Ahmadinejad: It’s your move Obama

Even though, the internet has exposed almost each of Zionist lies – one must give credit to Zionists for being consistant with their lying nature. They have been caught red-handed for putting words in their critics’ mouths – from Castro to Bishop Tutu; from Imam Khomeini to Chavez and from Ahmadinejad to Erdogan. The latest one is JTA’s (October 27, 2009) headline: “Iran will keep nukes as long as Israel does”. Disregarding IAEA’s several findings which confirmed that while Iran doesn’t have nuclear bombs (at least not yet), Israel has a stockpile of those – in fact what Ahmadinejad did say during his meeting with Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (as reported by JTA under the headline): “Iran will continue to progress in its nuclear program (doesn’t say for military usage) as long as Israel continues to have nuclear weapons. When an illegal regime possesses nuclear weapons, the other countries’ right for peaceful nuclear energy cannot be denied.”

Iranian government has just told IAEA watchdog that until the country receive the neclear fuel bought from France for its reactor in Tehran – it intends to keep its lightly enriched uranium inside Iran. Earlier, IAEA had negotiated a deal under which Tehran would ship 75% of its spent uranium stock to Russia and France for further reprocessing. Iranian nuclear negotiators had made a counter offer that Tehran may agree to IAEA’s proposal only if it gurantee foreign supply of nuclear fuel for the Iranian reactor, which is used for the production of medical isotopes for cancer treatment.

Since Islamic Revolution in 1979 – Tehran has developed very close relations with its nuclear neighbors (Russia, China, India and Pakistan) – with Russia and China being its major trading partners. All those four neighbors have their eyes set on Iran’s oil and gas resrves (second largest in the Middle East after Saudi Arabia). China is soon to become Iran’s No.1 trading partner (currently it stands US$29 billion annually). This is the major economic factor which would dull any US additional sanctions against Islamic Iran. Iran’s weak point, which the ZOGs intend to exploit – is country’s existing limited petroleum refining capacity. In order to counter western sanctions in this field, Chinese companies have already signed contracts worth US$8 billion to expand Iranian refineries.

Dilip Hiro in his October 29 article, titled Why Obama\’s Iran Policy Will Fail wrote:

“Obama has not drawn the right conclusion from his predeccesor’s failed Iran policy. A paradigm of sticks-and-carrots is simply not going to work in the case of Islamic Republic. Here, a lesson is readily available, if only the Obama White House is willing to consider Iran’s recent history. It’s unrealistic to expect that a regime which fought Saddam Hussein’s Iraq (then backed by the US) to standstill in a bloody eight-year war in the 1980s, unaided by any foreign power, and has for 30 years withstood the cosequences of the US-imposed economic sanctions will be alarmed by Washington’s fresh threat of Crippling Sanction (as demanded by its Tel Aviv master, Bibi).

The Chinese want to import Iran’s petroleum and natural gas through pipelines across Central Asia, thus circumventing sea routes vulnerable to US naval interdiction. As this is integral part of China’s energy security policy, little wonder that Chinese oil companies have committed an estimated US$120 billions – so far – to Iran’s energy industry.

As a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran is, in fact entitled to enrich uranium. The key point is the degree of enrichment: 5% enriched uranium for use as fuel in the electricity generating plant (called low enriched uranium); 20% enriched uranium for use as feedstock for producing medical isotopes), and 90%-plus for bomb-grade fuel……”

Afghanistan: Mission accomplished!!

Don’t take me wrong. I did not mean that Washington has accomplished its mission of liberating Afghan women (who are in worse conditions than they were under Taliban rule) or carrying out its ‘military solution’ in the country (Taliban still control 80% of Afghanistan outside Kabul and Kandhar) – but it did accomplish it real agenda, which was to establish military bases to protect the Caspian Sea pipeline and restablish the opium supply for the dying Jewish controlled Drugs market.

In April 1998, US Energy Secretary Bill Richardson visited Kabul and discussed the construction of pipeline to transport oil and gas from Central Asia through Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea via Pakistani port of Gawadar. The deal was made on behalf of UNOCAL. Then Mossad carried out the a false-flage bombing operation at US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998 for which Necons blamed Al-Qaeda. US president Bill Clinton saw it a golden opportunity to divert public attention from his sex scandal with Mossad agent Monica Lewinsky – and fired eight missiles into Afghanistan near Pakistani border. Most of these hitschools, mosques and villages – killing a number of innocent civilians and goats. This infuriated Mullah Omar, who in revenge backed-up from the pipeline deal.

Later, in a ‘religious decree’, Mullah Omer banned the cultivation of opium. The UN Drug Control agency reported that within two years’ period the opium supply from Afghanistan hit the rock-bottom, 176 tons – which created a short supply of drugs in the West and skyrocketed the prices.

Bush administration discussed a regime change in Afghanistan in March 2001. But to do that Washington needed a new Pearl Harbour – which the pro-Israeli operatives in the administration, Pentagon and Mossad were glad to provide. That ‘window of opportunity’ appeared on September 11, 2001 – which was blamed on Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden and Muslims within 24 hours of the WTC and Pentagon attacks. A former German minister of technology, Andreas von Buelow, called the ‘official story’ as stupid hoax: “I wonder why many questions are not asked. For 60 decisive minutes, the military and intelligence agencies let the fighter planes stay on the ground; 48 hours later, however, the FBI presented a list of suicide attackers (which did not appear on the passengers’ boarding list either). Within ten days, it emerged that seven of them were still alive.”

Thierry Meyssan in his book ’9/11 – The Big Lie’ stated: “The infallible method of achieving these attacks; the use of radio beacons….. It was not necessary in fact to have any hijackers onboard at all, as there was no taking of hostages; by hijacking into the planes’ computers before take-off, it would have been possible to take over the aircraft in flight, thanks to the Global Hawk technology perfected by the Department of Defence. The Boeings would have been under remote control like a drone – a plane without a pilot.”

Karen Kwiatkowski in her recent article, titled Afghanistan a Success – Time to Come Home!, wrote:

“Eight years ago, the public objective was to displace the Taliban and create a non-al-Qaida supporting democracy in Afghanistan.

For a moment, leave aside Washington’s more fundamental objective in the military invasion of Afghanistan and subsequent base-building – security for the trans-Afghanistan pipeline project, restoring the opium exports that had finally subsided under Taliban enforcement by early 2001, and improved military positions vis-a-vis Iran, Pakistan and Russia. The fossil fuel manupilations, drug money and maintaining a justification for our out-sizedmilitary-industrial complex are not the topics here.

The Taliban, while initially displaced from Kabiul, are regaining some political influence. We may claim “mission accomplished” because they are competing for influence in Afghanistan that has other comparable politized ethnicities – and the Taliban no longer receive significant support from Al-Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden.

Osama who?

Yes, that’s what we are saying.

Afghans are infuriated, not at this past summer’s flawed and corrupted election, but also at the previous elections that confirmed US satrap Hamid Karzai. Afghans have international support for thei case against US manipulated election – and we should take the anger of Afghans as confirmation of our success in creating a democratic mindset there.

Afghan also understand some of the basics our own founders and early Presidents grasped, and not just the successful use of insurgency tactics against a far better equipped and funded occupying army that wants to economically exploit and civilize them.

In a recent report of moral troubles for our Marines in the agricultural Helmand region, reporters “talked to the grey-beared men in the village… asked if they wanted school or more doctors, all said such questions were a matter for those who own the fields.

A matter for those who own the fields. In a nutshell, it’s clear that these Afghans get it Government, and collectively provided services and police, should be by the people , of the people and for the people.

Of course, a few setences latter, villagers in Helmand were surprised to hear a new round of elections to be held in. A villager is quoted: “We never even heard of elections. If we had, I suppose, we might have voted.”

While some might have missed the recent election, we may still consider our public mission accomplished. Not only Afghans understand how democracies should work, they appear to be ready and willing to participate in that iconic process of ballot-casting.

What more we could ask? The need is done. Afghanistan is a success by our own standards, and while our public claims of a righteous invasion still sustainable.

The Gateses and McCrystals of the world are the real barbarians, personally and professionally locked on a threadmill that demands ever more blood and more glory at any cost………”

Kashmir’s ‘Black October’

“The will of Kashmiris is the supreme law in Kashmir,” said Mahatma Gandhi.

“We are committed to abide by the decision of the people of Kashmir, whatever it might be. We are committed secondly to a plebicite (promised and agreed in UNSC resolution). If the people of Kashmir decide to remove or do away with their old ruler, we must accept that decision in view of our repeated assurances to the effect. If they want to leave India, that also we have to accept because of our assurance. We could of course want this done in the proper way and having due regard to the constitutional proprieties,” – Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India in a letter to Indian President Dr. Rajinder Prasad.

“From their arrival on October 27, 1947 to the present day, Indian troops continue to occupy a large proportion (60%) of the State of Jammu and Kashmir despite the increasing manifest opposition of the majority (80% Muslims) to their presence,” wrote British historian Alastair.

October 27 marked the 62nd anniversary of the Indian occupation of the Muslim-majority British Raj’s Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir. Historically, it were the Muslim rulers who united the over 5000 Hindu princely states in the Indian subcontinent, some as tiny as a ‘city state’, into Hindustan, later known as ‘Bharat’ and finally Christianized by the British colonialists into “India”. First Muslim rule was established in 712 CE by an young Muslim Arab General, Muhammad Bin Qassam, aged 17 – in the present-day Pakistan’s Sindh province.  

Like occpied Palestine, the for State of Jammu and Kashmir (J & K) is also occupied by the anti-Islam extremists. Muslim genocide in both Palestine (by the European Jews) and J & K (by Hindus from neighboring India) began in 1948. However, the plight of Kashmiri Muslims is long fallen from the Western screen for several reasons. One of the major one being that J & K doesn’t have oil reserves and there had never been a “Hindu Problem” in the past in Europe. However, when it comes to distorting the glorious Muslim history in those regions and their personal cunningness – Both Jew and Hindu extremists are birds of the same feathers.

Like Israeli Jews – the Hindu fascist too took the J & K issue to the United Nations – to buy time for their eventual annexation of the major part of the State into the Mother India against the wishes of state’s majority.

Mushtaq A. Jeelani, executive director of Toronto-based ‘Kashmiri-Canadian Council’ wrote under the title Black Day Anniversary for the Kashmiris.

Those who have followed developments in Kashmir know that the ongoing struggle for freedom began in 1931 when people came out in open revolt against then autocratic and tyrannical regime; they had nearly succeeded in over-throwing the regime when India stepped in 1947 to take over the tyrant disposed regime, faced with stiff resistance from the locals against its invasion – India transformed Kashmir into a purely military camp, killing hundreds of civilians.

The first war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir broke out in 1947. In 1948 India took the Kashmir issue to the United Nations Security Council, which constituted a special commission – the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan – with the mandate to independently investigate the matter and help the contending parties reach a negotiated settlement. The most important outcome of the deliberations of the commission were two resolutions passed by the Security Council on August 13th, 1948 and January 15th, 1949 respectively, calling upon the governments of India and Pakistan to hold a free, fair and impartial plebiscite under UN auspices in order to enable the people of Kashmir to decide whether they wanted to join India or Pakistan.

Since October 1989, the 700,000 strong Indian forces have killed more than 100,000 Kashmiris to silence the people’s demand for freedom, justice, and respect for human rights. They continue to carry out arbitrary detention, summary executions, custodial killings, extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, rape, sexual exploitation, torture and fake encounters. Generations of Kashmiris have grown up under the shadow of the gun; not a single family is unaffected; property worth hundreds of millions of dollars has been destroyed and the suffering and devastation continues unabated, sadly drawing no significant attention from the international community.

This year the occupying Indian troops kidnapped and killed 17-year-old Aasiya Jan and her sister-in-law, Nilofar Shakeel, 22; their corpses were found floating in a shallow stream on May 30th, 2009 after disappearing from their family’s apple orchards in the city of Shopian in Indian-administered Kashmir. Subsequently, the occupation forces’ attempt to cover it up set off months of massive demonstrations, several protesters were killed and hundreds injured in pitched street battles between anti-India demonstrators chanting: “we want freedom,” and the Indian occupation troops using brute force to get the situation under control.

Last two years have seen spontaneous, massive and non-violent protests where virtually everyone young and old, men and women, boys and girls are out on the streets protesting against India’s continued occupation. Such – on and off – protests have totally re-energized the Kashmiri freedom struggle into a classic people’s movement, which has stunned the Indian government.

The right to self-determination is the cornerstone of the United Nations system that underpins the contemporary international order. Its unquestioned acceptance has been established by core international instruments including the Charter of the United Nations, the two Covenants on Civil and Political and Economic, Social and Cultural rights and the declaration adopted by General Assembly resolution 1514.

For New Delhi to help resolve the Kashmir issue through peaceful negotiations, following actions are necessary and urgent:

• India must cease all military and paramilitary actions against civilians in Kashmir.
• India must end torture, custodial killings and extra-judicial executions of prisoners immediately.
• India must withdraw its military and paramilitary forces from all the urban areas immediately.
• India must release all the prisoners immediately arrested or captured in connection with the resistance movement and false cases instituted against them under the so-called emergency laws must be withdrawn.
• India must annul the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, the National Security Act and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, with respect to Kashmir, immediately.
• India must bring to justice all those killers and murderers who have committed horrendous crimes against innocents in Kashmir during the past 20 years. Or transfer all such cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for impartial justice.
• India must continue to help the displaced Kashmiri Hindu families to resettle in their homes in Kashmir and provide them all necessary assistance.
• India must allow International human rights monitors and the world media to visit Kashmir for their investigative work.
• Last but not least, India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir together with help from the international community can resolve the Kashmir issue peacefully; it may be time that India return to the negotiating table to resolve the 62-year-old Kashmir issue; this is essential for regional peace and security.”

The Father of Pakistani nation, Quaid-e-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, called the Valley of Kashmir as “Jaguar Vein” – and that’s the strategic importance of J & Kashmir is for Hindu India. By controlling the three major rivers (Ravi, Chenab and Sutlej) out of four – have their source in the Valley. By diverting the water, India has chocked Pakistan’s agriculture and power-generating sector. The power supply situation, since USrael installed their puppet Asif  Zardari as the ‘king maker’, has crippled the industrial and human life of the great majority of Pakistanis. Some ares experience load-shedding for upto 12 hours per day. Pakistan’s major source of electric power is the hydro-electric generating plants, but they cannot run at their full capacity when India divert the water sully to those dams.

The Mumbai-based Indian think tank, ‘International Center for Peace Initiatives’, admitted in its 2005 report: “Pakistan’s per capita water availability has declined from 5,600 cubic metres at the time of its independence in 1947 to 1,200 cubic metres in 2005. This is expected to reach the ‘threshold level’ of 1,000 cubic metres before 2010″.