Tuesday, December 28, 2010

خائن الرب ....الاسخريوطي المقدس ......شخصية الاسبوع




كتاب موثق على حلقات يكتبه الزميل سليمان العنداري - من فالوغا
وطارق نجم - من بيروت
وهناء حمزة - من دبي
ابحاث وتوثيق الدكتور زياد ماجد من غرفة نوم جيزيل خوري

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

الفداء

وخروف الفصح في لاهوت البطريرك صفير هم المسيحيين اللبنانيين وكما علق المسيح على خشبة هكذا يجب ان يعلق المسيحيون في لبنان على خازوق اميركي بمسعى البطريرك لكي يتم القول

سر الافخارستيا


المن في لاهوت البطريرك اي لاهوت السي أي ايه هو اموال الكونغرس المرصودة لمحاربة اعداء اميركا بالاعلام وبالدين وبرجال اللاهوت والمفتين سنة وشيعة ورجال حكمة دروز خاصة في لبنان فهل هناك من وسلوى اكثر بركة من مال الاميركيين الذي يصرفونه في لبنان ؟؟


القوة والعظمة التي للرب والتي حكي عنها في سفر الرؤيا


النص السابق ينطبق حصرا براي البطريرك صفير على الاميركيين فمن غيرهم لديه طائرات وقوة واجنحة لا تعد ولا تحصى ومن بيده اعطي عظمة القوة في هذا العالم الذي يحاول ابليس ان يحكمه ألا الاميركيين ؟؟


مسيح آخر الزمان الذي يماثل ملكي ساليم في الولادة


كاهنا إلى الابد وبلا اب وبلا ام وتعني في لاهوت السي اي ايه الذي يعنقه البطريرك صفير ان الامة الاميركية التي هي شعب الله المختار الجديد ولدت بلا اب وبلا ام مثل ملكي ساليم لانها فعلا امة لم يكن لها تاريخ في القارة الجديدة بل هي ولدت من لا شيء

لذا فمن يمسحه الاميركيون فهو مسيح الرب ورسول ملكوته

المقدمة

سر الافخارستيا والبطريرك نصرالله صفير


أسس يسوع هذا السر لان به الثبات وهو القائل

"من ياكل جسدي ويشرب دمي يثبت في وانا فيه" (يو6 : 56)

وبه ينال المؤمن بالمسيح الحياة الابديه

"انا هو الخبز الحي الذي نزل من السماء ان اكل احد من هذا الخبز يحيا الى الابد والخبز الذي انا اعطي هو جسدي الذي ابذله من اجل حياة العالم" (يو6 : 51).

وبه ينال المؤمن بالمسيح الخلاص والاستنارة

"الذي لنا فيه الفداء بدمه غفران الخطايا" (كولوسي 1 : 14).

وقد قال الرب للتلاميذ "هذا هو جسدي الذي يبذل عنكم، اصنعوا هذا لذكري" (لو19:22). قال هذا للرسل وهم مجتمعون معه في العلية يوم خميس العهد. ولهذا فإنم بولس الرسول حينما يتعرض لهذا الأمر يقول: "كأس البركة التي نباركها، أليست هي شركة دم المسيح؟! الخبز الذي نكسره، أليس هو شركة جسد المسيح؟!" (1كو16:10). فقال: "نبارك ونكسر"، دليل على الفعل، وقال "شركة دم المسيح" دلالة على قدسية هذا الأمر وأنه سر مقدس.

هذا الايمان المسيحي هو الذي يتجلى في سر التجسد اي ان الاله الذي هو الخالق تمثل للانسان بعرف المسيحي المؤمن في هيئة مخلوق تواضعا ورحمة لان خطية آدم لا يمكن ان يمحوها الا الموت اي موت البشرية جمعاء
ولان الخالق ضنين بمخلوقاته فقد نزل الى الانسان في هيئة واحد مثله ومات نيابة عن الانسانية جمعاء فحررها من الموت
وحين نتناول السر اي الخبز والخمر فاننا نتماثل والمسيح في جسد واحد هو هيكل الرب الذي يسكنه الاله لان الانسان هو هيكل الرب في رمزية الخلاص من الخطيئة للتائبين لا بالمعنى الحرفي للكلمة وإن ذهب كثير من الهراطقة الانجيليين المحتالين إلى القول بان الرب يسكن فعلا في صدر الانسان بما هو هيكله وينطق لسان التائبين حينها بصوت الرب وهي الهرطقة التي قادت المعمدانية إلى مهالك سيطرة ثلة من المحتالين عليها حيث يزعم كثير من الانبياء المعمدانيين الكذبة بان اوامرهم لاتباعهم هي اوامر الرب .

سر الافخارستيا عند البطريرك صفير له معنى اعمق
هو يرى بايمانه العميق بان الرب جعل سره في امة عظيمة هي شعبه الجديد الذي استبدل به شعبه القديم اسرائيل وان لم يتخلى عن الاخير ابدا وانما جعل شعبه الله المختار الجديد في موضع الراعي لخراف الرب التي هي شعب اسرائيل الحقيقي واشقاءه مسيحيي الشرق
هكذا تصبح امة الادارة الاميركية التي مسحها الرب هي مسيح الافخارستيا عند نصرالله صفير ويصبح البيت الابيض هو هيكل الرب وساكنه هو جسد المسيح الذي يناوله البطريرك للؤمنين في كل احد مع الخبز والخمر

اما صوت الرب فيسمعه البطريرك في همسات ملائكة الرب اي ملائكة الادارة الاميركية وهو كمؤمن حقيقي حين يسمع يطيع ولا يناقش ولا يجادل
الم يقل بولس الرسول في رسائله إلى الامم :

لا تجادلو لان الرب لا يحب من يطرحون الاسئلة --- ترجمة سانت جيمس طبعة وندسور
البطريرك مؤمن حقيقي لذا هو لا يطرح الاسئلة على ملائكة الرب اي ملائكة الادارة الاميركية التي هي هيكل الرب وشعبه المختار الراعي الصالح للخراف الضالة

ويستشهد البطريرك على لاهوت السي آي ايه هذا بوصوله شخصيا الى البطريركية المقدسة التي لا تعطى إلا للصالحين والاقوياء بالرب وهو يعترف في مقابلته مع سامي كليب --- انظر الرابط ---- انا ضعيف ولم اكن استحق الوصول الى البطريركية
ولكن الرب شاء ---- ويقصد البطرك بالرب شاء بان الادارة الاميركية شاءت فهي بفهمه الديني رب متجسد ومسيح ممسوح بالزيت في البيت الابيض
اما عن نبؤات لاهوت السي اي ايه فنورد بعضا مما جاء في العهد القديم

اولا:

ذبيحة ملكي صادق التي كانت من خبز وخمر "وملكي صادق ملك شاليم اخرج خبزا وخمرا وكان كاهنا لله العلي وباركه وقال مبارك ابرام من الله العلي مالك السماوات والارض" (الخروج 14) ستجد النص

وقد ذكر الرسول بولس ان"ملكي صادق هذا ملك ساليم كاهن الله العلي الذي استقبل ابراهيم راجعا من كسرة الملوك وباركه الذي قسم له ابراهيم عشرا من كل شيء

اولا ملك البر ثم ايضا ملك ساليم اي ملك السلام بلا اب بلا ام بلا نسب لا بداءة ايام له ولا نهاية حياة بل هو مشبه بابن الله هذا يبقى كاهنا الى الابد" (عبرانيين 7).

كاهنا إلى الابد وبلا اب وبلا ام وتعني في لاهوت السي اي ايه الذي يعنقه البطريرك صفير ان الامة الاميركية التي هي شعب الله المختار الجديد ولدت بلا اب وبلا ام لانها فعلا امة لم يكن لها تاريخ في القارة الجديدة بل هي ولدت من لا شيء

ثانيا
2. الجمرة التي وضعها الملاك علي شفتي اشعياء النبي: "في سنة وفاة عزيا الملك رايت السيد جالسا على كرسي عال ومرتفع واذياله تملا الهيكل السرافيم واقفون فوقه لكل واحد ستة اجنحة باثنين يغطي وجهه وباثنين يغطي رجليه وباثنين يطير وهذا نادى ذاك وقال قدوس قدوس قدوس رب الجنود مجده ملء كل الارض فاهتزت اساسات العتب من صوت الصارخ وامتلا البيت دخانا فقلت ويل لي اني هلكت لاني انسان نجس الشفتين وانا ساكن بين شعب نجس الشفتين لان عيني قد راتا الملك رب الجنود فطار الي واحد من السرافيم وبيده جمرة قد اخذها بملقط من على المذبح ومس بها فمي وقال ان هذه قد مست شفتيك فانتزع اثمك وكفر عن خطيتك" (اشعياء 6: 1-7). فكانت حقا هذه الجمره هي التناول المقدس الذي يعطي لمغفرة الخطايا "لان هذا هو دمي الذي للعهد الجديد الذي يسفك من اجل كثيرين لمغفرة الخطايا" (متى 26 : 28).


النص السابق ينطبق حصرا براي البطريرك صفير على الاميركيين فمن غيرهم لديه طائرات وقوة واجنحة لا تعد ولا تحصى ومن بيده اعطي عظمة القوة في هذا العالم الذي يحاول ابليس ان يحكمه ألا الاميركيين ؟؟

ثالثا
3. المن النازل من السماء: كان المن رمزا جليا لجسد الرب لان التناول المقدس "هو الخبز الذي نزل من السماء ليس كما اكل اباؤكم المن وماتوا من ياكل هذا الخبز فانه يحيا الى الابد" (يو6 : 58) "واما المن فكان كبزر الكزبرة ومنظره كمنظر المقل كان الشعب يطوفون ليلتقطوه ثم يطحنونه بالرحى او يدقونه في الهاون ويطبخونه في القدور ويعملونه ملات وكان طعمه كطعم قطائف بزيت ومتى نزل الندى على المحلة ليلا كان ينزل المن معه" (عدد 11) وفي (مزامير 105: 40 ) "سالوا فاتاهم بالسلوى وخبز السماء اشبعهم" وقارن الرب جسدة الحبيب بالمن في (يو6: 47 ) "الحق الحق اقول لكم من يؤمن بي فله حياة ابدية انا هو خبز الحياة اباؤكم اكلوا المن في البرية وماتوا هذا هو الخبز النازل من السماء لكي ياكل منه الانسان ولا يموت انا هو الخبز الحي الذي نزل من السماء ان اكل احد من هذا الخبز يحيا الى الابد والخبز الذي انا اعطي هو جسدي الذي ابذله من اجل حياة العالم... الحق الحق اقول لكم انتم تطلبونني ليس لأنكم رايتم ايات بل لانكم اكلتم من الخبز فشبعتم اعملوا لا للطعام البائد بل للطعام الباقي للحياة الابدية الذي يعطيكم ابن الانسان لان هذا الله الاب قد ختمه....الحق الحق اقول لكم ليس موسى اعطاكم الخبز من السماء بل ابي يعطيكم الخبز الحقيقي من السماء لان خبز الله هو النازل من السماء الواهب حياة للعالم فقالوا له يا سيد اعطنا في كل حين هذا الخبز فقال لهم يسوع انا هو خبز الحياة من يقبل الي فلا يجوع ومن يؤمن بي فلا يعطش ابدا".


المن في لاهوت البطريرك اي لاهوت السي أي ايه هو اموال الكونغرس المرصودة لمحاربة اعداء اميركا بالاعلام وبالدين وبرجال اللاهوت والمفتين سنة وشيعة ورجال حكمة دروز خاصة في لبنان فهل هناك من وسلوى اكثر بركة من مال الاميركيين الذي يصرفونه في لبنان ؟؟


4. خروف الفصح:

إن للتناول المقدس له قدسيته الخاصه ويجب التناول منه باستحقاق أي التوبه والنقاوة والايمان بفاعليه السر وقد شرح الرسول بولس ذلك "ان الرب يسوع في الليلة التي اسلم فيها اخذ خبزا وشكر فكسر وقال خذوا كلوا هذا هو جسدي المكسور لاجلكم اصنعوا هذا لذكري كذلك الكاس ايضا بعدما تعشوا قائلا هذه الكاس هي العهد الجديد بدمي اصنعوا هذا كلما شربتم لذكري فانكم كلما اكلتم هذا الخبز وشربتم هذه الكاس تخبرون بموت الرب الى ان يجيء اذا اي من اكل هذا الخبز او شرب كاس الرب بدون استحقاق يكون مجرما في جسد الرب ودمه ولكن ليمتحن الانسان نفسه وهكذا ياكل من الخبز ويشرب من الكاس لان الذي ياكل ويشرب بدون استحقاق ياكل ويشرب دينونة لنفسه غير مميز جسد الرب من اجل هذا فيكم كثيرون ضعفاء ومرضى وكثيرون يرقدون" (1كو11) وفي رساته الي اهل كورونثوس الاول الاصحاح العاشر قال " كاس البركة التي نباركها أليست هي شركة دم المسيح؟ الخبز الذي نكسره اليس هو شركة جسد المسيح؟ فاننا نحن الكثيرين خبز واحد جسد واحد لاننا جميعنا نشترك في الخبز الواحد".


وخروف الفصح في لاهوت البطريرك صفير هم المسيحيين اللبنانيين وكما علق المسيح على خشبة هكذا يجب ان يعلق المسيحيون في لبنان على خازوق اميركي بمسعى البطريرك لكي يتم القول

ها هو الاعمى يبصر والاكمه يشفى والكسيح يمشى


Tuesday, December 21, 2010

فأمر المقاومة خطير



فأمر المقاومة خطير


للاسف، أجد نفسي متشائماً، ليس بسبب وضع لبنان فقط، بل بسبب الحالة العربية المزرية
التي يعيشها العالم العربي.

القرار الاتهامي ليس صدفة أن يتحول كله ضد حزب الله، وليس صدفة ايضاً ان تبدأ المحكمة الدولية أعمالها في اذار لتحاكم حزب الله ولو غيابياً.

المسألة عميقة وخطيرة، وتستهدف إضعاف المقاومة ومحاصرتها، ووصفها بأنها منظمة ارهابية، وان تطلب واشنطن من اوروبا إدراج اسم حزب الله على لائحة الارهاب خصوصاً في ظل القرار الاتهامي والمحكمة الدولية.

المتحمسون للقرار الاتهامي كمن يلحس المبرد، فهو يلعق دمه، دون ان يدري، واذا كان يعتبر ان القرار الاتهامي ورقة في يده، فالقرار الاتهامي ورقة في يد الخارج وضد المقاومة.

المحكمة الدولية لن يستطيع أحد إيقافها على ما يبدو حتى الآن، لأن الأنظمة الديمقراطية الاوروبية تعيش في حالة اقلية ضعيفة، واكثرية قوية، ولذلك فلن تطالب أي دولة اوروبية بوقف عمل المحكمة، بل على العكس ستعمل على تأييدها كي لا تأخذ الأقلية من الأكثرية الحاكمة.

المشكلة آتية، وإني أرى ضباباً وغيوماً آتية الى سماء لبنان، ولولا ايماني بالمقاومة وقدرتها في الدفاع عن نفسها وعلى المواجهة، لغرقت في تشاؤم رهيب، لكن المعركة شبه كونية تقودها الولايات المتحدة الاميركية واسرائيل، ويجري الاعداد لها ضد حزب الله، وعلى ما اعتقد فإن حزب الله يعرف خطورة ما يجري والتخطيط ضده، لكن حزب الله يجب ان يدرك تماماً أن هذه المرة لا مجال للمساومة، ولا مجال للمرونة، لا مجال لمراعاة ظروف اطراف داخلية لبنانية، بل ان الأمر يتطلب حسماً وحزماً، وإلا فالمقاومة ستكون خاسرة، لا سمح الله.

إني أرى المؤامرة أكبر من كل ما يجري، ورغم تأكيد اطراف كثيرة، ان الورقة السورية - السعودية منتهية، فإني لا اعرف اذا ما كان هناك ورقة سورية - سعودية ستقيم الحل في لبنان وتعيد الوضع الى استقراره، فالقوى التي تقف في وجه المسعى السوري - السعودي هي اطراف كبيرة وقوية وعلى رأسها واشنطن واللوبي الصهيوني، وتعتبر ان المحكمة الدولية فرصة تاريخية لإغراق حزب الله في قرار اتهامي وفي محاكمة دولية، والمخطط سيكون طلب اسم تلو اسم من مسؤولي المقاومة، وكلما رفضت المقاومة، كلما تبلّغ مجلس الأمن، وكلما زاد ضغوطه على لبنان، وعملت اميركا مع حلفائها على محاصرة المقاومة في لبنان وعلى محاصرة لبنان لتضع المقاومة ضمن الحصار ايضاً.

إن هنالك ثنائية غريبة في موضوع القرار الاتهامي والمحكمة الدولية، وهذه الثنائية قاتلة، فمن جهة يجري العمل على تخدير حزب الله بأن الأمور ناضجة والحل قريب، واذا ما نامت المقاومة على حرير حلٍ يجري لمشكلة القرار الإتهامي والمحكمة الدولية، فالمقاومة حتماًً واقعة في خطر كبير، فتخديرها مقدمة لضربها أو لذبحها لا سمح الله.

أما الثنائية الثانية فهو ان يقوم حزب الله بعمل عسكري يجعل قسماً من الشعب اللبناني يرفض هذا العمل، اضافة الى رأي عام عربي يرفض هذا الموضوع. فما الحل يا ترى؟

إن اقتراحي الوحيد هو إعطاء مهلة لاتخاذ موقف من القرار الاتهامي والمحكمة الدولية، وهذه المهلة لا تزيد عن نهاية السنة، فإذا لم يتم الاستجابة لطلب المقاومة، فعليها الاستقالة من الحكومة مع وزراء المعارضة، وعليها الابتعاد عن العمل العسكري إلا في حال الدفاع عن النفس، وعلى المقاومة استنفار طاقاتها مع حلفائها لتشكيل جبهة ضد القرار الاتهامي يضم المقاومة والرئيس بري والنائب جنبلاط والعماد عون والنائب سليمان فرنجية، ويتم تخيير اطراف مسؤولة او سياسية، فإما ان تكون في اطار هذه الجبهة الرافضة للقرار الاتهامي، وإلا فإنها تترك المؤامرة تمر لتقع الفتنة في لبنان.

للأسف الكبير، ورغم ان طبعي هو تفاؤلي، فإني ارى غيوماً سوداء آتية فوق سماء لبنان، ولست في مجال التبصير والتنظير، بل أنا اتحدث عن نوايا اميركا واسرائيل، التي تعطي دليلاً واشارة الى إن الامور تسير نحو محاولة حصار المقاومة. ماذا يفيد المقاومة لو ربحت مقاعد وزارية وخسرت هيبتها او نفسها؟

الخلاصة هي طالما ان العمل في القرار الاتهامي يسير، فإن المعارضة يجب ان ترد بعدم وجود حكومة في لبنان تعمل، ليس من خلال تعطيل مجلس الوزراء من قبل موالاة او معارضة، بل من خلال اعطاء الاشارة القوية للمجتمع الدولي انه لا يوجد في لبنان حكومة ستتعاون مع التحقيق الدولي ومع المحكمة الدولية، وبالتالي سترى اميركا واسرائيل والمحكمة الدولية فراغاً رسمياً لبنانياً، وعندها في غياب وجود حكومة تصبح أغنية فيروز تنطبق على اميركا واسرائيل «لا تندهي ما في حدا» فلتتعامل واشنطن مع امر واقع جديد، هو انه في لبنان وبفعل دعم المقاومة لا يوجد حكومة، ولا يوجد مجلس نواب، ولا مؤسسات، فإما وقف العمل بالقرار الاتهامي وإما الاستقالة فوراً من الحكومة ومن اطياف المعارضة مع وزراء جنبلاط، واذا كانت فرنسا تنصح بالعكس، وسوريا تجاريها، والسعودية تقدم وعودها، فإن كل هذه الامور لن تفيد المقاومة عند ساعة الحقيقة، فأمر المقاومة خطير


Saturday, December 18, 2010

Extreme Inequality Helped Cause Both the Great Depression and the Current Economic Crisis


It is clear that when banks become too big, it harms the economy. Economist Steve Keen says that "a sustainable level of bank profits appears to be about 1% of GDP", and higher bank profits lead to a Ponzi economy and a depression.

But most mainstream economists dismiss the idea that wealth inequality among individuals causes economic crises.

Of course, some ideologues will argue that even discussing inequality is waging class warfare, and smacks of an attack on capitalism.

However, the father of modern economics - Adam Smith - disagreed.

And as Warren Buffet, one of America's most successful capitalists and defenders of capitalism, points out:

There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war ....

And as I have previously noted, radical concentration of wealth actually destroys capitalism, turning it instead into socialism for the rich.

Is There a Causal Connection Between Extreme Inequality and Economic Crises?

More to the point, most mainstream economists do not believe there is a causal connection between inequality and severe downturns.

But recent studies by Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty are waking up more and more economists to the possibility that there may be a connection.

Specifically, economics professors Saez (UC Berkeley) and Piketty (Paris School of Economics) show that the percentage of wealth held by the richest 1% of Americans peaked in 1928 and 2007 - right before each crash:

Figure 1

As the Washington Post's Ezra Klein wrote in June:

Thumbnail image for inequalitygraph.jpg

***

Krugman says that he used to dismiss talk that inequality contributed to crises, but then we reached Great Depression-era levels of inequality in 2007 and promptly had a crisis, so now he takes it a bit more seriously.

The problem, he says, is finding a mechanism. Krugman brings up underconsumption (wherein the working class borrows a lot of money because all the money is going to the rich) and overconsumption (in which the rich spend and that makes the next-most rich spend and so on, until everyone is spending too much to keep up with rich people whose incomes are growing much faster than everyone else's).

Robert Reich has theorized for some time that there are 3 causal connections between inequality and crashes:

First, the rich spend a smaller proportion of their wealth than the less-affluent, and so when more and more wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of the wealth, there is less overall spending and less overall manufacturing to meet consumer needs.

Second, in both the Roaring 20s and 2000-2007 period, the middle class incurred a lot of debt to pay for the things they wanted, as their real wages were stagnating and they were getting a smaller and smaller piece of the pie. In other words, they had less and less wealth, and so they borrowed more and more to make up the difference. As Reich notes:

Between 1913 and 1928, the ratio of private credit to the total national economy nearly doubled. Total mortgage debt was almost three times higher in 1929 than in 1920. Eventually, in 1929, as in 2008, there were “no more poker chips to be loaned on credit,” in [former Fed chairman Mariner] Eccles' words. And “when their credit ran out, the game stopped.”
And third, since the wealthy accumulated more, they wanted to invest more, so a lot of money poured into speculative investments, leading to huge bubbles, which eventually burst. Reich points out:
In the 1920s, richer Americans created stock and real estate bubbles that foreshadowed those of the late 1990s and 2000s. The Dow Jones Stock Index ballooned from 63.9 in mid-1921 to a peak of 381.2 eight years later, before it plunged. There was also frantic speculation in land. The Florida real estate boom lured thousands of investors into the Everglades, from where many never returned, at least financially.

Wall Street cheered them on in the 1920s, almost exactly as it did in the 2000s.
But I believe there may be a fourth causal connection between inequality and crashes. Specifically, when enough wealth gets concentrated in a few hands, it becomes easy for the wealthiest to buy off the politicians, to repeal regulations, and to directly or indirectly bribe regulators to look the other way when banks were speculating with depositors money, selling Ponzi schemes or doing other shady things which end up undermining the financial system and the economy.

For example, as John Kenneth Galbraith noted in The Great Crash, 1929, Laissez-faire deregulation was the order of the day under the Coolidge and Hoover administrations, and the possibility of a financial meltdown had never been seriously contemplated. Professor Irving Fisher of Yale University - the Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin or Larry Summers of his day - had stated authoritatively in 1928 that "nothing resembling a crash can occur".

Indeed, when enough money is concentrated in a couple of hands, the affluent can lobby to appoint to government positions, pay to endow prominent university chairs, and create think tanks and other opportunities for economics professors who spout the dogmas "everything will always remain stable because we've got if figured out this time" and "don't worry about fraud" to gain prominence. For example, Bill Black has written about The Olin Foundation's promotion over the last couple of decades of these dogmas.

I believe that the fourth factor exacerbates the first three. Specifically, when the wealthy have enough money to drown out other voices who might otherwise be heeded by legislators and regulators, they can:

  • Skew the tax code and other laws so that they can get even wealthier
  • Encourage a debt bubble (Bill Black has repeatedly explained that the fraudsters blow huge bubbles, knowing that the government will bail them out when the bust leads to defaults)
  • And create new Ponzi schemes for speculation

(Admittedly, there might not always be a direct connection, but all of the factors are at least intertwined.)

Reuters wrote an excellent piece on the issue of inequality and crashes (discussing the first three factors) last month:

Economists are only beginning to study the parallels between the 1920s and the most recent decade to try to understand why both periods ended in financial disaster. Their early findings suggest inequality may not directly cause crises, but it can be a contributing factor.

***

America has one of the largest wealth gaps among advanced economies. Based on an inequality measure known as the Gini coefficient, the United States ranks on a par with developing countries such as Ivory Coast, Jamaica and Malaysia, according to the CIA World Factbook.

***

There is little agreement among economists about what precisely links high inequality to crises, which helps explain why so few officials saw the financial upheaval coming.

Rapid expansion of credit is one common thread.

***

Raghuram Rajan, a professor at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business and a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, believes governments tend to promote easy credit when inequality spikes to assuage middle-class anger about falling behind.

"One way to paper over the rising inequality was to lend so that people could spend," Rajan said.

In the 1920s, it was expansion of farm credit, installment loans and home mortgages. In the last decade, it was leveraged borrowing and lending, by home buyers who put no money down or investment banks that lent out $30 for each $1 held.

"Housing credit gave you an instrument to assist those falling behind without them feeling they're beneficiaries of some sort of subsidy," Rajan said. "Even if their incomes are stagnant, they feel really good about becoming homeowners."

Another theory is that concentration of wealth at the top sends investors searching for riskier interest-bearing savings. When so much cash is sloshing around, traditional safe investments such as Treasury debt yield very little, and wealthy investors may seek out fatter returns elsewhere.

Mark Thoma, who teaches economics at the University of Oregon, wonders if the flood of investment cash from the ultra-rich -- both in the United States and abroad -- encouraged Wall Street to create seemingly safe mortgage-backed securities that later proved disastrously risky.

"When we see income inequality rising, we ought to start looking for bubbles," he said.

Kemal Dervis, global economy and development division director at Brookings and a former economy minister for Turkey, said reducing inequality isn't just a matter of fairness or morality. An economy based on consumption needs consumers, and if too much wealth is concentrated at the top there may be times when there is not enough demand to support growth.

"There may be demand for private jets and yachts, but you need a healthy middle-income group (to drive consumption of basic goods)," he said. "In the golden age of capitalism, in the 1950s and 60s, everyone shared in income growth."

The fact that economists are even examining the link between inequality and financial crises shows just how much the thinking has changed in the wake of the Great Recession.

***

Ajay Kapur, a Deutsche Bank strategist, spotted the inequality parallels between the 1920s and the most recent decade, but didn't see the meltdown coming. The former Citigroup strategist created a stir five years ago when he built an investment strategy around his thesis that essentially divided the world into two camps: the rich and the rest.

Kapur told clients in 2005 that the United States and a handful of other economies were developing into "plutonomies" where the wealthy few powered economic growth and consumed much of its bounty, while the "multitudinous many" shared the leftovers.

Plutonomies come around only once or twice a century, he argued -- 16th century Spain, 17th century Holland, the Gilded Age. The last time it happened in the United States was during the "Roaring 1920s".

***

At least one new arrival to Washington's policy-making scene, Fed Vice Chairman Janet Yellen, has expressed concern that extreme inequality could ultimately undermine American democracy.

"Inequality has risen to the point that it seems to me worthwhile for the U.S. to seriously consider taking the risk of making our economy more rewarding for more of the people," she wrote in a 2006 speech.

For further background, see this, this and this.

Note: The graphics above are slightly misleading, as Saez notes that inequality is actually worse now than it's been since 1917.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: White House Cabinet Member Suggested Killing an American Service Man to Justify War


On Monday, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Hugh Shelton told told Jon Stewart that a Clinton cabinet member proposed letting Saddam kill an American pilot as a pretext for war in Iraq:
And see this.

This might seem, at first glance, like just an odd, one-off suggestion.

However, as Reported by the New York Times and other newspapers, George W. Bush also suggested to Tony Blair that a U.S. plane be painted in United Nations colors so that - if Saddam shot it down - it would create a casus belli. As the Times wrote in 2006:
The memo [confirmed by two senior British officials as being authentic] also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire ....
And it's not just the current war in Iraq. As I've previously pointed out, war is always sold to it's people by artificially demonizing the enemy:

Countries need to lie about their enemies in order to demonize them sufficiently so that the people will support the war.

That is why intelligence "failures" - such as the following - are so common:

  • It is also now well-accepted that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident which led to the Vietnam war was a fiction (confirmed here).

And governments from around the world have admitted that - for many years - they have used false flag incidents to sell their people on the wars they wish to launch.

For example:

  • A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that - under orders from the chief of the Gestapo - he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland. Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson
  • The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950's to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister
  • Israel admits that an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this)
  • As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings. Official State Department documents show that - only nine months before - the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. (While the Joint Chiefs of Staff pushed as a serious proposal for Operation Northwoods to be carried out, cooler heads fortunately prevailed; President Kennedy or his Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara apparently vetoed the plan)
  • The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him "to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident", thus framing the ANC for the bombing
  • An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author)
  • According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.
  • The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings
  • As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the "war on terror".
  • Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”
  • United Press International reported in June 2005:
    U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.
  • Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers
  • At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence

There are many other instances of false flag attacks used throughout history proven by the historical evidence. See this, this and this. The above are only some examples of governments admitting to using false flag terror....

The Pearl Harbour Deception....






All war is by deception. Even those we are taught were "good."


Dec. 7, 1941 was "a day of infamy," in more ways than one.








FDR and the making of a war
by Srdja Trifkovic

The "mother of all conspiracies."


The claims can be summarized as follows: President Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to enter the war in Europe, especially after the fall of France (June 1940). In this desire he was supported by the old elite of Anglophile Wasps and by the increasingly influential Jewish lobby. In June 1941 they were joined by the assorted leftists who cared about the Soviet Union more than about America. After meeting FDR at the Atlantic Conference (August 14, 1941) Churchill noted the "astonishing depth of Roosevelt's intense desire for war." But there was a problem: the President could not overcome the resistance to "Europe's war" felt by most Americans and their elected representatives.

The mood of the country was a problem, and Roosevelt therefore resorted to subterfuge. He systematically and deliberately provoked the Japanese into attacking the United States. His real target was Hitler: Roosevelt expected the German dictator to abide by the Tripartite Pact and declare war on America, and hoped that Hitler's decision would be facilitated by a display of America's apparent vulnerability. Accordingly, even though Roosevelt was well aware of the impending attack on Pearl Harbor, he let it happen and was relieved, even pleased, when it did. The evidence is circumstantial, of course, and chronologically its more important elements proceed as follows:

1. In the summer of 1940 Roosevelt ordered the Pacific to relocate from the West Coast to Hawaii. When its commander, Admiral Richardson, protested that Pearl Harbor offered inadequate protection from air and torpedo attack he was replaced.

2. On October 7 1940 Navy IQ analyst McCollum wrote an eight-point memo for Roosevelt on how to force Japan into war with U.S., including an American oil embargo against Japan. All of them were eventually accomplished.

3. On 23 June 1941 - one day after Hitler's attack on Russia - Secretary of the Interior and FDR's Advisor Harold Ickes wrote a memo for the President in which he pointed out that "there might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

4. On 18 October Ickes noted in his diary: "For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan."

5. The U.S. had cracked key Japanese codes before the attack. FDR received "raw" translations of all key messages. On 24 September 1941 Washington deciphered a message from the Naval Intelligence HQ in Tokyo to Japan's consul-general in Honolulu, requesting grid of exact locations of U.S. Navy ships in the harbor. Commanders in Hawaii were not warned.

6. Sixty years later the U.S. Government still refuses to identify or declassify many pre-attack decrypts on the grounds of "national security"!

7. On November 25 Secretary of War Stimson wrote in his diary that FDR said an attack was likely within days, and asked "how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without too much danger to ourselves. In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors."

8. On November 25 FDR received a "positive war warning" from Churchill that the Japanese would strike against America at the end of the first week in December. This warning caused the President to do an abrupt about-face on plans for a time-buying modus vivendi with Japan and it resulted in Secretary of State Hull's deliberately provocative ultimatum of 26 November 1941 that guaranteed war.

9. On November 26 Washington ordered both US aircraft carriers, the Enterprise and the Lexington, out of Pearl Harbor "as soon as possible". This order included stripping Pearl of 50 planes or 40 percent of its already inadequate fighter protection. On the same day Cordell Hull issued his ultimatum demanding full Japanese withdrawal from Indochina and all China. U.S. Ambassador to Japan called this "The document that touched the button that started the war."

10. On November 29 Hull told United Press reporter Joe Leib that Pearl Harbor would be attacked on December 7. The New York Times reported on December 8 ("Attack Was Expected," p. 13) that the U.S. knew of the attack a week earlier.

11. On December 1 Office of Naval Intelligence, ONI, 12th Naval District in San Francisco found the missing Japanese fleet by correlating reports from the four wireless news services and several shipping companies that they were getting signals west of Hawaii.

12. On 5 December FDR wrote to the Australian Prime Minister, "There is always the Japanese to consider. Perhaps the next four or five days will decide the matters."

Particularly indicative is Roosevelt's behavior on the day of the attack itself. Harry Hopkins, who was alone with FDR when he received the news, wrote that the President was unsurprised and expressed "great relief." Later in the afternoon Harry Hopkins wrote that the war cabinet conference "met in not too tense an atmosphere because I think that all of us believed that in the last analysis the enemy was Hitler... and that Japan had given us an opportunity." That same evening FDR said to his cabinet, "We have reason to believe that the Germans have told the Japanese that if Japan declares war, they will too. In other words, a declaration of war by Japan automatically brings..." - at which point he was interrupted, but his expectations were perfectly clear. CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow met Roosevelt at midnight and was surprised at FDR's calm reaction. The following morning Roosevelt stressed to his speechwriter Rosenman that "Hitler was still the first target, but he feared that a great many Americans would insist that we make the war in the Pacific at least equally important with the war against Hitler."

Jonathan Daniels, administrative assistant and press secretary to FDR, later said "the blow was heavier than he had hoped it would necessarily be... But the risks paid off; even the loss was worth the price." Roosevelt confirmed this to Stalin at Tehran on November 30, 1943, by saying that "if the Japanese had not attacked the US he doubted very much if it would have been possible to send any American forces to Europe."

Hitherto eminently establishmentarian historian Jonathan Toland has made it possible for Pearl Harbor "conspiracy theorists" to become more respectable "revisionists" with his Infamy: Pearl Harbor and its Aftermath [1981]: "Was it possible to imagine a President who remarked, 'This means war,' after reading the [thirteen-part 6 December] message, not instantly summoning to the White House his Army and Navy commanders as well as his Secretaries of War and Navy? ... Stimson, Marshall, Stark and Harry Hopkins had spent most of the night of December 6 at the White House with the President. All were waiting for what they knew was coming: an attack on Pearl Harbor. The comedy of errors on the sixth and seventh appears incredible. It only makes sense if it was a charade, and Roosevelt and the inner circle had known about the attack."

Churchill later wrote that FDR and his top advisors "knew the full and immediate purpose of their enemy": "A Japanese attack upon the U.S. was a vast simplification of their problems and their duty. How can we wonder that they regarded the actual form of the attack, or even its scale, as incomparably less important than the fact that the whole American nation would be united?"

The real target, Adolf Hitler, duly walked into the trap on December 10, 1941, thus committing the greatest blunder of his career and ensuring Germany's defeat. The rest, as they say, is history. The ensuing fury gave birth first to a superpower, then to an empire. It swept away doubters and isolationists, it legitimized a total war for unconditional surrender. It created nuclear weapons, the Cold War, the military-industrial complex, the "intelligence community," and today's benevolent global hegemony. The people who run the American Empire today will as strenuously deny the existence of a Pearl Harbor conspiracy as their predecessors denied it half a century ago. But in their hearts they'll admit that, even if there had not been one, it should have been invented.
Much more at apfn


Pearl Harbor - Mother of all Conspiracies


Fascism and False Flags = War By Deanna Spingola


Pearl Harbor - Conspiracy



A
National Security Agency (NSA) Study rules out Pearl Harbor conspiracy - 2008
Well of course, any admission might lead to more questioning of 9/11 .....

Monday, December 6, 2010

ASSANGE'S WIKILEAKS IS AN INSIDE JOB FOR DISTRACTING SHEEPLE FROM UTTER LAYERS OF CORRUPTION


wikileaks_is_CIA left a comment on the post "GENERAL SAYS WIKILEAKS IS CIA AND MOSSAD":

This is directly from the Wikipedia November 2007, since erased:

"There have been many allegations that Wikileaks is a CIA front (eg. by cryptome)...

Arguments have centered around the location of Wikileaks-related matters and the source of its funding...

National Security Agency HQ Maryland.

"The contact number on Wikileaks.org has a D.C. area code and is a Verizon cell phone number registered in Adelphi, Maryland.

"Intellus.com, a Web tracking service, connected the number to a 'Va Reston.'

CIA building in Reston

"Twenty miles down the road from Adelphi is Reston, Virginia, home to iDefense labs, whose Web site says it is 'a comprehensive provider of security intelligence to governments.'

"The DC telephone number is also on the same telephone exchange as the newly created (2006) Iraq Study Group and the Afghanistan embassy of Washington."

Website for this image

At http://tinfoilpalace.eamped.com/ we read the following posts on Julian Assange and WikiLeaks: Genuine Rebel or the Next Fake ...

A. Assange fits all the specifications of a phony rebel, dished up to the public so that we eventually accept the silencing of whistleblowers and the closure of truth-related websites, all in the name of national security.

A few notes of my observations:

1) If Assange was truly rogue, the mainstream media would simply black him out.

2) Assange accepts the official version of the events of 9/11. Red flag.

3) The finances of WikiLeaks have been described as "opaque."

Website for this image

4) The overly-emphasized "CIA is after Assange" story in the media rings false.

The CIA does not advertise its own agendas and missions, and the media rarely intrudes on their discretion. But here we have something like Wile E Coyote and the Roadrunner. What's wrong with this picture?

5) The recent (last week) NYT profile of Assange was originally bylined by Eric Schmitt, then the names were changed.

Assange has used Schmitt in the past to communicate.

Schmitt is a senior writer on terrorism and national security for the NYT, and is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations!

Red and Black - Satanic.

6) Assange dresses the part: black suit, red tie. C'mon.

7) The WikiLeaks document release reminds many of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. Remember, Ellsberg worked for Internal Security Affairs.

He was a spook.

Ellsberg himself has recently come out to say he thinks the CIA may be targeting Assange. Oh, please.

8) The information that has come to light in the massive document release is not particularly groundbreaking, and as such, fits the description of a "limited hang-out."

The timing, too, scarcely a week before elections, is worth noting.

(I tried three times to post a one-paragraph comment on the NYT Assange profile, suggesting WikiLeaks was disinfo. The moderators turned it down twice, as the comments thread ballooned from 106 into the 400s, with everyone pro and con Assange but swallowing him whole as the real thing. After a direct appeal to the mods on my third attempt, they posted it shortly before locking the thread.) Netanyahu says: “Israel has not been damaged at all by the WikiLeaks publications. On the contrary, the documents showed support in many quarters for Israel’s assessments, especially on Iran.” Website for this image http://incogman.net/

B. He's as dirty as a they come.

I'll say it again: 15,000 more dead in Iraq than the U.S. admitted?

Try close to ONE MILLION, per the Lancet several years back.

Do I trust the Lancet or some CIA plant? Well, I don't trust the Lancet, either; but, I'd trust them over this yackdoodle any day of the week.

C. Well, well, well.......

Wikileaks Proves WMDs in Iraq

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/wikileaks_proves_wmd_found_in.html

It gets really boring after awhile, doesn't it?

D. Funny how Assange and Ellsberg gave a press conference last Saturday at a hotel located "a stone's throw" from MI6, where yesterday spy chief Sir John Sawyers gave the first public speech in MI6's 101-year history, defending secrecy in the war against terror.

“Secrecy is not a dirty word,” he said. “Secrecy is not there as a cover-up. Secrecy plays a crucial part in keeping Britain safe and secure.”

Both press conferences were written up in the NYT by John F. Burns.

It's always interesting to learn a little about the guys who write these stories, right?

Burns studied Russian at Harvard, Chinese at Cambridge, and later Islamic history at Cambridge. He served as bureau chief in Moscow 1981-84, and is currently London bureau chief. He is married to a woman who is currently the NYT Baghdad bureau chief.

Foxes watching the henhouse, if you ask me.

E. For a wanted man he seems able to show up in public with ease.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

The Sad Loss of Arab National Dignity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&feature=relate&v=nP-YSzRneiA


NEW YORK -- It is sad and shocking -- pitiful, even, in many cases -- how many Arab leaders are portrayed in the U.S. State Department cables released by WikiLeaks/CIA/DOD earlier this week. A few points about the conduct of Arab leaders come to mind, as we learn new details of what they thought, said and did in various diplomatic moments. These points are about competence, accountability, truthfulness and dignity in the realm of leadership, or, as we have here, the shortages of these qualities in so many cases.

The most shocking revelation -- not a revelation, really, as many of us had warned about this for decades -- is that Arab governments that have spent hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars on buying American and other foreign arms still find themselves totally helpless, vulnerable, and fearful in the face of what they see as growing Iranian power and influence in the region. The assorted Arab leaders who are quoted as asking the United States to hurry up and do something about Iran’s growing nuclear technology capabilities reveal an apparent inability to care for their own countries and citizens. Those who privately called on, or expected, Israel and/or the United States to do their dirty work for them did so because of their own inability to make the decisions and pursue the policies that could have transformed their countries into more viable states, ones that could undertake the tasks of statecraft -- whether diplomacy or war -- with some credibility.

It is bad enough that a host of Arab countries has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on “security” systems that in the end saw them asking others to make pre-emptive attacks against the neighboring Iranian government and country that should have been a partner, friend and even ally. It is worse that the Arab leaders who looked to the United States and Israel to protect them by attacking Iran asked for this course of action quietly, surreptitiously, without standing up for their positions in public. But it is far, far worse that all of this should have taken place in a context in which the Arab leaders in question seem to have had zero conclusive proof -- zero -- that Iran was planning to produce nuclear weapons. Indeed, their policies instead may prompt Iran to consider this option. A collective Arab policy of covert appeals for American and Israeli foreigners to carry out aggression against a (Muslim) neighbor without evidence of that neighbor’s culpability -- affirming that one’s own immense, nearly immeasurable, Arab national wealth spent for security in the end is not able to provide that security -- is a sad testament to the poor quality leadership in the national security realm, to say the least.

Arab leaders in the Gulf and elsewhere have had many opportunities in the past half century to forge mutually beneficial working relations with Iran, to remove the few political obstacles that stood in the way of healthy mutual ties, and to develop interlocking security, trade, and infrastructural relations that would have done for the Gulf and wider Middle East region what the European Community and Union have done in unifying and strengthening a prosperous Europe. Why Arab leaders who had the legitimacy, the means, the motive and the opportunity to do this did not do so in recent decades may some day, one hopes, be explained by future historians. For the moment, we have contemporary events and the revelations of these leaks to remind us what happens when total political, economic and military power in the hands of small numbers of men (no women here) is shielded from any sort of routine accountability by the nationals and citizens of these same countries.

The reason that democracy is a desired and effective governance system is that national policies tend to broadly mirror public sentiment, which gives the national leaders credibility when they speak and negotiate with, or occasionally even threaten, other leaders. As these leaks indicate, Arab leaders mostly seem to lack that sort of credibility, which sometimes causes them to say one thing in public and something else in private when speaking to foreign powers.

Public opinion in the Gulf, Egypt, Jordan and other Arab countries is varied, not monolithic. Many Arabs support Tehran’s policies, and many others oppose them. Some Arabs covet American support, others distrust it. Some Arabs want to make peace with Israel, others want to fight it.

This variety, however, is totally detached from the policies and the public or private statements of Arab leaders -- which weakens the leaders, keeps Arab countries vulnerable, and leads to the sort of sad, shocking and even pitiful examples of behavior we now read about. Wasted billions, perpetual vulnerability, chronic non-credibility, duplicitous policy pronouncements, and, in the end, no success to show for all these, adds one more serious and priceless, if intangible, casualty to the list: national dignity.


HK

HK
RIP

Arithmetics of Disdain,

At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act"

It is noteworthy that the State Department's list of global terrorist incidents for 2002 worldwide failed to list the car bombing attack on Hobeika and his party.... But Listed a small Hand Grenade thrown at a U.S. franchise in the middle of the night when the place was closed, empty and no one was hurt? The White House wanted to ensure the terror attack on Mr. Elie Hobeika, and his party of three young men with families, was censored from the report. The reason was simple: this attack ultimately had Washington's and Israel's fingerprints all over it....Given the actual climate of political cacophonies, deceit, deception and intrigue in Lebanon of today, Lebanon of the LIARS of NEOCONVILLE, it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Mr. Elie Hobeika was a visionary Leader and a Hero.Lebanon will probably never know a Leader of this caliber.My dear friend ELIE, you have been reborn on January 24th 2002.Heroes are reborn the day of their Martyrdom .ELIE, you are more alive today, than many living political corpses,walking and talking in Beirut Lebanon every day, until resurrection.At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act"- G. Orwell A U.S. intelligence source revealed to me, that in the world of intelligence "carve out" subcontracts such confusion is often the case with "plausible deniability" being a foremost concern in ALL covert operations, especially in Elie Hobeika's case on January 24th 2002, & Hariri's Feb. 14th 2005... Notwithstanding Jacques CHIRAC's gesticulations and false sorrow for the loss of his "friend" Rafic HARIRI, he has been regularly organizing official meetings in Paris for Asef Shawkat with his services to secure SYRIA for and with Assef Shawkat,....


The propensity of governments to create secrets out of the obvious is one of the more tedious aspects of international relations. But this secret is not obvious, and it is not trivial. Though it is true, and I hold the KEY.



Fabrications, LIES , False Flag operations, CIA and MOSSAD.It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt,that ALL stories which came out immediately after the Assassination of Mr.Elie Hobeika, Fares Sweidan,Dimitri Ajram, and Waleed El-Zein, were completely &utterly FALSE. It was a pure fabrication by the KILLERS;AND the CIA'S Foreign Denial and Deception Committee (FDDC),to cover their tracks. Standard operating procedure...101I mean by that, the stories relating to Elie trying to find IMAD Moughnieh, the alleged attempted contacts with CIA, MOSSAD, etc. , the missing Iranian diplomats, the 9 most wanted by CIA, whose names have been circulated then,on purpose by CIA, to 7 ministers in the Lebanese Government, etc. [names which CIA has completely forgotten now,one of them has proven since to be a CIA asset himself...] ALL these were a tortuous web of lies to cover the tracks of the Murderers of CIA, MOSSAD, and their Syro-Lebanese tools.Special ongoing Investigation.Oct. , 2007- On September 15, 2001, just four days after the 9-11 attacks,CIA Director George Tenet provided President [sic] Bush with a Top Secret"Worldwide Attack Matrix"-a virtual license to kill targets deemed to be a threat to the United States in some 80 countries around the world. The Tenet plan, which was subsequently approved by Bush, essentially reversed the executive orders of four previous U.S. administrations that expressly prohibited political assassinations. Mr. Elie Hobeika will be the first target of the US administration, to pave the way for its Iraq Invasion .It planned to directly control the "Energy Basin" and ALL the OIL Transportation routes,from Pipelines to the Maritime avenues and choke points in the Gulf areas, and from central Asia to Mauritania and beyond.But most of all, Mr. Elie Hobeika will be made to pay dearly with his life,for daring to change his politics and views, after experiencing first hand,THE BRUTALITY OF THE ISRAELIS AND THE AMERICANS ,and their CULTURE OF VIOLENCE , Intrigue, murder & very bad Politics.The BUSH+CHENEY Energy MATRIX, coming to a place near you SOON.The awakening is near. It will be like a hurricane passing with untold fury.Mark my Words: .....

http://anaconda-manifesto.blogspot.com/


THE assassination of yet another Lebanese MP — the seventh anti-Syrian figure to be murdered since the slaying of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005 — has brought Lebanon to the brink of a catastrophe. It threatens to be even more devastating than the 1975-90 civil war. The country’s survival as an independent unified state is now at stake. The divide between anti-Syrian and pro-Syrian blocs is now unbridgeable.

As to fears of fresh civil war, it is already a reality. With ministers and pro-government MPs being assassinated, the government even more besieged than the one in Iraq, surviving MPs in hiding, who can talk of political normality? Lebanon is at war with itself. How long before that translates into general armed conflict is anyone’s guess. It would be naive to imagine that Ghanem’s killing will be the last. The anti-Syrian majority in Parliament is now razor-thin. Those behind this and the other killings are obviously determined to bring down the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora by the physical elimination of its parliamentary majority.

There can be no doubt that more assassinations are planned and will be attempted. If that happens and the Lebanese government falls as a result and is replaced by a pro-Syrian government, it will trigger a wave of retaliatory violence — against Hezbollah, against the Shiite community and against pro-Syrian figures. Open warfare waits in the wings.

Syrian protestations that it had nothing to do with Antoine Ghanem’s murder and the others may be true. It is quite possible that the killings are wholly internal, the work of pro-Syrian elements inside Lebanon who want power back. There are certainly some who do not want a new president elected to replace Emile Lahoud. It is even possible that Israelis were behind the killings, intent on destabilization and making Syria appear the villain — possible but unlikely; they have much to lose if a Hezbollah-dominated, pro-Syrian government were installed in Beirut.

The problem is that very few believe Syria’s innocence. They ask the question “who benefits?” and, in the case of each assassination, come up with the same answer: Damascus and its clients in Lebanon. That belief robs Syria of having an acceptable role in Lebanon for a long time to come. The majority of Lebanese want their sovereignty to be absolute; with no interference from anyone — be they Syrian, Israeli, Iranian, American or whatever. That dream, however, is being car-bombed to oblivion....

Forget what you've heard about objectivity. Not even cameras are objective. To nearly everything you analyze (and report on) you bring notions based on - but not limited to - your class, gender, skin color, ethnicity, native language, upbringing, education, religion, culture, playground experiences, political orientation, the influences of people you trust and things about the way our brains work that nobody even knows yet. Like sponges, we absorb stereotypes and clichés about other people's attitudes and behavior which skews our perceptions in ways we don't even realize. So don't fool yourself into believing in objectivity. The best you can achieve is fairness, and that's a tough path to stick to as well.

And then we'd have a talk about the textbook description of objectivity, which is that "every story has two sides," a pernicious dualistic myth that profoundly undermines what is supposed to be a search for truth....



The even greater danger with these dark clouds forming over Lebanon is for the region. With Syria’s links to Iran, Iran’s links to Hezbollah, rising tension over Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions, there is a chain explosion waiting to happen. An Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, an American attack on Iran, a Syrian attack on Israel, more Lebanese assassinations: One could trigger another. The temperature is fast rising on the Middle East’s northern rim — and it is near flash point.

***************************************************

Petition USA

Dear Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee,
http://judiciary.senate.gov/ , thanks for your
great work defending the USA Constitution, with
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW" ,Separation
between Churches and State and Free Speech,
and my questions are:1) since most likely the Senate

will approve Michael Mukasey as the new A.G.of

the United States, and since as you know,he is an

orthodox Israeli-American and with dual citizenship,
American and Israeli,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_B._Mukasey
http://phillyfreedom.blogspot.com/ , NYT Sept.
18.07 "Washington outsider with many sides"
http://voxpopnet.net/
for info on Mukasey as Judge of the WTC-
Insurance 9/11 case , will he respect other
religions exactly thesame as his?2) since he is an

ordained rabbi within his orthodox community,will his partners get treatment better or different in any way
from the one you or I or anybody else would get from

him in the United States of America?

3) what happens to all the Security Contracts
and Military deals he and his son Marc are
doing with the Companies and Interests of
Giuliani Partners and other associates ?

4) what happens with all the deals they
worked on in his son's law firm,
Bracewell&Giuliani?since Bracewell&Giuliani has

offices in the South Asia, like in Kazakhstan,a big

oil supplier ruled by an extreme undemocratic leader,
Nazarbayev, will the Mukasey's and Giuliani's
get special deals? with no supervision? political
donations? will the actual law firm of Mukasey
get special deals too? will anybody ask ? or will
they just say yes :blindly?

5) Michael Mukasey

and his son Marc are strong AIPAC supporters ,

but will anyone in the Senate ask anything about their relationship to these political-military-religious-financial
and foreign groups? we know that no one
will,but is that right? isn't special treatment?
the A.G.?

6) Chairman,this powerful military-religious-
financial group , of which Michael Mukasey is
a leader, will have unprecedented influence in
the Justice Dpt. ,White House and Congress,
not to mention over the average taxpayer,
and since many members of the orthodox
community to which he belongs are diamond,
gold,jewelry,insurance ,real estate and tobacco
dealers and wholesalers while claiming Tax
Exemption due to religious condition,will his
appointment stop all the Investigations of the
IRS and Justice Dpt.as well as Commerce,etc.?
and back taxes?
do average Americans have a guarantee of
equal treatment?
when we start getting prosecuted for asking
questions,what recourse do we have ? any ?
and since orthodox Mukasey will most likely
install many members of his organized religious
group into office,will we be forced to request
help from the same community like his with
the special privilege?7) Judge Mukasey was in

charge of the 9/11/01 Trial case between the

leaseholders of the WTC,SIlverstein-Goldman-

Pacific-etc., and the 23 Insurance Companies these

new leaseholders called just days before 9/11 to
open dozens of policies over everything in
the Towers, services,leases,businesses,contracts,
profits,hardware,you name it,their premiums
were millions of dollars a week, didn't make
any business sense,unless they knew what was
going to happen a few days later ,and
everybody in N.Y. and around the world
was waiting for answers from the Trial ,
and then Judge Mukasey put a lid on the
Trial and no news came out, NOTHING !!!!
and everybody asked why ?, if it is a patriotic
case,why no news at all ?why the secrecy ?
why Judge Mukesay didn't want anybody in
America to know everything about Silverstein
and his dozens of policies? , then we also found
out that then N.Y.State A.G. Eliot Spitzer
wrote a Friend of the Court brief supporting
Silverstein,the AG siding with one of the
parties!, and the Judge and Spitzer started to
push the Insurance Companies to settle for 2
events,a total of 7 billion dollars to Silverstein
and his partners, many of the Insurance
Companies refused because they knew
something was not right and eventually they
settled on 4.6 billion dollars for Silverstein ,
but we still never got any details in any
newspaper ,radio or TV,NOTHING ! I WOULD
LIKE TO ASK JUDGE MUKASEY WHY ? ,
but we do know that no one will ask him
anything in D.C., he and his Orthodox
Congregation partners rule,after all they all
go to Israel together and share Religious
Ceremonies with Kissinger, Chertoff,
Bloomberg ,Silverstein,etc., and yet we hear
S. Schumer and other neocons saying to the
media that they want to learn more from
the man !8) Chairman,this new A.G. will have
unprecedented influence over President Bush
and VP Cheney,since he is the only one that
can prosecute the 2,is it wise to have a
member of a foreign religious-political group
having so much power over the President and
the Vice-President of the United States of
America ? safe ? smart? patriotic?We know that MR..Mukasey was selected by
Joshua Bolten and approved by Senator
Schumer and others,so since "they" run
Washington,it's a done deal ,hearing Senator
Schumer telling the Media how wonderful
Mukasey is and that his nomination cuts
down on pressure on the White House, do
they extorted a deal from the President:
Our orthodox candidate and we stop asking
for White House U.S. Attorney papers and
information?is that why Bush looks so depressed?

is that how Schumer,Bolton, Emanuel,Specter,
Lieberman and Bloomberg are going to run
this country?
because clearly with Mukasey as A.G.,they
run this country lock,stock and barrel,it's
that how our Constitutional Rights end ?
Extortion of the President of the United
States?,
hearing Schumer and Specter, it's clear that it
was all about getting the Christians out of the
Justice Dpt. and installing the neocon orthodox
in, is that how they do it ?A partner of Mukasey

as adviser to Giuliani , the neocon Pedhoretz,

has repeatedly pushed with Pr.Bush to bomb Iran,

to attack, and since Sen. Lieberman and Sen. Kyl

are pushing to brand Iran's Military a terrorist

Organization, is this the beginning of a concerted

effort to push for war? it's important to remember
all this , because in 2002 and 2003 all these
neocons with Sen.Schumer,S.Coleman,
Sen.Boxer,R.Emanuel,Kristol,Safire, Wolfowitz,
Perle,Feith,Kagan,Abrams,Fleischer,Edelman,
Whitman, Kaplan,Kellner,Gutman,Berman,
Sulzberger,Murdoch,Karmazin, ex-sec.Cohen,
Gorelick,Chertoff,Wainstein,Kissinger,etc.,
were pushing for war every day on the media
and yet now they are attacking anyone that
mentions it, they are warning elected officials
like R.Moran that to mention these facts is
anti-this and anti-that and "watch it ", they
are bullying any one that mentions what happen
before the USA went to Iraq,and worst: they
insist now on their media that only Bush-
Cheney-Rice-Rumsfeld are responsible , that
no one else pushed for this war:

THEY ARE RE-WRITING HISTORY!!! and
it looks like its not the first time, it sounds
like they always pull the same trick: they push
for war,financed with their Hedge Funds and
then with the media they erase any links to
themselves, this is criminal; to push for war
and then to hide and blamethe Christians
only,that's evil and SHOWS LOTS OF
WEAKNESS ON THE PART OF THE USA,
THIS IS A DISASTER FOR THIS GREAT
COUNTRY! to confirm an organized
religious-political-military from a foreign sect
and laws to Attorney General is
un-Constitutional,illegal, un-American and
goes against the core of the USA values,
thousands died to defend the USA
Constitution from foreign religions, how can
the Senate now approve a religious leader ?
will they even ask this question? will they
commit High Treason ?when you look at these

incompetent and criminal decisions against the

Rule of Law and the Declaration of Independence,
how can Taxpayers petition the Government
for any rights?Thanks for your great work defending
America from foreign and domestic enemies,
in my humble opinion, this situation
looks to me like occupation and foreign control,
and to you ?America knows that George Washington,

Lincoln and all the Founding Fathers would be proud of
your defense of the USA Constitution against
High Treason and High Crimes,

thanks.

US Citizens

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NO COMMENT ....... "For Now..."


Saakashvili Ordered me to Get Rid of Patarkatsishvili’ – Okruashvili


Ex-Defense Minister Irakli Okruashvili has made yet another startling allegation against his former ally, President Saakashvili. The president, he said, had personally ordered him to liquidate Badri Patarkatsishvili, a business tycoon.
Speaking live on Imedi TV’s talk show On the Air late on September 25, Okruashvili said: “Saakashvili told me that we should get rid of him [Patarkatsishvili], in the same way as happened to Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister, who was killed in a car bomb attack.”
“In July 2005,” Okruashvili said, “Saakashvili asked me: what did I think about getting rid of one person… - Badri Patarkatsishvili? And then he [Saakashvili] outlined a very detailed plan on how to get rid of him.”
Okruashvili continued: “It was absolutely clear to me that it was a trap for me as well, because they would have gotten rid of me as well after getting rid of Patarkatsishvili.”
He said in response he told Saakashvili that he needed time to think about it.
“Meanwhile, I met with one person who at that time was working with the Americans and told him about the president’s proposal,” Okruashvili said. “I did it in the hope that the information would have been passed on to the Americans… It was Zaza Gogava [now Chief-of-Staff of the Georgian armed forces] However it did not work. Because after a month Saakashvili again repeated his demand about getting rid of Patarkatsishvili.”
“Then I met with another person in Turkey, whose identity I can not reveal. He also has close links with the Americans. He's not a Georgian citizen. I told him about Saakashvili’s plan. This information, it seemed, was delivered to the Americans, because since then Saakashvili never talked with me about getting rid of Patarkatsishvili.”President Saakashvili, who is currently in New York for the UN General Assembly Session, has yet to comment on his former ally’s allegations.

more:






Irakli Okruashvili, ex-defense minister and once President Saakashvili’s closest ally, has accused the president of engaing in “anti-state steps” and “ordering murders.”
In his first public statement since he quit the government last November, Okruashvili also finally announced the launch of his political party – Movement for United Georgia. He refused to take question after his ten-minute speech, but said he planned to give further details and “answer all questions” during a TV appearance planned for later on Tuesday.
“I will definitely speak more on these crimes, which were masterminded by the authorities,” he said. Okruashvili added: “I was ordered by Saakashvili several times to liquidate certain influential and important people, which I refused to do.” He gave no further details.
There has been considerable speculation that “a war of compromising materials” would precede Okruashvili’s political comeback and the unveiling of his new opposition party.
Okruashvili said at the news conference in his party's headquarters in downtown Tbilisi that “fascist trends” and “anti-state steps undertaken by the authorities” had convinced him and his co-thinkers to set up the new movement. He also suggested that it hadn't been easy to launch the party.
People, he said, “are terrorized” because of “repression.” “Those with dissenting opinions are deemed ‘enemies of the state’ and the government is refusing to hold a dialogue with them,” he said.
This, he said, had made it difficult to convince people to engage in public life.
Okruashvili said that the anti-corruption campaign was “unreal.” The prisons, he said, were full of petty criminals, while corruption continued to thrive among “top level officials, Saakashvili’s inner circle and his family.”
“Three years ago when I was Interior Minister,” Okruashvili said, “I arrested Temur Alasania, the president’s uncle, for extortion of USD 200,000. I, however, had to release him on the president’s insistence.”
He also accused the authorities, and personally Saakashvili, of, as he put it, “a deliberate anti-Orthodox Church campaign” and “of fighting against Georgian traditions and values.”
“Saakashvili has an inner hatred of the Georgian Orthodox Church,” Okruashvili said. “The Georgian church is the most respected institution in Georgia. [Because of this] he [Saakashvili] perceives the Church as his main competitor. While in his inner circle, I often heard him talking about splitting the Church and discrediting the clergy.”
He also said that there was “a clear attempt” by the Saakashvili administration “to re-write Georgia’s history, as if nothing Georgian existed before the Rose Revolution, and everything new is being created by Saakashvili.”
Okruashvili also made an obvious attempt to appeal to other walks of life by saying that the older generation, those over 50, had been “neglected and humiliated.”
Internally displaced persons from Abkhazia and South Ossetia, he said, “were not regarded as human beings during ex-President Shevardnadze’s regime and this trend has continued in the Saakashvili regime as well.”
He also criticized the authorities’ policies towards the secessionist regions.
“We were one step away from reclaiming one of our lost territories,” Okruashvili said, apparently referring to South Ossetia.
Several months before his resignation from the cabinet, Okruashvili said that he had planned to celebrate the 2007 New Year in Tskhinvali, the capital of breakaway South Ossetia. Commentators said that Saakashvili’s decision to move Okruashvili last November from the Defense Ministry to the Ministry of Economy was largely because of Okruashvili’s perceived hawkish stance on South Ossetia.
In his speech on September 25, Okruashvili said that “only Saakashvili’s weakness, inability and fear” had foiled plans to reclaim the secessionist region. He also said Saakashvili was too weak to take an unspecified “historic decision.”
He also criticized Tbilisi’s decision to create the provisional South Ossetia administration, led by Dimitri Sanakoev. Okruashvili said Sanakoev had no respect and authority among the population of the region. He also said that installing Sanakoev was “an imaginary attempt” to unite the country.
Okruashvili explained his decision to “quietly” quit the government without voicing his discontent was because of, as he put it, his sense of “civil responsibility.”
“Army officers, who are still my friends, asked me to do it quietly,” he said and added that by doing so he had denied the country’s enemies an opportunity to speculate on a split within the government.
Okruashvili admitted that he shared “the responsibility for some mistakes because I was also once part of this government.”
“I, however, have done nothing but good for my country when in government,” he added. “So any attempt to discredit me will fail.”
Towards the end of his speech, he implied that he might have presidential ambitions.
“Georgia will be united only if it has a president who doesn't humiliate and insult its own people,” Okruashvili said.
Throughout his speech, Okruashvili's fellow party members stood beside him. They include: lawmakers Tea Tlashadze, Ketevan Makharashvili, Koka Guntsadze, Gia Tortladze and Gia Tsagareishvili; former Deputy Defense Minister Levan Nikolaishvili and a lawyer, Eka Beselia.
Two former journalists from Rustavi 2 TV station, Nana Lezhava and Natia Lazashvili, were also there. Both quit the TV station shortly after Rustavi 2 changed hands last November following Okruashvili’s resignation.