Posted by: quiscus | December 9, 2009

December 9, 2009

1.  “Ramping up Afghanistan war to control Caspian oil and gas transport routes

The 800-pound gorilla standing in the auditorium at West Point is still waiting for an answer to why Obama made his surge-speech for 30,000 more troops and $30 billion to pay for them. That gorilla wonders “why” Obama pitched so hard for the US to stay and surge through Afghanistan and Pakistan. The reasons given were that the Afghanistan Taliban and Al Qaeda led by Osama bin Laden were the people that attacked us on 9/11, which was an iteration of George W. Bush’s reasons for the War on Terror. They are as phony now as the day Bush promised to smoke out Bin Laden.

Murray goes on to say that the motive in ramping up “the threat of Islamic terrorism in Uzbekistan through forced confessions was to ensure the country remained on-side in the war on terror, so that the pipeline could be built.”

Murray adds, “There are designs of this pipeline, and if you look at the deployment of US forces in Afghanistan, as against other NATO country forces in Afghanistan, you’ll see that undoubtedly the US forces are positioned to guard the pipeline route. It’s what it’s about. It’s about money, it’s about oil, it’s not about democracy.”

If one thinks about it, the use of non-renewable fuels for the long term is silly on it’s face. It is like only using a finite store of food that was left by a previous generation, which everyone would then be fighting over as the supply started to dwindle.

The reality is that we can farm energy just like we do food and that is where we should be heading.

It is those who profit from the oil who don’t want this to happen, until they have depleted what is left of the oil. Of course, they couldn’t come out and say that and have us support their wars for control of the remaining oil sources, because people might ask what alternatives there were. No, they needed to deceive us into supporting their wars for it and 911 and Dick Cheney’s post 911 world was their way of doing that.”

2.  “The High-Flying Bin Ladens — 12 Osama Kin Hold FAA Licenses

At least 12 members of Osama bin Laden’s family currently hold Federal Aviation Administration pilot’s licenses that make them eligible to fly aircraft anywhere in the United States, including three who received their licenses just this June, according to an analysis of FAA records provided to ABC News by a computer security firm, Safe Banking Systems.”

3.  “Emails Show bin Laden was Bush Talking Point, not Target

Missing” White House emails retrieved from Bush administration records indicate that top Bush Justice Department officials had little interest in the pursuit of Osama bin Laden or Mullah Mohammed Omar, head of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Top Military Commander Says Getting Bin Laden is Key to Defeating Al Qaeda. Why Now, When the Government Has Ignored Bin Laden for the Past 8 Years?”

4.  “The Great (Berlin) Wall of Israel

Try to imagine this: An American president visits Israel and in a speech given close to the vast “separation wall” Israel continues to build in part through Palestinian territory, says: “Mr. Netanyahu, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for Israel and the region, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Netanyahu, open this gate! Mr. Netanyahu, tear down this wall!”

I’m sure you recognize that set of famous lines. With the name “Gorbachev” in place of “Netanyahu,” President Ronald Reagan intoned them on June 12, 1987, in front of the Berlin Wall. Less than two-and-a-half years later, of course, that stain on Europe, that prison wall of Soviet power which, in all the years of the Cold War, was seldom long out of the U.S. news, was gone – and 20 years later we’re still celebrating. The Israeli wall, endlessly under construction, is far longer, approximately twice as high, no less militarized, and no less a dystopian wonder of prison architecture. It is also a thief. As it meanders, it steals land. It is, as the Berlin Wall once was, a stain on the human landscape. But no American president, including Barack Obama, is likely to make a Reaganesque journey to the Middle East, denounce the wall, and call for its dismantlement. It plays little part in the news in this country when the Israeli-Palestinian situation is raised. It’s hard to imagine us celebrating its fall.
In the meantime, while that grotesque wall grows, while the talk is of shuttling diplomats and diplomatic cul-de-sacs, of paths to nowhere and missing Plan Bs for the Obama administration, as well as potential Israeli strikes against Iran, those in the shadow of the wall suffer.”

5.  “It wasn’t a good day for the Department of Defense when Stars and Stripes scooped the Pentagon’s secret scheme to profile journalists covering the war. Seems that the Rendon Group—the tyrannosaurus rex of military public-relations contractors—was getting paid to weed out reporters who did not fit the command’s ideal of tractability.

The Army and Rendon have vociferously denied that embed requests were being held up on this basis, despite subsequent revelations of two confirmed cases to the contrary and reports by individual journalists who obtained their Rendon-generated profiles.

Seeing an exposé of these practices was akin to spotting a tiny glitch in the virtual-reality world of “The Matrix” and getting a glimpse of the reality underneath. What lies beneath here is a powerful engine that propels our war machine. This Matrix is the construct of military “Strategic Communications,” a rubric that covers everything from military public affairs to public diplomacy to information operations. “Info ops” (IO) in turn include battlefield intelligence, some forms of electronic warfare, psychological operations (PSYOPS), military deception, and anything in these broad areas that serves to sell, manage, and manipulate the preferred messaging of the military. This massive complex is as expensive as it is complicated. But more importantly, notes author and war correspondent Robert Young Pelton, “it doesn’t work.”

“Strategic Communications is not just ‘shaping information’ and needless internal churn, it’s a process designed to constantly justify the reason for the Department of Defense to be in this war,”

6.  “Spy Chief: We Knew Iraq Dismantled Weapons

The UK knew Iraq had dismantled its long-range missile before the war, an intelligence chief has told an official inquiry into the invasion.

7.  “Volcker: Financial Innovation is Worthless, and Banks Should Be Limited to Traditional Depository Function

Geithner said we need [credit default swaps] for financial “creativity” and “innovation”…

Is Geithner right that financial “creativity” and “innovation” are good things?


The Canadian banking system is the world’s most stable banking system precisely because it is boring instead of innovative.

Paul Krugman writes that banking has to be made boring again, to prevent the kinds of results which came from high -flying finance in the 1920’s (the Great Depression) and late 1990s early 2000s (the current melt down). Krugman also notes:

Part of the problem is that boring banking would mean poorer bankers, and the financial industry still has a lot of friends in high places. But it’s also a matter of ideology: Despite everything that has happened, most people in positions of power still associate fancy finance with economic progress.”

8.  “Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges Preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough.

As Mr Singh suggests, the interesting question is perhaps not whether the climate changers have got the science right – they probably have – but whether they have got the pitch right. Some campaigners’ apocalyptic predictions and religious righteousness – funeral ceremonies for economic growth and the like – can be alienating, and may help explain why the wider public does not seem to share the urgency felt by those in Copenhagen this week.

In a rather perceptive recent comment, Mr Miliband said it was vital to give people a positive vision of a low-carbon future. “If Martin Luther King had come along and said ‘I have a nightmare,’ people would not have followed him,” he said.”

9.  “Copenhagen and Global Warming: Ten Facts and Ten Myths on Climate Change

Climate has always changed, and it always will. The assumption that prior to the industrial revolution the Earth had a “stable” climate is simply wrong.

Accurate temperature measurements made from weather balloons and satellites since the late 1950s show no atmospheric warming since 1958.  In contrast, averaged ground-based thermometers record a warming of about 0.40 C over the same time period. Many scientists believe that the thermometer record is biased by the Urban Heat Island effect and other artefacts.

Climate change is a non-linear (chaotic) process, some parts of which are only dimly or not at all understood. No deterministic computer model will ever be able to make an accurate prediction of climate 100 years into the future.

Not surprisingly, therefore, experts in computer modelling agree also that no current (or likely near-future) climate model is able to make accurate predictions of regional climate change.

The biggest untruth about human global warming is the assertion that nearly all scientists agree that it is occurring, and at a dangerous rate.

10.  “One can go on and on with that.  One of the worst retroactive, self-justifying lies told about this time period by those who did these things is that they had no reasons to question the false claims they were disseminating because “everyone” believed them and nobody disputed them.  To see how false that is, consider the March 17, 2003 Der Spiegel Editorial warning that “for months now, Bush and Blair have been busy blowing up, exaggerating and deliberately over-interpreting intelligence information and rumours to justify war on Iraq.”

The people who mindlessly passed on claims like Tony Blair’s “45-minute” hysteria did it without regard to whether it was true.  At best, they didn’t care.  They wanted the invasion and were willing to say anything to justify it.  The ones who were most unquestioning were “journalists” whose only ostensible function is to question — see but a small sampling of examples above.  What’s most remarkable about all of it is that virutally none has even acknowledged wrongdoing and none has suffered any consequences of any kind.  This British investigation is underscoring just how extreme all of this was.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: