Galbraith argues that neither growth nor austerity are the right remedies for the euro-zone crisis. Instead, the focus should be on solidarity. James K Galbraith holds the Lloyd M Bentsen Jr. Chair in Government-Business Relations at the Lyndon B Johnson School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin. His most recent book is Inequality and Instability: A Study of the World Economy Just Before the Great Crisis (Oxford University Press). The austerity moment is passing. Britain's double-dip recession and Europe's 11 percent unemployment show where austerity leads. Public protests in Greece and Spain show the suffering it causes. Political upheaval, so far in France, shows that electorates will not tolerate it for long. Now fashionable opinion offers the "growth" alternative. Growth means higher profits, better wages and more jobs. What a fine idea. The problem, though, is that growth is only a goal. It is not a policy. And every lobbyist, political hack and 10-cent crank has a strategy to make growth happen. The details consist of whatever it was they most wanted beforehand. Thus the American rich urge tax cuts as a "growth strategy." European employers urge "labor market reform," depending on whom you ask. The most adept American thinkers favor both: Stimulus now and consolidation later. In this way they can embrace cuts in pensions and health care as part of a "strategy for growth." Neither here nor there! This is nonsense and most people see that clearly. If austerity was a deceit, growth is a chimera!i
Against the background of frightening statements that sound from Western and Israeli politicians about the imminent attack on Iran, an active war in the economic area has been ongoing. In early January of 2012, news agencies spread the message that Tehran and Moscow abandoned transactions in dollars and euros in favor of rubles and Rials. Note that this decision was made after the sudden drop of the Iranian Rial value in January, by more than one third, in relation to the US dollar. According to Tehran officials, this was due to the machinations of the West and anti-Iranian hysteria. Following this development, international interbank transfer system of information and payments SWIFT used for financial interaction between Western and Iranian companies has ceased its work in the Islamic Republic. Despite these significant and seemingly purely economic things Westerners talk openly, the next steps against Iran are due to the desire to further punish Tehran for its nuclear program. What consequences will there be for Iran? Is Russia able to really help to minimize the costs of termination of SWIFT? Ivan Rodionov, professor at the Institute of Economics, shared his thoughts in an interview with "Pravda.Ru". First, if we talk about the fact that Tehran and Moscow could abandon transactions in dollars and euros, unfortunately this is something of a PR nature and is more a political gesture. It is unlikely that they will be able to completely switch to the Ruble and Rial. Several issues should be considered: We are sellers, and the market is determined by the buyer. The latter has the obligation in terms of purchase of the national currency. It looks pretty and is good for PR, but it cannot have any economic sense because commissions will consume all possible benefits!
Don't visit Gaza by sea. In May 2010, nine Mavi Marmara activists died trying. Anyone planning Gaza, West Bank, or East Jerusalem trips be warned. Interdictions, beatings, arrests, interrogations, detentions, or even death may follow. Israel's indeed dangerous. Arrivals supporting Palestinian rights risk harshness. Don't come wearing jerseys or bearing signs saying "solidarity with Palestine". Don't say you plan West Bank East Jerusalem, and/or Gaza visits. Worse is admitting you'll help build schools, plant trees, or repair damaged wells. Don't suggest you plan protesting against illegal settlement construction. If asked, don't tell! Any one or combination of these may result in close encounters with security forces leaving lasting impressions and realization that avoiding trouble requires staying mum: On April 14, Danish activist Andreas Ias learned the hard way: Jordan Valley Brigade deputy commander Lt Colonel Shalom Eisner rifle-butted him in the face. Hospitalization followed. His offense was peacefully participating in a Palestinian demonstration. He and others were singing songs calling for Palestine's liberation. The incident was videotaped. On April 16, Andreas said IDF claims about protester violence were "a complete lie. If I thought this would happen, I would have protected myself. It came out of nowhere" for no reason. It was unprovoked. Two female activists were also injured. Others were assaulted and shoved to the ground. Rarely do investigations and punishment follow similar incidents. Practically never for IDF officers, especially high-ranking ones!!
The US is facing a $15 trillion national debt, and there is no shortage of opinions about how to move toward deficit reduction in the federal budget. One topic you will not hear discussed very often on Capitol Hill is the idea of ending one of the oldest American welfare programs, the extraordinary amount of corporate welfare going to the nuclear energy industry. Many in Congress talk of getting "big government off the back of private industry". Here's an industry we'd like to get off the backs of taxpayers. As,respectively, a senator who is the longest-serving independent in Congress and the president of an independent and non-partisan budget watchdog organization, we do not necessarily agree on everything when it comes to energy and budget policy in the US. But one thing we strongly agree on is the need to end wasteful subsidies that prop up the nuclear industry. After 60 years, this industry should not require continued and massive corporate welfare. It is time for the nuclear power industry to stand on its own two feet. Nuclear welfare started with research and development. According to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, since 1948 the federal government has spent more than $96bn in 2011 dollars on nuclear energy research and development. That is more than four times the amount spent on solar,wind, geothermal, biomass, bio-fuels, and hydro-power combined . But federal R&D was not enough. The industry also wanted federal liability insurance too, which it got back in 1957 with the Price-Anderson Act. This federal liability insurance program for nuclear plants was meant to be temporary, but Congress repeatedly extended it, most recently through 2025.
The operator of the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant has been dumping something like a thousand tons per day of radioactive water into the Pacific ocean. Remember, the reactors are riddled with meltdown holes, building 4 with more radiation than all nuclear bombs ever dropped or tested, is missing entire walld, and building 3 is a pile of rubble. The whole complex is leaking like a sieve, and the rivers of water pumped into the reactors every day are just pouring into the ocean, with only a slight delay. Most people assume that the ocean will dilute the radiation from Fukushima enough that any radiation reaching the West Coast of the US will be low. Scientists have stated that radiation in the ocean very quickly becomes diluted and would not be a problem beyond the coast of Japan. US fisheries are unlikely to be affected, because radioactive material that enters the marine environment would be gratly diluted before reaching US fishing grounds. A Woods Hole oceanographer said: The Kuroshio current is considered like the Gulf Stream of the Pacific, a very large current that can rapidly carry the radioactivity into the interior of the ocean, Buesseler said. But it also dilutes along the way, casing a lot of mixing and decreasing radioactivity as it moves offshore. But just as we noted 2 days after the earthquake hit that the jet stream might carry radiation to the US by wind. We are now warning that ocean currents might carry more radiation to at least some portions of the West Coast of North America than is assumed: The floating debris will likely be carried by currents off Japan toward Washington, Oregon and California before turning toward Hawaii and back again toward Asia, said Curt Ebbesmeyer, a Seattle oceanographer who spent decades tracking flotsam!
In a recent Vermont debate about the impacts of bedding F-35A fighter jets at the Burlington International Airport, the arguments in support often come down to balancing noise and other impacts against economic necessities and benefits. Whatever the outcome, it has raised renewed questions about the economic impacts of military spending. A new study finds that money spent on clean energy, health care, and education would create many more jobs than if the same money is spent on defense. Dire warnings that thousands of Vermont jobs are at risk due to looming defense cuts and related changes in Air Force priorities may turn out to be overstated, or at least premature. In March, a report commissioned by the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) predicted that Vermont would lose upwards of 2,100 jobs if automatic defense cuts were triggered by the failure of Congress to reach a budget deal. Vermont Air National Guard jobs were reportedly also on the line: Under the Pentagons initial budget the Air Guard could see a loss of 9,900 jobs nationally over the next five years, including 3,900 active duty personnel and 900 members of the Air Force reserve. Two months later, such outcomes look less likely. Research meanwhile indicates that funding for clean energy, health care, and education would create substantially more jobs. The AIA study, conducted for the aerospace industry in 2011 by Dr Stephen Fuller of George Mason University, projects that more than a million jobs could be lost nationwide, if sequestration leads to a projected $600 billion cut in the defense budget. The Pentagon and other analysts forecast more conservatively that $1 trillion in cuts over a decade would add one percentage point to the unemployment rate!
Rupert Murdoch is a bad man. His son James is also bad. Rebekah Brooks is allegedly bad. The News of the World was very bad, it hacked phones and pilloried people. British prime ministers grovelled before this iniquity. David Cameron even sent text messages to Brooks signed "LOL", and they all had parties in the Cotswolds with Jeremy Clarkson. Nods and winks were duly exchanged on the BSkyB deal: Shock, horror! Offering glimpses of the power and petty gangsterism of the British tabloid prrss, the inquiry conducted by Lord Leveson has, I suspect, shocked few people. As the soap has rolled on, bemusement has given way to boredom. Tony Blair was allowed to whine about the Daily Mail's treatment of his wife until he and the inquiry's amoral smugness protecting him were exposed by a member of the public, David Lawley-Wakelin, who shouted,"Excuse me, this man should be arrested for war crimes." His Lordship duly apologized to the war criminal and the truth-teller was seen off. Why Murdoch should complain about the British establishment has always mystified me. His interrogation, if that is the word,by Robert Jay QC, was a series of verbal marshmallows that Murdoch promptly spat out. When he described one of his own rambling, self-satisfied questions as "subtle", Jay received this deft dismissal from Murdoch: "I'm afraid I don't have much subtlety in me." As the theatre critic Michael Billington reminded us recently, it was in the Spectator in 1955 that Henry Fairlie coined the term "the establishment" defining it as "the matrix of official and social relations within which power in Britain is exercised". For most of mu career as a journalist, Murdoch has been an influential and admired member of this club, even a mentor to many of those now casting him as a "bad apple".
If you had followed May Day protests in New York City in the mainstream media, you might hardly have noticed that they happened at all. The stories were generally tucked away, minimalist, focused on a few arrests, and spoke of 'hundreds' of protesters in the streets, or maybe, if a reporter was feeling especially generous, a vague 'thousands'. I did my own rough count on the largest of the Occupy protests that day. It left Union Square in the evening, heading for the Wall Street area. I walked through the march front to back, figuring a couple of thousand loosely packed protesters to a block, and came up with a conservative estimate of 15,000 people. Maybe it wasn't the biggest protest of all time, but size-able enough given that Occupy, an organization without strong structures, but once strongly located, had been quite literally pushed or even beaten out of its camps in Zuccotti Park and elsewhere across the country and toward oblivion. It's true that if you were checking out the Nation or Mother Jones, you would have gotten a more accurate sense of what was going on. Still, didn't the great protest movement of our American moment, on a planet still in upheaval, deserve better that day? And no matter what you read in the mainstream media, here's what you would have known: This country is increasingly an armed camp, and those marchers, remarkably relaxed and peaceable, were heading out into a concentration of police that was staggering and should have been startling: Cops on motor scooters patrolled the edges of the march, which was hemmed in by the usual moveable metal barricades. Police helicopters buzzed us at rooftop level.
In the immediate wake of President Obamas May, 2011 announcement of the alleged extrajudicial killing of Osama bin Laden by US military forces, a struggle reemerged over the official 9/11 myth that major journalistic outlets have been complicit in perpetuating over the past decade. The corporate medias reaction to the robust skepticism over bin Ladens assumed execution suggested a great deal about the extent to which they are locked in to upholding the broader 9/11 parable and serving the Anglo-American political-economic establishment and status quo: After Obamas statement on bin Ladens fate citizen journalists and activists employing blogs and social media posed questions that should have been asked by professional journalists, specifically pointing to the need for further evidence supporting the presidents claims and the Obama administrations curiously inconsistent description of events. Many cited reports and commentary by mainstream news outlets, such as CBS, CNN, and The New York Times, quoting government sources that bin Laden was in failing health and likely died in December 2001. Nevertheless, once a lie has been put into motion and accepted as truth by the intellectual class, it often becomes "a de facto" reality, the broader society is obliged to endure for better or worse. In 2005 author and media critic Normon Solomon contacted the Washington Post to inquire whether its reporting of the 1964 Tonkin Gulf incident alleging the North Vietnamese attacked US ships was ever retracted. Though later proven false, the reports were carried as front page news in US papers and figured centrally in the Congressional passage of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution formally initiating the Vietnam War.
Sometimes a search for information can lead to something totally unexpected and somewhat shocking. Such as it was today, when I looked at the white house website and webpage source code. The White house website has totally changed, and now shows Obama sitting with his hands folded, staring upwards towards heaven, almost as though he's listening to God, or perhaps Mohammed. Obama's apparently simple-looking politically-oriented white house website loads more than 1,740 lines of HTML source code into your computer when you visit www.whitehouse.gov. Code includes numerous mis-spelled keywords for Barack, including one named Barck: meta name="keywords" content="President, Barack Obama, White House, United States of America,44th President, White House history, President Obama, Barck, Barak, Barrack, Barrack, Obma, Barack" Above code statements help insure that both those who know he's the 44th president, and also those who cannot spell his name right will all find his website, which resides on government servers and is maintained at taxpayer expense. It's not apparent why Soetoro was left out. There is also a browser call in the source code to google analytics. What a surprise. Buried within the code are numerous references to various URLs. One cryptic URL is http://app2.whitehouse.gov/ppo. Actual line of code for above URL call is exactly this:
. Apply for what KIND of job? Blowing something up? Or does it mean something else as you will see below. I visited this URL and performed a screen capture of the browser window so you can see exactly what I saw. Nothing was added to or deleted in the browser's display window. Apply for a Job
In an organized act of brutality, a number of US soldiers went on a house-to-house shooting spree in Zangabad village, Kandahar in March and massacred 16 people including nine children, while they were sleeping, and all Washington had to say were a few words of condolence and apology nonchalantly strung together in order to appease the overwhelming public rage in Afghanistan. However, Western media reduced the number of the killers to one. The bodies were reportedly wrapped in blankets and set on fire. US President Barack Obama said he was deeply saddened, "I offer my condolences to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives, and to the people of Afghanistan, who have endured too much violence and suffering. This incident does not represent the exceptional character of our military and the respect that the United States has for the people of Afghanistan." As contradictory as these words seem, the very 'exceptional character' of the US military had earlier urged them to burn copies of the Holy Quran, an incident which saddened the hearts of Muslims all across the world. These and earlier incidents are not coincidental, and well attest to a prevailing mindset in the US military, and a dominant policy in Washington. It is clear that the US government has commenced a large-scale campaign against Islam with the express intention of debilitating the Muslim community. In fact, the war on Islam started in 2001, when the then US president George Bush made a crass reference to his so-called war on terror "crusade". He warned Americans that "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile." Bush's politically untoward remark rang alarm bells in Europe and the Muslim world, though it went barely noticed in the American community.
After the Greek elections struck fear into the hearts of the global banksters, the fallout remains uncertain. If the next Greek election produces an anti-austerity government, Greece will almost certainly make a speedy exit from the euro. If this happens, and it is looking increasingly inevitable, the consequences for the global economy are spectacularly gloomy. Yet US media and US politicians are largely silent on the issue, almost as if nothing were happening. What will happen when Greece leaves the Euro? Foreign banks hold over $90 billion in Greek debt in the public and in the private sectors. These enormous losses could very well bring down banks in Europe and abroad. Also, the struggling Euro countries such as Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland will see their borrowing costs skyrocket, since the wealthy will be more reluctant to waste anymore investment money on risky Euro countries, guaranteeing a further downward spiral of bailouts and bankruptcy. How likely is a Greek euro exit? The conservative Economist magazine reports: "If Greece rejects the second bail-out, or falls drastically behind in its program of debt payments and public sector cuts, its exit could become inevitable." This scenario appears likely, as Greek voters have tired of supporting politicians that continue to attack the majority of voters living standards through massive austerity policies, cuts to jobs, social programs, and the public sector in general. How would the US be affected by a European Union meltdown? The Bank for International Settlements claims that US banks have loaned $96.8 billion to the weakest European nations in the public and private sector, with an additional $275.8 billion to German and French banks, who would suffer directly if the weak nations drowned!
Independent observers knew it long ago. Today's global economic crisis provides added confirmation. In 2008, a staunch champion of the system expressed second thoughts. An ideology based on inequality, injustice, exploitation, militarism, and imperial wars eventually self-destructs or gets pushed. Growing evidence in America and Europe show systemic unaddressed problems too grave to ignore. They remain so despite millions without jobs, savings, homes or futures. Imagine nations governed by leaders letting crisis conditions fester. Imagine voters reelecting them despite demanding change. OWS aside, one day perhaps rage will replace apathy in America. The latest jobs report alone provides incentive enough to try and then some. On May 4, the Labor Department reported 115,000 new jobs. It way overstated the true number. Official figures belie the dire state of things. At most two-thirds the headline total were created. Even that's in doubt. Most were low-pay, part-time, or temp positions with few or no benefits. Decades ago, workers would have avoided them. Today, there's no choice. The report also showed economic decline. Expect much worse ahead. In 2008, Main Street Americans experienced Depression. It rages today. Poverty's at record levels. Real unemployment approaches 1930s numbers. Dire conditions are worsening. Announced job cuts are increasing. Hiring plans are down. Compared to year ago levels, they're off 80%. Income is stagnant for those lucky to have work. The private diffusion index measuring growth fell sharply month-over-month. The unemployment rate decline reflects discouraged workers dropping out. They want jobs but can't find them. The Labor Department considers them non-persons. They're not counted to make official figures look better.