Saturday, January 22, 2011
So if unemployment goes down will this ruin JP Morgan's food stamp business?
Tunisia continues to open its breast to Islam - May Allah send them brothers and sisters in Egypt, Jordan and throughout the region that open it up as well
Protesters have now been joined by a small number of police - it would be a turning point if this now spreads to wider sections of the force.
Al Jazeera's Nazanin Moshiri reports from Tunis.
While the media portrayed Tunisian Youth that simply wanted to go to Europe, the reality is that a groundswell of Tunisians know Islam is their solution... As N. Africa is the crossroads of West and East, they are expressing themselves through the media of the era and no Saudi shaikh silent when the regime brings the oppressor home under protection, is needed to know music is haram. However, it is evident this struggle includes an Islamic component We should support that and nurture that and know that once iman enters into the hearts of men and is given an oppurtunity to profess its message, there is no doubt that it reins superior. We pray that Allah give Islam a free voice in Tunisia and throughout the region and ask you all to keep them in your prayers absent idealist criticisms.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Thursday, January 20, 2011
By MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC SCHMITT
It was all 30 years ago... and you can thank Kissinger for most of these messes... We should all celebrate when this man dies, a true criminal and friend of the shaytan. However, he seems to have correctly identified the utility of Obama as tool during the crisis. People are waking up all over, but most of them are buying silver and gold and throwing fits like Max Keiser getting to "profit from the crash". We continue to implore the Muslims everywhere to wake up and smash these scoundrels, implement Islam, and stop supporting their system. Just a familiar reminder to... Wake Up Ya Muslimeen!!!
source By Tom Robbins
published: January 19, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
If you could give Mr. Obama advice on what he needs to do in Afghanistan in the next few years, what would you tell him?
Obama has made a very significant significant shift in Afghanistan policy which has barely registered with the commentariat: that the US will be in Afghanistan in force until Dec 2014 and even beyond.
This is a far more significant decision than the "surge: decision of the fall of 2009, yet since it doesn't comfortably fit the narrative of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning president, this large shift has barely registered.
My advice would be that this is absolutely the right approach and the next step would be a status of forces agreement or even treaty with the Afghan government to solidify the fact of our long term presence in the country.The rest of the interview responses are equally as absurd... apparently nothing less than absolute defeat and annihilation will get the Americans off Muslim land... First, they assaulted his decision for withdrawal in 2011 and now with NATO and Obama committed to 2014, the pressure is being put on the centrist compromiser Obama already, either you alter course or the media will elect a Republican. However, commentary like this gives CNN a perfect oppurtunity to "confront us on our extremist rhetoric" and this time we can do it live with the experts.
What are the most important lessons of the War in Iraq that Mr. Obama should pay attention to?
Signaling American determination to stay can work wonders in the context of the Afghan War, which is what Bush did with the surge decision of the fall of 2006.
More INFO HERE about CNN's smut propaganda
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
A Palestine group led by Mahmood Abbas, who is considered by the West as a "president of the Palestinian Authority", has invited to the area under its control on the Western Bank of the River Jordan a notorious gang of mercenary killers Blackwater.
The HAMAS Movement said that the appearance of the American mercenary group Blackwater in the occupied West Bank pursues two goals: maintaining the occupation status-quo and training Abbas' hit squads so that they become more sadistic.
The HAMAS statement said that Palestine cannot be the area of activity of this gang of neo-crusaders who committed horrendous crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan by killing thousands of peaceful Muslims.
The permission by the PA to allow the mercenaries to operate in Palestine is regarded by the HAMAS as a new political defeat of the Abbasites and an abuse of the honor and dignity of the Palestinian people.
It is to be mentioned thereupon that, according to an American opposition paper The Nation, the US armed gang, the "private security firm Blackwater", which is widely used by the US army and the CIA against Muslims in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, received a task to murder Muslims throughout the world.
This has been testified under the oath before a federal court in Virginia by former employees of this organization and a former US marine.
After that, the U.S government even announced a formal investigation into the activities of the Blackwater "for murder or complicity in murder of former employees of this organization, U.S citizens, by its leader.
The witnesses said that the leader of the Blackwater, Erik Prince, "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith on the globe" and that the Prince's companies "encouraged the destruction of Iraqi life"
In their testimony to the court, they stated:
"Prince intentionally deployed in Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis.
Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, who fought the Crusades (against Palestine - KC).
Going to Iraq to shoot and kill Iraqis was viewed as a sport or game".
It is to be recalled that on June 10, 2009, Pakistani Taliban destroyed the base of Blackwater terrorists in Peshawar in a martyrdom operation. The terrorists' base was located in a luxurious five-star hotel.
Dependent mainstream Western press lied, as usual, that "terrorists killed innocent civilians and UN employees".
Department of MonitoringKavkaz Center
January 18, 2011 "Creators" -- -- Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown, especially today in the Maghreb and Middle East.
For the ouster of Tunisia’s Zine El Abidine Ben Ali has sent shock waves from Rabat to Riyadh. Autocrats, emirs, and kings have to be asking themselves: If rioters can bring down Ben Ali with his ruthless security forces, what prevents this from happening here?
Millions of militant Muslim young who have never shared in the wealth produced by the oil and gas must be asking: If Tunisians can take down a detested regime, why cannot we?
America had no role in this uprising, and our diplomats had been appalled at the corruption. Yet Ben Ali was an ally in the war on terror, and what happened in Tunisia could trigger a series of devastating blows to the U.S. position in the Middle East.
For when autocrats fall, it is not always democracy that rises. And in the Middle East, democracy is not necessarily America’s ally.
The fall of King Farouk in 1952 led to Col. Nasser in Egypt. The ouster and murder of King Faisal in Iraq in 1958 led to Saddam. The fall of King Idris in Libya in 1969 led to Gadhafi. The fall of Emperor Haile Selassie in Ethiopia in 1974 led to the rise of the murderous Col. Mengistu. And the fall of the shah of Iran in 1979 led to the Ayatollah Khomeini.
Often the old saw applies: “Better the devil we know…”
And should a new wave of revolts sweep the region, we might see the final collapse of the neoconservative foreign policy of George W. Bush.
That Mideast policy rested on several pillars: uncritical support of Israel, invasions to oust enemies in Afghanistan and Iraq, and U.S. occupations to rebuild and convert these nations into democracies.
Well before he left office, these policies had made the region so anti-American that Bush was himself, in opinion surveys, viewed less favorably by the Muslim masses than Osama bin Laden.
And when Bush, having declared at his 2005 inaugural that his goal was now to “end tyranny in our world,” called for elections in the Middle East, he got the results his policies had produced.
In Palestine, Hamas swept to power. In Lebanon, Hezbollah made such gains it was brought into the Lebanese government it has just brought down. When Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak allowed some electoral districts to be contested, the Muslim Brotherhood won most of them.
In Iran in 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected and became an instant favorite of the Arab masses because of his hostility toward Israel. The trend continued in the Iraqi elections of 2010, which enhanced the prestige and power of the anti-American Muqtada al-Sadr.
The message from the Mideast has been consistent and clear: When elections are held, or monarchs and autocrats overthrown, the masses will turn to leaders who will pull away from America and stand in solidarity with the Palestinians.
Turkey is a case in point. Before he invaded Iraq, Bush asked Ankara for permission to attack from its territory in the north, as well as Kuwait in the south. The parliament of this NATO ally of 50 years refused permission.
Since then, Turkey has been moving away from America, away from Israel, and closer to the Islamic peoples of a region Ottoman Turks ruled for centuries.
George H.W. Bush abjured “the vision thing.” But George W. had a road-to-Damascus experience during 9/11. He became a true believer that the security of his country and the peace of the world depended on a global conversion to democracy. And he would do the converting.
This is the ideology of democratism. Bush’s zealotry in pursuing his new faith blinded him to the reality that whatever their failings, the kings of Morocco, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia and Mubarak are more reliable friends than any regime that might come out of one-man, one-vote elections.
Why, other than ideology, would a leader demand that a friendly regime hold elections if it were a near certainty the regime to come out of those elections would be more hostile to one’s own country?
Dwight Eisenhower preferred the shah to Mohammad Mossadegh, though the latter had been elected. Ike backed the coup. Richard Nixon preferred Gen. Augusto Pinochet to Chile’s pro-Castro President Salvador Allende, who was elected. The general was with us.
Yet this raises anew the question: Why do they hate us?
In the 19th century, European monarchs disliked our republic, but their people loved us. Through World War II and much of the Cold War, the peoples of the Middle East saw America as the champion of liberation from imperial rule. We were first to throw the British out.
Perhaps we have lost the people of the Middle East, while winning the allegiance of their autocratic rulers, because we, too, have become an empire – and no longer see ourselves as others see us.
New statement from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan “How the 1,400 Troops Re-enforcement Could Uplift the Sagging Morale of 120,000 American Troops"
According to a report in the New York Times, Pentagon is intending to send 1,400 more soldiers to Afghanistan in the current year 2011, presumably to fill up the vacuum existing in the ranks of the American army— a vacuum which is the result of the tips-and-runs attacks of the Mujahideen and increase in their strength during the previous year.
The Pentagon claims that the surge of the troops in Afghanistan will carry out special raids and effective operations against the Mujahideen in the current year but it is not true. The fact is that the Americans faced huge material and life casualties last year, reaching an unprecedented level in the past nine years period. It was expected that the Americans would try to replenish the vacuum to an extent by resorting to a fresh surge.
As to the Pentagon’s claim that the new 1,400 troops will take part in special operations against the Mujahideen, we could only say, it is futile and meaningless. During the past nine years, Pentagon has not left any stone unturned in using all tactics and stratagems which their brutal imagination could envisage. They have not spared committing any crime including battles against the Mujahideen; torturing them; engineering surreptitious conspiracies; launching political ploys; perpetrating genocide against the Afghanis people; detaining the common Afghans and destroying their plantations, properties, hearths and homes. So we can say, the fresh surge by the Pentagon is not a new initiative but aimed at replenishing the void that has been created by the fatalities and injuries of the American troops during the past year. There seems no other rationale behind the re-enforcement.
If we look at facts, we know that Pentagon will not be able to fill up the vacuum of the troops casualties by a fresh surge of 1,400 troops. Every one knows the fact, that during the past year, some undeniable events took place and even American sources and the American spokesmen at Bagram Airbase have confirmed them. Furthermore, some sources put the American troop’s fatality during the last year at 3,000 soldiers. However, other substantiated evidence on hand and the Mujahideen’s data show the casualties were many times higher than the ones revealed.
Granted, if even they are able to fill up the vacuum by the miniscule 1,400 troops surge, then what about another vacuum that the American troops in Afghanistan are grappling with right now, and that is the problem of sagging morale; the descending psychological conditions and the fear of war. What does Pentagon think that, will the re-enforcement of 1,400 troops prove to be an effective panacea to fill the gap and what breakthrough they are going to make during 2011? Contrarily, these extra 1,400 troops will suffer from low morale when they join the American troops stationed there and hear their stories and accounts of armed clashes with the Taliban. The war of Afghanistan and the Jihad environ prevailing there will teach them exemplary lessons that it will be difficult to tell their condition from the already stationed troops which have been crumbled at the hands of the Mujahideen.
The troops of the fresh surge and the previous ones will be quashed thanks to the well-known Afghan willpower that their war specialties and tactics of special operations will be of no use any more. By then, they themselves will seek the way of escape from Afghanistan if Allah willing.
French floods: rescuers search houses as death toll rises
Rescuers searched mud-filled cars and houses for bodies above the French Riviera on Thursday as the death toll in the region's worst floods in two centuries rose to 25 people
2010–2011 Queensland floodsA series of floods hit Australia, beginning in December 2010, primarily in the state of Queensland including its capital city, Brisbane. The floods forced the evacuation of thousands of people from towns and cities. At least 70 towns and over 200,000 people were affected. Damage initially was estimated at around A$1 billion. The estimate of lost revenue from Australia's GDP is about A$30 billion. Queensland Treasurer Andrew Fraser said it was not possible to put a figure on the damage; "other than to say the damage bill is going to start with a b and not an m".
Three-quarters of the state of Queensland was declared a disaster zone. The 2010–2011 floods killed at least 31. As of 14 January, an additional 40 are missing in or around Grantham. The Queensland floods were followed by the 2011 Victorian floods which saw more than 50 communities in western and central Victoria also grapple with significant flooding
In the wake of the floods we have decriptions of ground zero floods , scenes equivilant to a battle field and likened to post war reconstruction
No one but a dumb thief plays with the security of others and then makes himself believe he will be secure. Whereas thinking people when disaster strikes make it their priority to look for its causes, in order to prevent it happening again.
Monday, January 17, 2011
With the name of Allah, Most Gracious Most Merciful
The Obama administration’s effort to persist in carrying out a deadly war in Afghanistan outside the public’s eye has been succeeding. Three means are employed: tight control over news flowing out of Afghanistan; vastly greater reliance upon secretive night raids by U.S. Special Forces; and a stepped-up use of private contractors/mercenaries on the ground in Afghanistan. The latter effort is crucial in helping reduce reported U.S. military casualties in Afghanistan, the primary factor which affects domestic U.S. politics.
Every now and then, the mainstream media reports upon a particularly egregious incident which took place in Afghanistan. Nowhere can a reader get a sense of the overall level of pain inflicted upon average Afghan civilians by the actions of U.S. and NATO occupation forces. This brief essay paints a picture of ground reality in Afghanistan during the month of December 2010. The United Nations’ UNAMA releases overall figures, but the data is simply presented in aggregate fashion and we are asked to believe. A skeptic cannot fact check the numbers. We are simply asked to believe these faith-based numbers. As I have noted many times, the UNAMA figures for civilians killed by U.S/NATO actions are at best around 70% of the actual numbers killed. For example, for 2009, the UNAMA captured less than 60% of the civilians who perished.
Graph 1. Cumulative total of civilians killed during December 2010
The graph above plots the cumulative total of Afghan civilians killed in U.S/NATO military actions during December 2010. The total is 68-69 persons, a greater December toll than in the previous two years:
|Civilians killed||Foreign occupation forces from hostile action*||Ratio civ to occupation|
|December 2008||42||26 (US @ 2)||1.58|
|December 2009||57-61||32 (US @ 15)||1.84|
|December 2010||68-69||39 (US @ 32)||1.77|
*Data from the Web-based compilation at http://www.icasualties.org/oef/
The data for 2010 is a serious undercount because of the dramatic increase of deadly night raids by U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) forces whose raids are clandestine and about which only limited reporting exists.
A comparison (Table 1) indicates the level of Afghan civilian deaths at the hands of the foreign occupation forces has oscillated around 900 per year since 2007. On the other hand, the level of foreign occupation soldiers’ deaths caused by hostile action has soared since 2007. The share of U.S occupation soldiers’ deaths of the total foreign occupation toll has risen from 35% in 2007 to 70% in 2010. The Table demonstrates the crucial role NATO forces played in fighting America’s Afghan war during the earlier years. In 2007, NATO casualties accounted for 55% of the total, but by 2010 the figure was a mere 30%.
Table 1. Civilian and Occupation Force Deaths in Afghanistan, 2006-2010
|Year||Civilian casualties||Occupation force deaths (@ U.S.)||Ratio of civ deaths to occup. force deaths|
|2006||660 - 782||130 (65)||5.1 – 6.0|
|2007||1010 - 1297||184 (83)||5.5 - 7.0|
|2008||864 - 1017||263 (133)||3.3 - 3.9|
|2009||936 - 1087||451 (266)||2.1 - 2.4|
|2010||807 - 915||632 (440)||1.3 – 1.4|
|Total….||4277 - 5098||1660 (987)||2.6 – 3.1|
Everyday life in Afghanistan was dangerous for children, women, Afghan Army and Police forces, clerics, road workers, public officials, saying night-time prayers, sleeping, driving to lunch, etc. The relative lethality for Afghan civilians versus U.S/NATO occupation forces is captured by the ratio in the last columns above which derives the ratio of Afghan civilians killed per foreign occupation soldier death. In 2006-7, five Afghan civilians died for every dead occupation soldier, but by 2010 this ratio was only 1.3, reflecting the shift in U.S. tactics towards using ground attacks as opposed to aerial bombing. On the other hand, ground attacks can be very deadly. For December 2010, 19 Afghan civilians died from air attacks, 45-46 from ground strikes and 4 from drone strikes (in the Pakistan border region). The numbers who were killed in secretive night-time SOCOM force strikes are no doubt mostly omitted from the reported totals above.
The following Table 2 presents a summary of the twenty-five U.S/NATO attacks which resulted in Afghan civilians being killed.
Table 2. Deadly Attacks by U.S/NATO forces during December 2010
|Date||Place||# victims and details||Type of attack|
|Dec 1-7||Maidan Wardak||1||1 AM night raid|
|Dec 4||Ghazni||1 girl injured who died||air|
|Dec 4||Paktia||7 road laborers||ground attack|
|Dec 6||North Waziristan||2||drone|
|Dec 7||Logar||2 Afghan Army soldiers||air|
|Dec 8||Helmand||3 women||air|
|Dec 10||Kandahar||7-8 clergy men||ground|
|Dec 11-13||Kunar||Estimated 7 killed||ground|
|Dec 14||Marja, Helmand||1||air|
|Dec 15/16||Helmand||4 Afghan Army soldiers||air|
|Dec 17||Nangarhar||2||night raid|
|Dec 18/19||Helmand||2 men (Abdul Aziz and Eid Gul)||night raid|
|Dec 21||Helmand||2 children||ground|
|Dec 21||Helmand||3 women||ground|
|Dec 23||Faryab||2 men (incl Mohammad Aminuddin)||air|
|Dec 24||Kabul city||2 night guards||night raid|
|Dec 27||Kapisa||2 sons of Mosafir (Walid and Khan)||mortar fire|
|Dec 28||North Waziristan||Estimated 2||drone|
|Dec 30||Maidan Wardak||Injured girl dies||ground|
Details beyond those mentioned in the Table are hard to come by for many of the attacks. The raid carried out on December 18, 2010 in the Lashkari bazaar area by NATO forces accompanied by the notorious soldiers of the Afghan National Security directorate, all of a sudden arrived by helicopter as the guests Eid Gul and Abdul Aziz, both aged over 50, were preparing for evening prayer. The attackers stormed into the home, killing both guests, injuring another man and abducting two other people.
At 11 A.M., on December 23rd, a NATO helicopter opened fire on a convoy of five cars driving 5 kms outside the provincial capital, Maymana of Faryab province. The travelers were going to a luncheon event hosted by a local council head. The NATO helicopter strafed one vehicle killing a police officer and Mohammad Aminuddin, brother of former Afghan parliament member Sarajuddin Mozafari. Two other policemen and a civilian were wounded.
The death tolls for Afghan civilians killed by U.S/NATO actions were 54-61 for November and 149-165 for October 2010. Nothing suggests a change in this daily slaughter. As Hornberger asserted in the “The Banality of Killing,” average Americans place no value upon the lives of Afghans, Iraqis and Pakistanis. Killing them has been normalized and trivialized. Any ways, “they” hide amongst civilians or are terrorists or enemy combatants. As Hornberger put it,
Never mind that our public officials have had 10 years to kill terrorists and enemy combatants to their hearts’ content but apparently still haven’t gotten them all. Never mind that the terrorists and enemy combatants might well now consist primarily of people who are simply trying to oust their country of a foreign occupier, like people did when it was the Soviet Union that was doing the occupying. Never mind that the number of terrorists and enemy combatants continues to rise with each new killing. It’s all just part and parcel of the new normality for American society.