The American Gulag ... Assault & Rape Against White Males In Prison ...

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/prison/report.html

...

Race and Ethnicity
IV. PREDATORS AND VICTIMS
Past studies have documented the prevalence of black on white sexual aggression in prison.(213) These findings are further confirmed by Human Rights Watch's own research. Overall, our correspondence and interviews with white, black, and Hispanic inmates convince us that white inmates are disproportionately targeted for abuse.(214) Although many whites reported being raped by white inmates, black on white abuse appears to be more common. To a much lesser extent, non-Hispanic whites also reported being victimized by Hispanic inmates.Other than sexual abuse of white inmates by African Americans, and, less frequently, Hispanics, interracial and interethnic sexual abuse appears to be much less common than sexual abuse committed by persons of one race or ethnicity against members of that same group. In other words, African Americans typically face sexual abuse at the hands of other African Americans, and Hispanics at the hands of other Hispanics. Some inmates told Human Rights Watch that this pattern reflected an inmate rule, one that was strictly enforced: "only a black can turn out [rape] a black, and only a chicano can turn out a chicano."(215) Breaking this rule by sexually abusing someone of another race or ethnicity, with the exception of a white inmate, could lead to racial or ethnic unrest, as other members of the victim's group would retaliate against the perpetrator's group. A Texas inmate explained, for example: "The Mexicans--indeed all latinos, nobody outside their race can 'check' one without permission from the town that, that person is from. If a black dude were to check a mexican w/out such permission & the mexican stays down & fights back, a riot will take place."(216)The causes of black on white sexual abuse in prison have been much analyzed. Some commentators have attributed it to the norms of a violent black subculture, the result of social conditioning that encourages aggressiveness and the use of force.(217) Others have viewed it as a form of revenge for white dominance of blacks in outside society.(218) Viewing rape as a hate crime rather than one primarily motivated by sexual urges, they believe that sexually abused white inmates are essentially convenient surrogates for whites generally. Elaborating on this theory, one commentator surmised that "[i]n raping a white inmate, the black aggressor may in some measure be assaulting the white guard on the catwalk."(219)Some inmates, both black and white, told Human Rights Watch that whites were generally perceived as weaker and thus more vulnerable to sexual abuse. An African American prisoner, describing the situation of incarcerated whites, said:When individuals come to prison, they know that the first thing that they will have to do is fight. Now there are individuals that are from a certain race that the majority of them are not physically equip to fight. So they are the majority that are force to engage in sexual acts.(220)Another African American inmate, while generally agreeing with the idea of whites as easy victims, gave a more politically-oriented explanation for the problem of black on white sexual abuse:Before I continue, let me explain that I consider myself to be speaking from mainly a black perspective. The reason I say that is not to be racist, but to emphasize that on the main, blacks, whites, hispanics, etc. . . . have a different outlook on prison rape from a convict viewpoint. Most [blacks] feel that the legal system is fundamentally racist and officers are the most visible symbol of a corrupt institution & with good reason . . . . [b]lacks know whites often associate crime with black people. They see themselves as being used as scapegoats . . . . So is it any wonder that when a white man comes to prison, that blacks see him as a target. Stereotypes are prevalent amongst blacks also that cause bad thinking. The belief that all or most white men are effete or gay is very prevalent, & that whites are cowards who have to have 5 or 6 more to take down one dude . . . . Whites are prey and even a punk will be supported if he beats up a white dude.

...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the very real case of "double jeopardy," in the so-called United States Criminal Justice System. White men are singled out, not only in everyday life in this rotting carcass of a once-great country, but especially in prison. You should burn these facts into your mind when you think about the increasing number of prisoners in this once-free nation. Keep in mind that as more and more working-class white men become disenfranchised in the System--through Affirmative-Action, set-asides, usury-debt, ignoring of men's health issues, discrimination in the court system, etc.. etc.. this will become a more prevalent aspect of more people's lives, as it is for thousands of poor Hispanics and other non-black inmates.

This so-called Justice system, administered by the "Justice Department," is an obscene, brutal and patently unjust system that purposely puts people in a Gulag system that makes the Soviet Gulag system model look humane in comparison. The very real and near-insurmountable racial divide that separates black-and-white in this country is magnified a thousand-fold in the so-called American Criminal Justice system. In this hyper-racist world, black prisoners are unleashed upon defenseless white prisoners and the System not only ignores this reality of black-on-white hate crimes, but actively encourages it.

Instead of separating prisoners along racial lines, the System forces disparate groups together in close quarters. Moreover, the Sytem ensures that white prisoners are outnumbered in every major prison system in the American gulag, in an attempt to instill the very real fear that besides simply "doing time," in prison, the white man has to fear being forcibly raped and subsequently infected with AIDS or other life threatening STD.

Political prisoners, enemies of tyranny and non-violent prisoners of this American Gulag are especially at risk at the hands of violent, racist black thugs in the Gulag system. With racist terrorist groups such as the Crips, Bloods and others it is open season on white men--in our streets and in the prisons.

I would say to write your congressperson and senator (not capitalized because they're not worth the effort), but it won't do any good. The best bet is to educate yourself on the law, obtain as much of a legal defense fund as you can for any possibility of arrest by a corrupt cop, and be emotionally prepared for the hellish experiences of the American Gulag system and, finally, to learn appropriate and lethal self-defense measures. In regards to our "legal system," the first and most important rule is the Golden Rule of course, which is, "He who has the Gold, is He who makes the Rules." This corrupt system works on money and connections, not on the rule of law and truth.

Don't look to our "leaders," either Senor Gonzales in the INjustice Department or Rabbi Chertoff of Motherland Insecurity to make any attempts to stop the hate crime of rape against white prisoners, because they have too much to gain by keeping the status quo. Senor Arbusto Dubya Boosh? He's too busy opening our southern border ever-wider and picking another fight with a nation that isn't a threat to our livelihoods.

This Gulag America ... another attempt to stifle dissent, kill off the working-class, and maintain the industry known as the "justice system"

Do As Bush Says ... Not As Bush Does ...

Iraq shuts bordersThu Feb 15, 2007 8:16 AM ET

By Ross Colvin
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq closed its borders with Iran and Syria as U.S. and Iraqi troops tightened their grip on Baghdad on Thursday, setting up more checkpoints that stopped and searched even official convoys for weapons.
An Interior Ministry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the closure of Iraq's four border crossings with Iran and two with Syria took effect on Wednesday.
U.S. officials have long accused Syria of allowing foreign fighters to cross its long, porous border into Iraq, and at the weekend presented evidence of what they said was Iranian-manufactured weapons being smuggled into Iraq.
"The plan to close the borders went into effect last night. Many points were closed, but I can't confirm that all were shut," U.S. military spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Christopher Garver told Reuters.
There was no immediate confirmation from Tehran or Damascus, both of which deny involvement in Iraq's chaos.
Iraq had said it would shut the borders for 72 hours. The U.S. military said on Wednesday the aim was to choke off the flow of weapons and foreign fighters into the country.
The closures came as thousands of U.S. and Iraqi troops stepped up an offensive in Baghdad, the epicenter of sectarian violence between minority Sunnis and majority Shi'ites that has pitched the country toward all-out civil war.
Military analysts say many militiamen were likely to lie low or leave Baghdad until the operation is completed rather than seek confrontation with U.S. and Iraqi forces.
Fewer members of the Mehdi Army militia of radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have been seen on the streets of their stronghold, the sprawling Sadr City slum in east Baghdad, in the past week.
Several Mehdi Army commanders are also reported to have left the capital to avoid arrest.
The United States has identified the militia as the greatest threat to peace in Iraq and hundreds of Mehdi Army members have been arrested.
The U.S. military and Iraqi government officials have said Sadr himself left Iraq for Iran ahead of the crackdown, but an official of Sadr's political movement, Salam al-Maliki, said he was still in Iraq.
STOP AND SEARCH
The chief U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, Major-General William Caldwell, said border checkpoints were to be revamped to establish "transfer points" so vehicles could be searched.
The U.S. military said last week the operation was under way, but Baghdad residents had noticed little change until Wednesday, when checkpoints began springing up in the city.
Operation Imposing Law is seen as a last-ditch effort to stabilize the capital. Shi'ite officials have warned that failure could mean a collapse of the Shi'ite-led government. President Bush is sending more than 17,000 additional troops for the crackdown.
More checkpoints appeared overnight and residents reported that even official government or security convoys were stopped and asked for weapons permits and identification papers.
A Reuters photographer said only people with Interior and Defense Ministry badges were allowed to keep their weapons.
Civilians with permits still had their guns seized. He saw two people arrested for not having identification documents.
Policemen and soldiers searched vehicles thoroughly, using long metal rods to prod piles of vegetables to look for bombs or weapons. The city is blighted by daily car bombings that have killed thousands.
Similar operations in the past have ended in failure, partly because Shi'ite militias tied to parties within the government were seen as off-limits, but Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki has said this time militants will be targeted regardless of their religious affiliation.
"Some of the brothers who are wanted by the Americans have moved house because we've been targeted before," Sadr official Maliki told Reuters.
He said the movement backed the crackdown. "That's why there is no resistance to the security forces in our areas. The prime minister assured us that we won't be targeted as an organization but only death squads, terrorists and criminals wanted by the authorities."
(Additional reporting by Mussab Al-Khairalla in Baghdad)

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2007-02-15T131551Z_01_COL530476_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-BORDER.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its odd. The United States is condemning Iran and Syria for their alleged unwillingness to halt the infiltration of foreign fighters into Iraq by way of their long, porous borders. However, why doesn't the United States government look towards the U.S. southern border for many examples of infiltration and illegal trafficking of illegal aliens into the sovereign territory of the United States?

It's a case of "doing as Bush says," not as Bush does. At least the Iranians and Syrians have valid excuses and alibis for their inability to halt the infiltration of foreign jihadists into Iraq. It is a war zone, first of all, and in warzones a fog of war invariably exists. Secondly, Iran and Syria lack the technological resources, financial capability and manpower necessary to patrol their borders with volatile Iraq. Third, both Iran and Syria are engaged with their own insurgency problems in their border areas, and this also directly hampers interdiction of foreign fighters crossing into neighboring Iraq. Finally, and most importantly it must be remembered these fighters aren't exactly averse to violence and confrontation with either Iranian or Syrian security forces, thus apprehending and keeping them from crossing the border is a more difficult task.

The United States' southern border experiences none of the above, yet the border remains porous. Moreover, no real attempt has been made thusfar to make any real inroads in the problem of illegal immigration into the U.S.. The fact of the matter is, the Democrats gain more potential voters and Welfare recipients, while the Republicans gain more cheap labor and conscripts for future wars against Iran, N. Korea, etc.. Both parties gain while the working-class American loses.

These politicians we have "leading" us are as useless as cancer ... and more deadly.

Do as Bush says...not as Bush does.

On The Domestic Front ... More Window-Dressing of the Coming Collapse ?

Obama: U.S. ready for black president

By JIM DAVENPORT, Associated Press Writer 41 minutes ago
White House hopeful Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record), taking a fellow black lawmaker to task, said Saturday voters are ready to elect a black president.
"At every turn in our history, there's been somebody who said we can't," the Democratic senator from Illinois told a nearly all-black audience of about 2,000 at Claflin University.
"Some people said we can't do this, we can't do that, so we shouldn't even try. If I have your support, if I have your energy and involvement and commitment and ideas, then I'm here to tell you, 'Yes we can.'"
The comments drew the loudest ovation during a question-and-answer session in his first campaign swing through South Carolina, an early voting state.
The first-in-the-South contest here is seen as a test of candidates' abilities to reach black voters. Half of the state's Democratic primary voters are black.
Obama responded to comments this past week by Democratic state Sen. Robert Ford of Charleston, who helped mobilize black voters for former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards in 2004, but has switched to Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2008 presidential race.
Ford said Tuesday that Obama, a first-term senator, has much to prove. "The media made this guy bigger than life," Ford said. "This guy isn't tested and they made him a rock star."
Ford said one reason he was supporting Clinton, the New York senator, is that he is skeptical Obama can win the presidency and worries his nomination could hurt other Democratic candidates.
"Every Democrat running on that ticket next year would lose — because he's black and he's top of the ticket. We'd lose the House and the Senate and the governors and everything," Ford said.
Ford drew widespread criticism for his comment and later apologized.
U.S. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., introduced Obama, saying "Run, Barack, run."
"Obama is able to run today because Rosa Parks sat down," Clyburn said. "He is able to run today because Septima Clark stood up."
Parks, in 1955, refused to give up her bus seat to a white man in Montgomery, Ala., sparking a mass boycott by thousands, mainly black women domestic workers who had long filled the buses' back seats.
Clark was an educator and activist for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People decades before the nation's attention turned to racial equality.
Clyburn says he is not endorsing a primary candidate.
State Democratic Party Chairman Joe Erwin tells candidates the race is open and the black vote is not monolithic.
Darcel Lancaster, an 18-year-old Claflin freshman, spent nearly two hours waiting in the morning's chill to be the first in line to see Obama. The biology major said she wouldn't commit to Obama's campaign.
"I'm going to look more into others," she said.
She doesn't expect him to win every black vote — including hers.
"Some people think he's not black enough," Lancaster said. If she picked Obama, it wouldn't be because of his race, she said. "He's not full black," Lancaster said.
U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut spoke earlier Saturday at a Richland County Democratic Party breakfast to a crowd of less than 100.
Both Dodd and Obama had to shorten their South Carolina visits to get back to Washington for a Senate vote on a resolution opposing the Iraq war.

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are being lost, while the U.S. Dollar continues to collapse against the Euro, Yen, and every other major currency of worth, and while the borders of the United States continue to be overrun with illegal-aliens and potential terrorists even--our Mainstream Media continues its love-affair with Obama. It's as if nothing else matters in the national front, this guy's mug is plastered everywhere in just about every major Mainstream Media publication.

This guy Obama is a media darling now! A Senator for less than 3 years, he's risen in notoriety like a Scud missle and his star shines brighter than Tinseltown. What's his claim to fame? He's black...or, to be accurate, he's "not full black," which doesn't insure the United States' Black-Block Vote. But he's more black than Hillary Rodham Clinton, so we gotta make do with what we have, we gotta' get cred where we can.

The funny thing about this article is the fact that a Democrat, John Ford--who also happens to be black--admitted that the Mainstream Media made Obama larger than life, a "rock star," in other words. What's more, Mr. Ford said what every thinking American should consider too--this guy, Obama, is untested. He's got no real experience, he has no foundation.

It is true that the other contenders for the next presidential election are also virtually untested and/or unknown, but it seems that the Mainstream Media is focused on this guy Obama more and more. Why? What does he have to bring to the presidential table other than the fact that he's half-black and can read off a teleprompter all the same platitudes and pithy remarks that the current Idiot-in-Chief can?

One thing of note...remember the words of Darcel Lancaster in the above AP article. Focus on what she says, and what it implies. "Some people think he's [Obama] not black enough." This sounds like the Black-Block Vote in action, to me. Ms. Lancaster goes further when she says, "he's not full black." All of this is a puzzle to me, as I am sure it is to you.

Now...flipmode on this kick...what if a European-American said this about Obama? What if a white guy said, "Some people think Obama isn't WHITE enough," and added further, "he's not full white." What do you think would happen to this white guy? If you're a minority-majority (any non-white person in any major city in America...a minority in the country, but a majority in the cities), and you read this from a white man about a potential candidate, what would YOU think? You'd think it was racist, I bet.

Thats the same way I feel about what Ms. Lancaster said and the way the Black-Block Vote tends to work.

America needs someone to the Right of Patrick Buchanan to survive the coming years. Anything less would be a pale (no pun intended) imitation of a real Leader.

America the pitiful...controlled by insanity and gripped with fear...

...And Speaking About Breaking UN Resolutions...

'Outposts' thriving in the West Bank

By RAVI NESSMAN, Associated Press WriterSat Feb 17, 11:31 AM ET

With its playgrounds, identical houses and manicured flower beds, Bruchin looks like any placid Israeli suburb. Except that Bruchin is not supposed to exist.
Bruchin is among more than 100 West Bank outposts never officially authorized by the Israeli government. And Israel's repeated commitments to freeze settlement construction haven't hampered Bruchin's transformation from a cluster of trailers less than eight years ago into a thriving community of 380 people, girded by government supplied roads, electricity and water.
"Normally, when you think of an outpost you think of a water tower. This is a real town," said Amishai Shav-Tal, one of Bruchin's founders.
Unlike the full-blown settlements that have been built in the face of international criticism, the outposts have never gone through the public process of gaining official government approval. Many of them began as little more than a cell phone tower or trailer erected by settlers on a West Bank hilltop to establish a presence there, a seed they used to quickly establish a new community.
The outposts infuriate the Palestinians, who see them as part of a plan to strengthen the Jewish grip on land they want for an independent state.
With the international community focusing its disapproval mainly on the traditional settlements, Israel has managed to quietly plant a slew of the outposts across the West Bank, say Palestinians, Israeli critics and even the settlers themselves.
"This is the game that the government always played with the settlers: 'You will do it, we will turn a blind eye and then one day when we are politically able to, we will legalize it,'" said Dror Etkes, who monitors settlements for the Israel's Peace Now movement.
Israel has not built an official settlement in more than a decade. When it approved a new one in late December, it quickly backed down under international condemnation.
But Bruchin is a different story. Settler leaders and a former Cabinet minister say the government cooperated through every phase of its creation in the northern West Bank. In recent talks with the Defense Ministry, which must approve new settlement construction, the settlers demanded Bruchin be the first in a string of developed outposts to be recognized as full settlements, which would ease fears that they could be forcibly removed.
"They have no choice, they have to recognize most of the outposts," said Bentzi Lieberman, a settler leader.
Over the 40 years since Israel captured the West Bank in the 1967 Mideast War, the settlers have cultivated political allies and manipulated divided coalition governments in their favor. They capitalized on Palestinian hostility toward Israel to push the claim that the entire West Bank is the Jews' biblical birthright and a vital security buffer with the Arab world.
But some outpost residents fear the government may be turning against them.
As prime minister, Ehud Olmert started out with what looked like a campaign to tear down the unauthorized settlements, and was elected on a platform calling for the country to abandon much of the West Bank and all but the largest settlement blocs.
Political troubles following last summer's war in Lebanon have forced Olmert to put his plan on hold, but the settlers of Bruchin say they felt the change.
The army office in charge of the West Bank has issued orders to stop construction at the outpost and to demolish what has already been built, spokesman Capt. Zidki Maman said without providing details. It has also prevented Bruchin from upgrading its electricity hookup, which the settlers complain is too small for its growing population.
"Bruchin is an illegal outpost," Maman said.
The settlers blame U.S. pressure, and say they feel betrayed by the government.
Meanwhile, Bruchin continues to thrive — with the government's help.
On a sunny winter morning, soldiers sent by the government stand guard at Bruchin's gates, while the squeals of children at play ring out from the outposts' nine preschools, many of them funded by the Education Ministry.
Down a tidy road lined with tall street lights and brick sidewalks, past the marble-walled synagogue and the community center, stand 40 two-story yellow stucco houses in two rows. A large sign says they were built with Housing Ministry help.
Nearby, a cluster of nearby trailers houses another 40 families, who arrived in recent years.
Residents describe Bruchin as a quiet, close-knit, religious suburb. They have neighborhood barbecues, cooking classes for the wives, and after-school judo, ceramics, basketball and Torah for the kids.
"It's a good place," said Avi Galimidi, a 30-year-old student who moved here 2 1/2 years ago with his wife and four children. "It has wonderful and good people. And I want to settle the land."
Israel has repeatedly promised to freeze all settlement activity in the West Bank, where nearly 270,000 settlers — a 6 percent increase from a year ago, according to government figures — live among 2.4 million Palestinians.
Several thousand Israelis are believed to be living in outposts.
Under the 2003 "road map" peace plan, Israel agreed to remove dozens of outposts built since March 2001, but that deal that does not include Bruchin, since it was started two years earlier. Israel also agreed to freeze settlement growth, which should have ended all expansion at Bruchin. Israel did not follow through on either of those commitments.
The Palestinians have also failed to live up to their road map commitment to disband militant groups, who effectively rule the streets of the West Bank and fire missiles at Israeli towns from Gaza.
The U.S. sees the settlements and their continued construction as obstacles to peace, at a time when U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has scheduled a Feb. 19 summit between Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to foster a rapprochement.
"The Israel government should live up to its commitments, and that includes on the settlements, that includes on outposts. These are commitments, by the way, to the United States, they're not commitments to the Palestinians," U.S. Ambassador Richard Jones said.
The Israelis "should not create facts on the ground," he said.
But more than 100 outposts have been built since 1995, and most now have at least some form of basic infrastructure, Etkes said.
Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat calls the outposts "baby settlements."
"Our worst fear there is being realized, which is that they will boom and become major settlements," he said.
Like many outposts, Bruchin was a response to violence — the fatal shooting of an Israeli woman, Yael Mevar, as she drove near an Arab town on Dec. 31, 1997.
Angry settler leaders dusted off old plans for a settlement about 12 miles east of Tel Aviv, between Israel and the large settlement of Ariel, deep in the West Bank. In the spring of 1999, Jewish seminary students moved into trailers on a hilltop.
"You can't come and just shoot Jews and we'll do nothing," said Shav-Tal, 31. "We'll show them that we live in this country, and we are the people that own this country."
In October, Shav-Tal and five other families answered the students' call to settle in Bruchin. They moved into trailers powered by electricity generators, with water tanks filled every three days, Shav-Tal said.
"The challenge that you have of building something where there is nothing — that's real Zionism," he said.
That core group posted fliers in nearby settlements, advertised on the Internet, and were flooded with applications, Shav-Tal said.
"Our problem from the first day was more people want to come than the places we have," Shav-Tal said.
More trailers rolled in. The government-owned electricity company hooked Bruchin up to the grid. The water company installed a pump and pipes. The local council paved 1.5 miles of roads. Public bus service began.
The settlers received approval from the Housing Ministry to build 40 permanent houses, and their occupants moved in 2 1/2 years ago, well after the road map was unveiled. Their newly empty trailers became available for new arrivals, and by December, these too were filled, bringing Bruchin's population to 380.
The army may call Bruchin illegal, but in her government-commissioned report on the outposts two years ago, attorney Talia Sasson said the Housing Ministry spent $785,000 on Bruchin's infrastructure and public buildings.
The government was deeply complicit in the creation of many of the outposts, Sasson wrote.
"Most of the outposts were financed by some ministry in Israel," she told The Associated Press.
"We helped build it," said Yitzhak Levy, who was housing minister in 1999. "It is supposed to be a city. It has a large area. It is clear that this is a place that was going to grow, and therefore there was investment. It was done openly."
Yehudit Passal moved here 1 1/2 years ago with her husband and two children because it allowed her family to be near the Tel Aviv job market while strengthening Israel's hold over the West Bank, she said.
Her decision was strengthened, she said, by Israel's 2005 withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, which included the dismantling of 21 settlements and another four in the northern West Bank.
She said she wanted the remaining settlements to be large, "so it would be that much harder to take them down."
A few hundred yards down the hill lies a town of 4,000 Palestinians. Its name is Brukhin, the Arabic form of Bruchin. Mayor Akrima Samara says the outpost's existence blocks Palestinians from their olive groves and grazing land, and has dimmed their hopes for a state of their own.
"With every passing day we see the outpost grow," he said. "This land is lost."
The settlers of Bruchin have big plans. A detailed blueprint envisages expanding their community tenfold, to 750 families, said Itzik Turk, the outpost's general secretary.
But the sympathy the settlers once enjoyed in Israel has weakened as Israelis have wearied of war with the Palestinians and the burden of being an occupying power.
Galimidi, the student, says he is not worried about Bruchin's future.
"I believe that all the problems will be solved little by little," he said. In another 20 years, "Bruchin will be a city, and we will have malls."

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And "our" president has the nerve to openly claim that the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001 hate us "for our freedoms." I hate to say it, Bush, but these folks have many reasons to hate the United States and "our" leadership, and our freedoms and way of life isn't high on their list.

1. U.S. Unconditional Support for Israel -- In the face of UN resolutions, world opinion and decency, the United States continues to support Israeli actions against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. These actions include arbitrary arrest without access to a lawyer, torture of alleged Palestinians, sectioning off of whole towns into virtual Palestinian ghettos, wanton destruction of Palestinian homes of SUSPECTED Palestinian resistance fighters, shooting Palestinian stone-throwing youth with U.S. supplied M-16 assault rifles, use of American-made cluster bombs on Palestinian towns and Lebanese villages, etc.. etc..


2. U.S. Support for Unpopular Despotic Arab Leaders -- The House of Saud which currently controls Saudi Arabia is a prime example here. They're disliked by the majority of Saudis and are duplicitous in their dealings with foreign nations, but because they supply oil to the U.S. and support--de facto if not de jure--the existence of Israel.


3. U.S. Military Aggression in the Region -- The invasion of Iraq and the upcoming invasion of Iran are not endearing the "Arab on the street," to the United States. The fact of the matter is, the reasons for the United States invading Iraq have been disproven as fabrications on the part of "interested parties," namely Israel and certain disaffected Iraqi insurgent groups with access to the United States office of the President. It must be remembered that thanks to the imposition of sanctions alone in the 90's, over 500,000 Iraqis died, and most of these were children. How many Iraqis have died in this current war in Iraq is anyone's guess, but it's safe to assume that many tens of thousands more have died directly due to U.S. actions or indirectly from insurgent assaults.


4. U.S. Troops on Arab Lands -- These troops are there ostensibly to act as a "rapid reaction" force to potential hotspots in the region, but these troops ARE hotspots. The local Arab populations generally do not want American infidel troops stationed on their soil and are clear on this. This is a major issue of contention with the U.S.

So, as the Israelis continue to ignore the rest of the world and continue to expand illegally into Palestinian lands, as the Israelis continue to produce nuclear weapons in the face of UN Resolutions and world condemnation, and as they continue to instigate trouble with their neighbors--in this case Syria and Iran--the United States will continue to be dragged along into conflict and war with our Israeli masters. The American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and World Jewish Congress (WJO) definitely control the strings that make "our" politicians like Bush seek ever more conflict under false pretenses.

America belongs to Americans, not Israelis.

Iran: Threat to Stability in Iraq or Last Bastion Against Al-Qaeda?

MSNBC.com

Iran’s Quds Force enmeshed in Iraq
Accused of backing Iraqi militias, elite Quds corps deeply enmeshed in Iraq
The Associated Press
Updated: 10:34 p.m. CT Feb 15, 2007

CAIRO, Egypt - Iran’s secretive Quds Force, accused by the United States of arming Iraqi militants with deadly bomb-making material, has built up an extensive network in the war-torn country, recruiting Iraqis and supporting not only Shiite militias but also Shiites allied with Washington.
Still unclear, however, is how closely Iran’s top leadership is directing the Quds Force’s operations — and whether Iran has intended for its help to Shiite militias to be turned against U.S. forces.
Iran likely does not want a direct confrontation with American troops in Iraq but is backing militiamen to ensure Shiites win any future civil war with Iraqi Sunnis after the Americans leave, several experts said Thursday.
The Quds Force’s role underlines how deeply enmeshed Iran is in its neighbor — and how the U.S. could face resistance even from its allies in Iraq if it tries to uproot Iran’s influence in the country.
The Quds (pronounced “KOHds”) Force — the name means “Jerusalem” in Farsi and Arabic — is the most elite and covert of Iran’s military branches. Over the past two decades, the corps is believed to have helped arm and train the Hezbollah guerrilla group in Lebanon, Islamic fighters in Bosnia and Afghanistan, and even Sudanese troops fighting in south Sudan.
The force is part of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, which are separate from the regular military, report directly to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and are tasked with protecting the Islamic government. The Quds Force, formed in the 1980s and picked from the very best of the Guards, is its special branch for operations outside Iran.
“What Quds does is very specialized, the most dangerous work, operating underground,” said Mahan Abedin, an Iran expert and the research director at the London-based Center for the Study of Terrorism.
U.S. leveling accusationsNow the Bush administration is accusing the force of stirring up turmoil in Iraq.
Its key piece of evidence: “explosively formed projectiles,” sophisticated roadside bombs that fire a slug of molten metal that can penetrate armored vehicles. The U.S. military says the Quds Force provided the materials to Iraqi Shiite militias, which used them to attack Americans.
To make their case, U.S. military officials this week showed reporters in Baghdad pieces of EFP equipment, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades that they said were directly traceable to Iranian manufacture.
President Bush told reporters Wednesday he could “say with certainty” that the Quds Force was providing the equipment to militants.
“What we don’t know is whether or not the head leaders of Iran ordered the Quds Force to do what they did,” Bush said.
What is Tehran's involvement?Iran has denied the U.S. accusations. But the question of what the Quds Force and other Iranian operatives are doing in Iraq and how much direction they receive from Iran’s top leadership has become a key issue.
The Bush administration has increasingly blamed Iran for Iraq’s chaos and taken a more confrontational stance, vowing to stop any intervention. That has raised worries among some Democrats in Washington that the administration is building a case for military action against Iran, a claim Bush denies.
The chief U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, said Iranian and Iraqi detainees in U.S. custody said in interrogations that “the Quds Force provides support to extremist groups here in Iraq both in the forms of money and in weaponry.”
U.S. forces arrested six Iranians in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil in January, one of whom military officials say is the Quds Forces’ operational commander in Iraq, Mohsin Chizari.
“All of these efforts in which we have picked up these Quds Force officers are part of these efforts in which to disrupt these supply networks,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday at a Pentagon briefing.
U.S. military officials have said the Quds Force is supplying “rogue elements” of the Mahdi Army, a Shiite militia led by an anti-American cleric.
A role beyond insurgencyBut the Quds Force’s help appears to go beyond militiamen attacking U.S. troops. It supplies training and some weapons to the Badr Brigade — a militia linked to Iraq’s biggest Shiite political party — and smaller Shiite factions in the south, an official with a Shiite political party in Iraq who has close knowledge of militia activity told The Associated Press. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity.
The Badr Brigade is linked to the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the party headed by cleric Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, one of Iraq’s most powerful politicians, who met with Bush at the White House in December.
America’s Kurdish allies also have past links with the Quds Force, which helped them against Saddam Hussein’s regime in the 1990s. Notably, the six Iranians seized by U.S. troops were in Kurdish-controlled Irbil.
In addition to supplying weapons to Iraqi militias, the Quds Force has been recruiting Iraqi Shiites, giving them up to $150 a month and sending some to Iran for training, the Shiite political party official told the AP.
Concern over offensive weaponsCaldwell acknowledged that prisoners had said, under interrogation, that Quds operatives were supplying weapons to factions in the U.S.-backed Iraqi government. He said U.S. officials had asked political parties and government officials about the material.
“Some explained that there is a need for certain weaponry to come in for protection purposes,” he told a Baghdad news conference Wednesday. “The concern we had ... is that on that list were sniper rifles, mortars and some elements that are clearly offensive in nature.”
At most, Iran’s entire Quds Force probably numbers only about 2,000 — only about 800 of whom are core operatives, according to Abedin, the expert at the London-based think tank.
Abedin doubted the Quds Force was directly giving militias weapons, arguing that militias have their own domestic networks for building and obtaining weapons. But he said Quds was undoubtedly was providing intelligence and other organizational help.
“It would be very incriminating and dangerous for Iran to directly supply weapons to the militias, and it’s not a part of Iranian policy to directly confront the Americans,” he said.
Instead, the goal is likely “to enable these armed formations ... to gain an advantage over their Sunni rivals” in the battle for power that Iran expects could erupt later.
“They are looking to beyond, when the Americans withdraw,” he said. “They see the Shiite militias as natural allies.”
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17175714/

---------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an interesting article. The "American" government, controlled by the neocons, are desperately attempting to create reasons for another attack against a sovereign nation, in this case Iran.

These reasons--weapons of mass destruction, sponsorship of terror, and fomenting instability in the region--are quite similar to the reasons trotted out in the months before the ill-fated adventure in Iraq. This administration is desperate in its attempts to create a casus belli against Iran.

Why attack Iran? Iran is no threat to the United States. The guerrilla forces under its control, namely Hiz'b-Allah and HAMAS, are no direct threat to United States interests in the region. Indeed, on many occasions these guerrilla organizations had ample opportunity to attack American interests and personnel in both Lebanon and Israel, but have consistently refrained from doing so. What's more, they have refrained from doing so in spite of the United States supplying arms to the Israelis, constant attempts at trying to equate Al Qaeda with Hiz'b-Allah, and the constant threats against their sponsor nations--namely Syria and Iran.

In regards to the concern of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, it should be noted that Iran has signed on to the United Nations Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, whereas the United States "ally," in the region, Israel, has not. Also, the Iranians allow nuclear inspectors from the UN International Atomic Energy Agency and have done so consistently until quite recently when the Iranians LIMITED access to sensitive sites in response to sanctions imposed upon them. Finally, it should be remembered that throughout this entire ratcheting-up of tensions between the U.S. and Iran, the Iranian government has consistently and vehemently denied trying to acquire nuclear weapons.

Our so-called "ally," in the region--Israel--has NOT signed on to the UN Nonproliferation Treaty, has NOT allowed outside UN inspectors into its nuclear facilities, and hasn't even acknowledged that is has nuclear weapons, even though common knowledge in the region is that Israel does have nuclear weapons!

Finally, know that Iran has everything to gain by helping to establish a stable Shi'a dominated government in it's neighbor Iraq. Iran has a vested interest in ensuring that not only are its concerns addressed in Iraq, but that the government there is on friendly terms with Iran. In order to do so, the freely-elected Shi'a leadership of Iraq are supported diplomatically and economically by Iran. Iran is NO friend of Sunni-dominated Al Qaeda, either. The two are not aligned in any way, because the Sunnis view Persian, Shi'a Iran as heretics and outsiders, not as allies in their conflict with the United States, and Iran has close, working relationships with secular governments such as Russia, France and Germany. Al Qaeda views them all as unbeliever nations.

Why does this U.S. administration want another war that it cannot win, against a nation that is no direct threat against U.S. interests? Who gains in the fomenting of yet another conflagration in this region?

Guess who...Bush, the Neocons that control him, the military-industrial complex, and Israel. Everyone else loses!!!

Greetings & Welcome !!!

Greetings to All:


This is my humble attempt at creating a blog. In this way, it is hoped that you will find the information, articles and links presented informative, entertaining and illuminating. Most importantly, however, it is hoped that in some way--however great or small it may be--individuals are awakened about the current state of affairs in this once-great country.

There are no sacred cows here, you don't have to keep Kosher, you don't have to keep the Sabbath, and pork is fine as long as you don't act like a pig. In other words, read the information contained herein at your own risk and be forewarned--I don't ask for quarter and I certainly give none, either.

In this blog, which is my first by the way, it is my goal to expose the corruption, graft, nepotism and cronyism that infests local (particularly New Orleans, Louisiana), national and international political arenas. Additional targets of my sardonic wrath definitely include Hollywood and the denizens that make up that twisted Tinseltown. And, as long as I am able to remain within the legal parameters of this fine blogging site, I will strive to crush, annihilate, decimate and eradicate the objects of my hate and disdain with as much written vitriol as I am able to muster.

Be forewarned: Every letter a dagger, every word a sword, every sentence a cannon, and every paragraph a bomb. This is my goal. There are many things that need to be discussed and the so-called Mainstream Media fails miserably in this regard. Actual newsworthy people, places and events are either glossed-over, ignored or focused-on as THEY (the controllers of this System) see fit, and invariably this is to the detriment of the people.

In sum, know that as I become more comfortable with this medium, it will be my pleasure to introduce links to wire-feeds, websites, and pictures that I find interesting and informative. In other cases, idiotic politicians and celebrities will be exposed and ridiculed. And in all, you will be informed and be given my particular take on the subject at hand.

Look for future updates VERY soon!