Archive | January 31st, 2013

Iran says captures two U.S.-made miniature surveillance drones

NOVANEWS

U.S. drone - Iran TV - 8.12.2011

Fars news agency says lightweight RQ11 Raven drones were brought down by Iranian air defense units in separate incidents in August 2011 and November 2012.

Haaretz

Iran has captured two miniature U.S.-made surveillance drones over the past 17 months, Iranian media reported on Wednesday.

Several drone incidents over the past year have highlighted tension in the Gulf as Iran and the United States flex their military capabilities in the vital oil exporting region in a standoff over Iran’s disputed nuclear program.

The lightweight RQ11 Raven drones were brought down by Iranian air defense units in separate incidents in August 2011 and November 2012, Rear Admiral Amir Rastegari told Fars news agency.

“Much of the data of these drones has been decoded by the Army’s jihad and research center,” he said, without elaborating.

Manufactured by AeroVironment, the RQ11 Raven has a wingspan of 1.36 meters (4.5 feet) and a range of 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) and is used by the U.S. military for low-altitude surveillance.

Iran said on Dec. 4 that it had captured a U.S. intelligence ScanEagle drone in its air space over the Gulf in the previous few days, but the United States said there was no evidence to support the assertion.

The U.S. Navy said had it not lost any unmanned aircraft in the area. The four-foot (1.25 metre) ScanEagle surveillance drones built by Boeing Co are deployed in the region by the United States military and also by other countries.

In November, the United States said Iranian warplanes shot at a U.S drone flying in international air space. Iran said the aircraft had entered its air space to spy on Iranian oil platforms and said it would respond “decisively” to any incursions. 

Posted in IranComments Off on Iran says captures two U.S.-made miniature surveillance drones

Canada’s Indian Problem

NOVANEWS
blocade.jpg

Left – “Idle No More”  has launched blockades of roads and railways. 

Canada’s Indian leaders openly threaten
 violence but they’re not “terrorists.” 

“Idle No More” says new laws undermine their treaty rights but most Canadians view their protests as a demand for still more special privileges and handouts. Canada now spends in excess of $10 billion annually on Native services. Much of this is siphoned off by the Chiefs who earn exhorbitant salaries. Paul Fromm’s article below reflects the frustration of ordinary Canadians. 

Makow Comment: No mass protest movement gets started these days without the hidden hand of globalists who wish to destabilize a country or prevent resource development. Illuminati backing is reflected in the sympathetic coverage this movement has received from the left-liberal media, especially the government-run propaganda service, the CBC.



by Paul Fromm
Director, Canada First 
(Abridged/edited by henrymakow.com)
Any Canadian who has witnessed the intolerable buffoonery of the past month can only shake their heads as Canada’s indulgent, special-privileges Indian policy comes apart at the seams. Even some of the pro-minority media are exposing some of the hypocrisy and nonsense as the Canadian taxpayers are being set up to be fleeced once again.
 
Consider:
 
 
* On Idle No More Chief Spence’s Attwapiskat reserve, with its population of 1,500 living in Third World poverty on Hudson Bay, a recent Deloitte  audit reveals more than 400 of the transactions it reviewed lacked proper documentation.

reserve1.jpeg

‘There is no evidence of due diligence in the use of public funds, including the use of funds for housing,’ wrote Deloitte. “In our opinion, having over 80 per cent of selected transactions lacking any or proper supporting documentation is inappropriate for any recipient of public funds.’
 The Attawapiskat band council has received approximately $104 million from the federal government between April 1, 2005 and Nov. 30, 2011 for housing, infrastructure, education and administration.” The Toronto Star (January 7, 2013)

That works out to over $11,000 per year for every Indian on the reserve. Where has the money gone? So bad are Spence’s records that the audit cannot say there was been corruption or theft. There is so little documentation that no one seems to know where most of the money went. 

This is a problem not just for the Canadian taxpayers but for the impoverished Indians in the Attawapiskat band who do not seem to be benefitting from the taxpayers’ largess.

Here’s an idea. Instead of hotdogging it for media publicity with her hunger strike, Theresa Spence ought to haul her backside to a community college and take a course in elementary bookkeeping.


*  Police confirmed that the Indians were within their rights to ban the media from the Reserve as theirs is “sovereign territory.” This is utter fiction. Attwapiskat is part of Canada. A sovereign nation — say Russia, France, the U.S.A. — supports itself on its territory. The pathetic Attawapiskat band are nothing but parasites. Authorities have too long indulged the native “sovereignty” fiction.

* A CTV (January 8, 2013) reported: “Spence’s …common-law partner and co-manager of Attawapiskat, Clayton Kennedy, said there are no allegations of ‘misappropriation or anything like that.’ Kennedy defended his and Spence’s reported combined household income of about $250,000 a year, saying: ‘I think it’s adequate for the job that is being done.'” Adequate? The couple earn $250,000 between them to manage the finances for their band in such a way auditors can make neither head nor tail of it and the people remain in poverty.

spensejpg.jpg

(Spence,left, recently ended hunger strike. She said money was spent on lawyers and consultants. Obviously it wasn’t spent on accountants or housing.) 

* When the story of the Attawapiskat substandard housing hit the headlines over a year ago, … many Canadians spontaneously sent aid packages as well.The National Post (January 8, 2013) writer Jonathan Kay describes a CBC investigative report by Adrienne Arsenault: “Perhaps the most pitiful scene in the whole piece is the one in which Ms. Arsenault examines the masses of boxes containing (apparently useful) donations from concerned Canadians. 

Yet until Ms. Arsenault came around, no one had even bothered opening them up: Ms. Spence complains that she couldn’t get “volunteers” to do the job. That in itself is a damning indictment of the state of civil society in Attawapiskat. 

We are always told that the preservation of reserves is a great way to maintain First Nations culture. But the opposite is true: The best way to destroy a group’s spirit of civic solidarity is to turn the economy into an outsider-funded cargo cult; whereby the locals’ only “job” is to sit around waiting for handouts — to such extent that apparently even rousing themselves to rip open cardboard and plastic is seen as too taxing.

METIS JOIN THE PAYROLL

* Finally, as a further bit of lunacy, a Federal judge earlier this month just added another million special people, declaring Metis and non-status Indians to be “Indians” under the law and, therefore, the responsibility of the federal government. The decision will almost certainly be appealed. Jeffrey Simpson of the Globe and Mail(January 9, 2013) noted: “As there are 400,000 people who identify as Métis, the financial obligations on the federal and provincial governments could be extremely heavy, indeed.”

Back when the Charter of Rights was being negotiated in the early 1980s, it was obvious that the status Indian leadership and that of the Métis were superficially polite to each other but deeply distrustful. The Indians did not consider the Métis to be fully Indian (as, indeed, they were not and are not), and the groups’ treatment experiences within Canada had been different. The Métis, however, saw similarities where status Indians did not, and were anxious that the status Indians not receive constitutional protection that eluded them.

110911_METIS_AGM1_BB_149110.jpg

(Manitoba Metis leader, David Chartrand, with flag.)

And now the Federal Court says, in essence, that the two groups were treated sufficiently the same, and were lumped together by governments many decades ago, so they should be considered in a similar fashion today. 

Which will mean endless negotiations, considerable litigation and, if the Métis are ultimately successful, a huge additional financial obligation on the government that status Indians can only hope doesn’t come from what they’re receiving. If, indeed, the government owes the Indians “hundreds of billions” of dollars, according to one of their lawyers, what might Métis lawyers demand?”

So, now there will be demands for non-status Indians and Metis to be “equal” to the Indians in terms of not paying HST or income tax, having university tuition paid by the taxpayers for their children and being exempt from fishing and hunting laws. More special privileges in the pursuit of equality!

 Will there be “compensation” for who knows what historical slight? Only Canada’s activist judiciary can tell and the losers will be the non-Indian taxpayers. 


Posted in CanadaComments Off on Canada’s Indian Problem

Revolt of the Plebs Broadcast

Revolt of the Plebs Broadcast Jan 29, 2013

by crescentandcross

 

revolt-of-the-plebs-broadcast-jan-29-2013.mp3

Download Here

THANK YOU FOR ASSISTING WITH THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PRODUCING THIS PROGRAM

Posted in InterviewComments Off on Revolt of the Plebs Broadcast

Six IsraHelli security chiefs stun the world

NOVANEWS

By Samuel Burke, CNN

Six former heads of the Shin Bet, Israel’s secretive internal security service, have spoken out as a group for the first time and are making stunning revelations.

The men who were responsible for keeping Israel safe from terrorists now say they are afraid for Israel’s future as a democratic and Jewish state.

Israeli film director Dror Moreh managed to get them all to sit down for his new documentary: The Gatekeepers. It is the story of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories, as told by the people at the crossroads of some of the most crucial moments in the security history of the country.

“If there is someone who understands the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it’s those guys,” the director told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.

Against the backdrop of the currently frozen peace process, all six argue – to varying degrees – that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land is bad for the state of Israel.

The oldest amongst the former chiefs, Avraham Shalom, says Israel lost touch with how to coexist with the Palestinians as far back as the aftermath of the Six Day War of 1967, with the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, when the country started doubling down on terrorism.

“We forgot about the Palestinian issue,” Shalom says in the film.

A major impediment to a meaningful strategy, they say, are the Jewish extremists inside Israel – people like the Jewish Israeli who assassinated Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin, or the 1980 plot to blow up the Dome of the Rock Islamic shrine in Jerusalem.

A central theme of the documentary is the idea that Israel has incredible tactics, but lacks long-term strategy. That is to say, the security apparatus is able to pacify terrorists, but if operations do not support a move toward a peace settlement, then they are meaningless.

Moreh said he was shocked to hear Avraham Shalom, Austrian-born and a refugee of the Nazis, compare the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories to Germany’s occupation of Europe.

“Bear in mind that Avraham Shalom was born in Vienna,” Moreh said. “And at the Kristallnacht he was forced by his mother to go to school and was beaten almost to death by his classmates… He said ‘I experienced firsthand what it means to be under a racist regime.’”

Moreh knew that he had to include that part of the interview in the film. “I said to myself I have to keep it, because he understands what he speaks.”

“Only Jews can say those kind of words,” he told Amanpour. “And only they can have the justification to speak as they spoke in the film.”

The filmmaker said that this is “the most pro-Israel film” he could have created. “When you see the Titanic heading toward the iceberg, what would you do?”

A spokesperson for current Israel Prime Minister said Benjamin Netanyahu had not seen “The Gatekeepers,” and had no plans to do so.

“I think the fact that the PM of Israel is not willing to watch a film with six former heads of shin bet speaking and conveying a message to the Israeli public – to him and to the world. I think it just speaks about his personality,” Moreh said.

Critics accuse Moreh of cherry picking to advance a political agenda that falls on the left-wing of the Israeli political spectrum.

“They are all pragmatists,” Moreh told Amanpour about the subjects. “These are the six heads of the secret service of Israel saying in one and clear voice enough of the occupation – you cannot argue with that.”

Moreh said that none of the former chiefs has come to him with any problems with the final product and all of them told him they stand behind the film.

READ MORE: Did the Israeli military defy PM Netanyahu?

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Six IsraHelli security chiefs stun the world

Who Owns The Federal Reserve?

NOVANEWS
Global Research

 

“Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders.”

– The Honorable Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1930s

The Federal Reserve (or Fed) has assumed sweeping new powers in the last year. In an unprecedented move in March 2008, the New York Fed advanced the funds for JPMorgan Chase Bank to buy investment bank Bear Stearns for pennies on the dollar. The deal was particularly controversial because Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan, sits on the board of the New York Fed and participated in the secret weekend negotiations.1 In September 2008, the Federal Reserve did something even more unprecedented, when it bought the world’s largest insurance company. The Fed announced on September 16 that it was giving an $85 billion loan to American International Group (AIG) for a nearly 80% stake in the mega-insurer. The Associated Press called it a “government takeover,” but this was no ordinary nationalization. Unlike the U.S. Treasury, which took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the week before, the Fed is not a government-owned agency. Also unprecedented was the way the deal was funded. The Associated Press reported:

“The Treasury Department, for the first time in its history, said it would begin selling bonds for the Federal Reserve in an effort to help the central bank deal with its unprecedented borrowing needs.”2

This is extraordinary. Why is the Treasury issuing U.S. government bonds (or debt) to fund the Fed, which is itself supposedly “the lender of last resort” created to fund the banks and the federal government? Yahoo Finance reported on September 17:

“The Treasury is setting up a temporary financing program at the Fed’s request. The program will auction Treasury bills to raise cash for the Fed’s use. The initiative aims to help the Fed manage its balance sheet following its efforts to enhance its liquidity facilities over the previous few quarters.”

Normally, the Fed swaps green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes for pink pieces of paper called U.S. bonds (the federal government’s I.O.U.s), in order to provide Congress with the dollars it cannot raise through taxes. Now, it seems, the government is issuing bonds, not for its own use, but for the use of the Fed! Perhaps the plan is to swap them with the banks’ dodgy derivatives collateral directly, without actually putting them up for sale to outside buyers. According to Wikipedia (which translates Fedspeak into somewhat clearer terms than the Fed’s own website):

“The Term Securities Lending Facility is a 28-day facility that will offer Treasury general collateral to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s primary dealers in exchange for other program-eligible collateral. It is intended to promote liquidity in the financing markets for Treasury and other collateral and thus to foster the functioning of financial markets more generally. . . . The resource allows dealers to switch debt that is less liquid for U.S. government securities that are easily tradable.”

“To switch debt that is less liquid for U.S. government securities that are easily tradable” means that the government gets the banks’ toxic derivative debt, and the banks get the government’s triple-A securities. Unlike the risky derivative debt, federal securities are considered “risk-free” for purposes of determining capital requirements, allowing the banks to improve their capital position so they can make new loans. (See E. Brown, “Bailout Bedlam,” webofdebt.com/articles, October 2, 2008.)

In its latest power play, on October 3, 2008, the Fed acquired the ability to pay interest to its member banks on the reserves the banks maintain at the Fed. Reuters reported on October 3:

“The U.S. Federal Reserve gained a key tactical tool from the $700 billion financial rescue package signed into law on Friday that will help it channel funds into parched credit markets. Tucked into the 451-page bill is a provision that lets the Fed pay interest on the reserves banks are required to hold at the central bank.”3

If the Fed’s money comes ultimately from the taxpayers, that means we the taxpayers are paying interest to the banks on the banks’ own reserves – reserves maintained for their own private profit. These increasingly controversial encroachments on the public purse warrant a closer look at the central banking scheme itself. Who owns the Federal Reserve, who actually controls it, where does it get its money, and whose interests is it serving?

Not Private and Not for Profit?

The Fed’s website insists that it is not a private corporation, is not operated for profit, and is not funded by Congress. But is that true? The Federal Reserve was set up in 1913 as a “lender of last resort” to backstop bank runs, following a particularly bad bank panic in 1907. The Fed’s mandate was then and continues to be to keep the private banking system intact; and that means keeping intact the system’s most valuable asset, a monopoly on creating the national money supply. Except for coins, every dollar in circulation is now created privately as a debt to the Federal Reserve or the banking system it heads.4 The Fed’s website attempts to gloss over its role as chief defender and protector of this private banking club, but let’s take a closer look. The website states:

* “The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations – possibly leading to some confusion about “ownership.” For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.”

* “[The Federal Reserve] is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.”

* “The Federal Reserve’s income is derived primarily from the interest on U.S. government securities that it has acquired through open market operations. . . . After paying its expenses, the Federal Reserve turns the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury.”5

So let’s review:

1. The Fed is privately owned.

Its shareholders are private banks. In fact, 100% of its shareholders are private banks. None of its stock is owned by the government.

2. The fact that the Fed does not get “appropriations” from Congress basically means that it gets its money from Congress without congressional approval, by engaging in “open market operations.”

Here is how it works: When the government is short of funds, the Treasury issues bonds and delivers them to bond dealers, which auction them off. When the Fed wants to “expand the money supply” (create money), it steps in and buys bonds from these dealers with newly-issued dollars acquired by the Fed for the cost of writing them into an account on a computer screen. These maneuvers are called “open market operations” because the Fed buys the bonds on the “open market” from the bond dealers. The bonds then become the “reserves” that the banking establishment uses to back its loans. In another bit of sleight of hand known as “fractional reserve” lending, the same reserves are lent many times over, further expanding the money supply, generating interest for the banks with each loan. It was this money-creating process that prompted Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1960s, to call the Federal Reserve “a total money-making machine.” He wrote:

“When the Federal Reserve writes a check for a government bond it does exactly what any bank does, it creates money, it created money purely and simply by writing a check.”

3. The Fed generates profits for its shareholders.

The interest on bonds acquired with its newly-issued Federal Reserve Notes pays the Fed’s operating expenses plus a guaranteed 6% return to its banker shareholders. A mere 6% a year may not be considered a profit in the world of Wall Street high finance, but most businesses that manage to cover all their expenses and give their shareholders a guaranteed 6% return are considered “for profit” corporations.

In addition to this guaranteed 6%, the banks will now be getting interest from the taxpayers on their “reserves.” The basic reserve requirement set by the Federal Reserve is 10%. The website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York explains that as money is redeposited and relent throughout the banking system, this 10% held in “reserve” can be fanned into ten times that sum in loans; that is, $10,000 in reserves becomes $100,000 in loans. Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.8 puts the total “loans and leases in bank credit” as of September 24, 2008 at $7,049 billion. Ten percent of that is $700 billion. That means we the taxpayers will be paying interest to the banks on at least $700 billion annually – this so that the banks can retain the reserves to accumulate interest on ten times that sum in loans.

The banks earn these returns from the taxpayers for the privilege of having the banks’ interests protected by an all-powerful independent private central bank, even when those interests may be opposed to the taxpayers’ — for example, when the banks use their special status as private money creators to fund speculative derivative schemes that threaten to collapse the U.S. economy. Among other special benefits, banks and other financial institutions (but not other corporations) can borrow at the low Fed funds rate of about 2%. They can then turn around and put this money into 30-year Treasury bonds at 4.5%, earning an immediate 2.5% from the taxpayers, just by virtue of their position as favored banks. A long list of banks (but not other corporations) is also now protected from the short selling that can crash the price of other stocks.

Time to Change the Statute?

According to the Fed’s website, the control Congress has over the Federal Reserve is limited to this:

“[T]he Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute.”

As we know from watching the business news, “oversight” basically means that Congress gets to see the results when it’s over. The Fed periodically reports to Congress, but the Fed doesn’t ask; it tells. The only real leverage Congress has over the Fed is that it “can alter its responsibilities by statute.” It is time for Congress to exercise that leverage and make the Federal Reserve a truly federal agency, acting by and for the people through their elected representatives. If the Fed can demand AIG’s stock in return for an $85 billion loan to the mega-insurer, we can demand the Fed’s stock in return for the trillion-or-so dollars we’ll be advancing to bail out the private banking system from its follies.

If the Fed were actually a federal agency, the government could issue U.S. legal tender directly, avoiding an unnecessary interest-bearing debt to private middlemen who create the money out of thin air themselves. Among other benefits to the taxpayers. a truly “federal” Federal Reserve could lend the full faith and credit of the United States to state and local governments interest-free, cutting the cost of infrastructure in half, restoring the thriving local economies of earlier decades.

Posted in USAComments Off on Who Owns The Federal Reserve?

The Victory Hour Special Broadcast

The Victory Hour Special Broadcast Jan 30, 2013

by crescentandcross

the-victory-hour-jan-30-2013.mp3

Download Here

THANK YOU FOR ASSISTING WITH THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PRODUCING THIS PROGRAM

Posted in InterviewComments Off on The Victory Hour Special Broadcast

Lest We Forget–God’s Chosen C*cksuckers–Infant Genital Mutilation/Molestation

NOVANEWS
ed note–someone please explain to me again how there is nothing abnormal about these people, their beliefs and their practices.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Lest We Forget–God’s Chosen C*cksuckers–Infant Genital Mutilation/Molestation

The Children Killed by America’s Drones. “Crimes Against Humanity” committed by Barack H. Obama.

NOVANEWS
Global Research,

This is a list of names of innocent children killed by America’s drones

But behind each name there is the face of a child with a family history in a village in a far away country, with a mom and a dad, with brothers and sisters and friends.

Among the list, are infants of 1, 2, 3 and 4 years old.

In some cases brothers and sisters of an entire family are killed.

Four sisters of the Ali Mohammed Nasser family in Yemen were killed. Afrah was 9 years old when she and her three younger sisters Zayda (7 years old) , Hoda (5 years old) and Sheika (4 years old) were struck by an American drone.

Ibrahim, a 13 year old boy of the Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye family in Yemen was struck by a US drone, together with his younger brother Asmaa (9 years old) and two younger sisters, Salma (4 years old) and Fatima (3 years old)

These children are innocent. They are not different from our own children.

Their lives were taken away at a very young age as part of a military agenda, which claims to be combating “international terrorism”

These drone attacks are extremely precise. We are not dealing with “collateral damage”.

Drone operators have the ability of viewing from a computer screen their targets well in advance of a strike.

A family home is referred to as a “structure” or a “building” rather than a house. When they target a home with family members, they kill children. And they know that in advance of the drone strike:

“Bryant saw a flash on the screen: the explosion. Parts of the building collapsed. The child had disappeared. Bryant had a sick feeling in his stomach.

“Did we just kill a kid?” he asked the man sitting next to him.

“Yeah, I guess that was a kid,” the pilot replied.

“Was that a kid?” they wrote into a chat window on the monitor.”

The Woes of an American Drone Operator, Spiegel.de, December 14, 2012)

These children were killed on the orders of the US President and Commander in Chief Barack H. Obama.

The commander in chief sets the military agenda and authorizes these killings to proceed.

The killings were quite deliberate. They are categorized as “crimes against humanity” under international law.

Those who ordered these drone killings, including the president of the United States, are war criminals under international law and must be indicted and prosecuted

It should be noted that the drone attacks on civilians have increased dramatically during the Obama presidency (see below).

Pakistan strikes



The List of Names was compiled by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

CIA Drone Strikes in Pakistan 2004–2013

Total US strikes: 362
Obama strikes: 310 
Total reported killed: 2,629-3,461
Civilians reported killed: 475-891
Children reported killed: 176
Total reported injured: 1,267-1,431

US Covert Action in Yemen 2002–2013

Total confirmed US operations (all): 54-64
Total confirmed US drone strikes: 42-52
Possible extra US operations: 135-157
Possible extra US drone strikes: 77-93
Total reported killed (all): 374-1,112
Total civilians killed (all): 72-177
Children killed (all): 27-37

US Covert Action in Somalia 2007–2013

Total US strikes: 10-23 
Total US drone strikes: 3-9
Total reported killed: 58-170
Civilians reported killed: 11-57
Children reported killed: 1-3

Drone Infographics

This map details the locations of CIA drone strikes in the remote Pakistani tribal areas.

Partial List of Children Killed

PAKISTAN

Name | Age | Gender

Noor Aziz | 8 | male
Abdul Wasit | 17 | male
Noor Syed | 8 | male
Wajid Noor | 9 | male
Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male
Ayeesha | 3 | female
Qari Alamzeb | 14| male
Shoaib | 8 | male
Hayatullah KhaMohammad | 16 | male
Tariq Aziz | 16 | male
Sanaullah Jan | 17 | male
Maezol Khan | 8 | female
Nasir Khan | male
Naeem Khan | male
Naeemullah | male
Mohammad Tahir | 16 | male
Azizul Wahab | 15 | male
Fazal Wahab | 16 | male
Ziauddin | 16 | male
Mohammad Yunus | 16 | male
Fazal Hakim | 19 | male
Ilyas | 13 | male
Sohail | 7 | male
Asadullah | 9 | male
khalilullah | 9 | male
Noor Mohammad | 8 | male
Khalid | 12 | male
Saifullah | 9 | male
Mashooq Jan | 15 | male
Nawab | 17 | male
Sultanat Khan | 16 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male
Noor Mohammad | 15 | male
Mohammad Yaas Khan | 16 | male
Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 17 | male
Abdullah | 18 | male
Ikramullah Zada | 17 | male
Inayatur Rehman | 16 | male
Shahbuddin | 15 | male
Yahya Khan | 16 |male
Rahatullah |17 | male
Mohammad Salim | 11 | male
Shahjehan | 15 | male
Gul Sher Khan | 15 | male
Bakht Muneer | 14 | male
Numair | 14 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Taseel Khan | 18 | male
Zaheeruddin | 16 | male
Qari Ishaq | 19 | male
Jamshed Khan | 14 | male
Alam Nabi | 11 | male
Qari Abdul Karim | 19 | male
Rahmatullah | 14 | male
Abdus Samad | 17 | male
Siraj | 16 | male
Saeedullah | 17 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Salman | 12 | male
Fazal Wahab | 18 | male
Baacha Rahman | 13 | male
Wali-ur-Rahman | 17 | male
Iftikhar | 17 | male
Inayatullah | 15 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Adnan | 16 | male
Najibullah | 13 | male
Naeemullah | 17 | male
Hizbullah | 10 | male
Kitab Gul | 12 | male
Wilayat Khan | 11 | male
Zabihullah | 16 | male
Shehzad Gul | 11 | male
Shabir | 15 | male
Qari Sharifullah | 17 | male
Shafiullah | 16 | male
Nimatullah | 14 | male
Shakirullah | 16 | male
Talha | 8 | male

YEMEN

Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female
Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female
Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female
Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female
Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male
Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male
Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female
Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female
Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female
Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female
Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male
Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female
Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female
Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female
Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female
Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male
Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female
Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female
Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male
Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male
Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female
AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male
Abdel- Rahman Anwar al Awlaki | 16 | male
Abdel-Rahman al-Awlaki | 17 | male
Nasser Salim | 19

Posted in USA, Afghanistan, Pakistan & Kashmir, SomaliaComments Off on The Children Killed by America’s Drones. “Crimes Against Humanity” committed by Barack H. Obama.

PCHR condemns Israel’s Refusal to Participate in the UN Human Rights Council Review and Calls Upon the Council to Proceed with the Review

NOVANEWS

 

As had been anticipated, the State of Israel has failed to attend its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), which was scheduled to take place today, 29 January 2013. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) submitted a shadow report to the HRC in July 2012, in anticipation of Israel’s appearance at the UN body’s 15th Session.

Israel’s decision to boycott the UPR is yet another demonstration of its contempt for international human rights norms, and is made possible by the complacency of the international community. The failure to hold Israel to account for its violations of international human rights and humanitarian law has further deepened the culture of impunity which allows such violations to occur.

Israel’s refusal to participate in the review also represents a direct threat to the very credibility of the Human Rights Council, a cooperative mechanism with a mandate to examine the compliance of its Member States with their international human rights obligations. Israel is the first country to have withdrawn from the UPR procedure and, in doing so, has set a negative precedent for other states. The Human Rights Council should not allow Israel to stall the UPR process, and should instead protect its standards and procedures, and continue with the review of the State’s compliance with its human rights obligations.

PCHR’s shadow report emphasises that, as the occupying power in the West Bank including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. the State of Israel has specific obligations with respect to the care and protection of the occupied Palestinian population.

The report highlights Israel’s numerous violations of its obligations, such as: the illegal closure of the Gaza Strip; the unilateral imposition of a so-called ‘buffer zone’ inside the land and sea borders of the Gaza Strip; and the Israeli judicial system’s systematic denial of justice for Palestinian victims of attacks by Israeli forces, including the victims of ‘Operation Cast Lead’. The impunity enjoyed by Israel for this assault, which has been perpetuated by the international community, allowed it to carry out its latest offensive on the Gaza Strip in November 2012, in which 102 civilians, including 35 children and 14 women, were killed.

Despite Israel’s refusal to participate in the Universal Periodic Review, PCHR calls on the UN Human Rights Council to proceed with its review of Israel’s compliance with its human rights obligations. Member States should not be permitted to opt out of and undermine the UPR process by refusing to appear before the Council.

 

For PCHR’s Shadow Report to the Human Rights Council, click here.

Posted in Human RightsComments Off on PCHR condemns Israel’s Refusal to Participate in the UN Human Rights Council Review and Calls Upon the Council to Proceed with the Review

NATO: Proudly Delivering Death Since 1949

NOVANEWS
Global Research

 

THE GLOBALIZATION OF NATO

Author: Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
Clarity Press (2012)
ISBN: 978-0-9852710-2-2
Pages: 411 with complete index

Now available to order from Global Research

The world is enveloped in a blanket of perpetual conflict. Invasions, occupation, illicit sanctions, and regime change have become currencies and orders of the day. One organization – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) – is repeatedly, and very controversially, involved in some form or another in many of these conflicts led by the US and its allies. NATO spawned from the Cold War. Its existence was justified by Washington and Western Bloc politicians as a guarantor against any Soviet and Eastern Bloc invasion of Western Europe, but all along the Alliance served to cement Washington’s influence in Europe and continue what was actually America’s post-World War II occupation of the European continent. In 1991 the raison d’être of the Soviet threat ended with the collapse of the USSR and the end of the Cold War. Nevertheless NATO remains and continues to alarmingly expand eastward, antagonizing Russia and its ex-Soviet allies. China and Iran are also increasingly monitoring NATO’s moves as it comes into more frequent contact with them.

Yugoslavia was a turning point for the Atlantic Alliance and its mandate. The organization moved from the guise of a defensive posture into an offensive pose under the pretexts of humanitarianism. Starting from Yugoslavia, NATO began its journey towards becoming a global military force. From its wars in the Balkans, it began to broaden its international area of operations outside of the Euro-Atlantic zone into the Caucasus, Central Asia, East Africa, the Middle East, North Africa, and the Indian Ocean. It has virtually turned the Mediterranean Sea into a NATO lake with the NATO Mediterranean Dialogue and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, while it seeks to do the same to the Black Sea and gain a strategic foothold in the Caspian Sea region. The Gulf Security Initiative between NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council seeks to also dominate the Persian Gulf and to hem in Iran. Israel has become a de facto member of the military organization. At the same time, NATO vessels sail the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. These warships are deployed off the coasts of Somalia, Djibouti, and Yemen as part of NATO’s objectives to create a naval cordon of the seas controlling important strategic waterways and maritime transit routes.

The Atlantic Alliance’s ultimate aim is to fix and fasten the American Empire. NATO has clearly played an important role in complementing the US strategy for dominating Eurasia. This includes the encirclement of Russia, China, Iran, and their allies with a military ring subservient to Washington. The global missile shield project, the militarization of Japan, the insurgencies in Libya and Syria, the threats against Iran, and the formation of a NATO-like military alliance in the Asia-Pacific region are components of this colossal geopolitical project. NATO’s globalization, however, is bringing together a new series of Eurasian counter-alliances with global linkages that stretch as far as Latin America. The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) have been formed by Russia, China, and their allies as shields against the US and NATO and as a means to challenge them. As the globalization of NATO unfolds the risks of nuclear war become more and more serious with the Atlantic Alliance headed towards a collision course with Russia, China, and Iran that could ignite World War III.

Click to visit the Global Research ONLINE STORE

REVIEWS

“The Globalization of NATO by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is simply magnificent, erudite and devoid of the ethnocentrism to which one has become so accustomed from Western authors. The book deals with what doubtless are the most important and relevant issues of the day for all those committed to saving life and protecting Mother Earth from rampant human irresponsibility and crime. There is no other book that, at this particular time, I would most heartily endorse. I think Africans, Near Eastern peoples, Iranians, Russians, Chinese, Asians and Europeans generally and all the progressive Latin American countries of today will find a much needed reinforcement and support for their peaceful ideals in this excellent must-read book.”
MIGUEL D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN, Foreign Minister of Nicaragua (1979-1990) and President of the 63rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly (2008-2009): Managua, Nicaragua.

“We are far away from the principles and objectives for which the United Nations was created and the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal stipulating that some state actions can be considered crimes against peace. Nazemroaya’s book, in addition to reminding us that the role of the United Nations has been confiscated by NATO, elaborates the danger that the North Atlantic Treaty represents to world peace.”
JOSÉ L. GÓMEZ DEL PRADO, Chairman of the United Nations Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries (2005-2011): Ferney-Voltaire, France.

“Through carefully documented research, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya analyzes the historical and geopolitical evolution of NATO from the Cold War to the post 9/11 US- led “Global War on Terrorism.” This book is a must read for those committed to reversing the tide of war and imperial conquest by the world’s foremost military machine.”
MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY, Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG): Montréal, Canada.

“A very timely book. Yes, US-led NATO is globalizing, like the US-led finance economy. No doubt also for it to protect the latter, the “free market.” It is a classical case of overstretch to help save the crumbling US Empire and Western influence in general, by countries most of whom are bankrupt by their own economic mismanagement. All their interventions share two characteristics. The conflicts could have been solved with a little patience and creativity, but NATO does not want solutions. It uses conflicts as raw material it can process into interventions to tell the world that it is the strongest in military terms. And, with the help of the mainstream media, it sees Hitler everywhere, in a Milosevic, a bin Laden, a Hussein, a Qaddafi, in Assad, insensitive to the enormous differences between all these cases. I hope this book will be read by very, very many who can turn this morbid fascination with violence into constructive conflict resolution.”
JOHAN GALTUNG, Professor Emeritus of Peace Studies and Sociology at the University of Oslo and Founder of the International Peace Research Institute in Oslo (PRIO), the Galtung- Institut, and the Transcend Network: Oslo, Norway.

“Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya’s prolific writings give us a comprehensive understanding of the character of the military thrust and it’s all out, no holds barred STRATEGIC plans and moves to invade, occupy and plunder the resources of nations, inflicting unprecedented barbaric acts on civilian populations. He is one of the prescient thinkers and writers of contemporary times who deserves to be read and acted upon by people with a conscience and concern for humanity’s future.”
VISHNU BHAGWAT, Admiral and Chief of the Naval Staff of India (1996-1998): Mumbai, India.

“This is a book really necessary to understanding the role of NATO within the frame of long-term US strategy. The Globalization of NATO by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya not only provides an articulate analysis on the Atlantic Alliance: it is the best modern text devoted to the hegemonic alliance. With this book Nazemroaya reconfirms his ability as a brilliant geopolitical analyst.”
TIBERIO GRAZIANI, President of the Institute of Advanced Studies in Geopolitics and Auxiliary Sciences/L’Istituto di Alti Studi in Geopolitica e Scienze Ausiliarie (IsAG): Rome, Italy.

“Nazemroaya is an unbelievable prolific writer. What has often amazed many is his almost nonstop writing on extremely important issues for the contemporary world and his analysis about the globalization of NATO. What amazes many of us in other parts of the world are his seemingly limitless depth, breadth and the thoroughness of his knowledge that has been repeatedly appearing in his work. We are deeply indebted to Nazemroaya’s humble, tireless and invaluable contributions through his fearless, insightful and powerful writings.”
KIYUL CHUNG, Editor-in-Chief of The 4th Media and Visiting Professor at the School of Journalism and Communication at Tsinghua University: Beijing, People’s Republic of China.

“The Journalists’ Press Club in Mexico is grateful and privileged to know a man who respects the written word and used it in an ethical way without another interest other than showing the reality about the other side of power in the world. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya gives voice to the “voiceless.” He can see the other side of the moon, the side without lights.”
CELESE SÁENZ DE MIERA, Mexican Broadcaster and Secretary-General of the Mexican Press Club: Federal District of Mexico City, Mexico.

“With his very well documented analysis, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya has conducted a remarkable decryption of the strategies implemented by NATO – in the interests of the United States, the European Union and Israel – to expand its military grip on the world, ensure its control over energy resources and transit routes, and encircling the countries likely to be a barrier or a threat to its goals, whether it be Iran, Russia or China. Nazemroaya’s work is essential reading for those that want to understand what is being played out right now on the map in all the world’s trouble spots; Libya and Africa; Syria and the Middle East; the Persian Gulf and Eurasia.”
SILVIA CATTORI, Swiss political analyst and journalist: Geneva, Switzerland.


The Globalization of NATO

Author: Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
ISBN: 978-0-9852710-2-2
Clarity Press (2012)
Pages: 411 with complete index

Price: $22.95

Posted in USA, EuropeComments Off on NATO: Proudly Delivering Death Since 1949

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING