The Committee to Reform Democracy in California
Home  The Website    Corruption Updates    The Database    The Archives    Link Clusters    Why    How to Help     Contact
Fight Corporate Media Liars


#1 through #3 posted: March 8, 2008

#4 through #? posted: March 10, 2008

Previous Page: Page 161       All Archives         Next page: Page 163


Contact Us:

1) The Articles linked below were Abstracted from the sources cited. After the abstract there's analysis and commentary, links to related articles, and a link to the database with suggested search terms.

Why were Mexican students at rebel camp in Ecuador?

By Franco Ordonez | McClatchy, 3-7-08

MEXICO CITY — At least five Mexican nationals were present at a rebel camp where a top insurgent commander was killed last weekend in Ecuador, leaving Mexicans to speculate on why they were there.

Experts say that it's the first time Mexican nationals have been known to die alongside members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, Latin America's oldest guerrilla group.

Their presence added to questions of a possible link between FARC and a spate of pipeline bombings in Mexico last year that cut off fuel supplies to major industrial operations, including a Volkswagen factory. Mexican police officials noted then that the bombings, claimed by the Popular Revolutionary Army, or EPR, differed radically from the group's previous targets of ATM machines and other "nuisance bombings."

The police said then that the pipeline bombings — which are a common FARC tactic in Colombia — were so sophisticated that whoever did them may have received special training.

Also present in the Ecuador camp were an unknown number of Chileans.

Ecuador's security minister, Gustavo Larrea, said Friday that as many as four Mexicans were killed in the March 1 attack. A fifth Mexican, 26-year-old Lucia Morett, survived.

Mexican news outlets identified the dead as Juan Gonzalez del Castillo, Natalia Velasquez, Fernando Franco Delgado, and Soren Ulises Aviles Angeles. The National Autonomous University of Mexico said Morett, Velasquez, Delgado and Gonzalez del Castillo were students there. The newspaper El Universal said Aviles Angeles was a student at National Polytechnic Institute.

Both Morett and Gonzalez del Castillo were members of a radical student group that supported the FARC, according to the group's Web site.

Friends and classmates described Gonzalez del Castillo and Morett as "activists" and "internationalist militants," but not guerrilla fighters.

Larrea, Ecuador's Security Minister, told reporters there that "more than 10, a large group" of young people under 24, died in the attack that also killed the FARC's No. 2 commander, Raul Reyes.

Larrea said members of the student group were "studying" the oldest armed rebel movement in South America. But university officials said they had not sent any group to study the rebel movement.

FARC has a history with Mexico and UNAM. The rebel group once had an office there, but it was closed after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, when the FARC was declared a terrorist group.

Colombian officials have said for months that their intelligence shows the FARC has been operating clandestinely throughout Mexico. Now, they say, they have pictures of Mexicans being trained.

Top of Page


Mexico: Students killed at guerrilla camp weren't in training

Kevin G. Hall and Franco Ordonez | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: March 12, 2008 06:23:14 PM

WASHINGTON — Mexico's attorney general on Wednesday disputed claims that Mexican university students who were killed alongside a South American rebel leader in a recent raid were in the jungle receiving bomb training from guerrillas.

More questions than answers remain, however, in the aftermath of a March 1 cross-border incursion by Colombia's military into Ecuador, where at least 17 people including Colombian guerrilla leader Raul Reyes were killed.

Colombia's vice president said last week that the Mexican students were receiving "training" from the FARC, and some Colombian newspaper reports suggested that training was in bomb-making, information that they said came from the captured Mexican woman, 26-year-old Lucia Morett.

In an interview with reporters Wednesday in Washington, Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora challenged the Colombian accounts. He said that an unspecified number of Mexican university students were in Ecuador for a meeting of sympathizers of Venezuela's anti-American president, Hugo Chavez.

Chavez leads the self-proclaimed Bolivarian Revolution, which combines a vision of socialism with a shared Latin American identity like that espoused by Simon Bolivar, a contemporary of George Washington and a founding father of several South American nations.

"What we know now for a fact is these particular individuals were participating in a congress of the Bolivarian movement, and they, through that, were visiting this (FARC) camp at the border with Colombia," Medina Mora said.

More recently, Cuba has become deeply aligned with Venezuela's Chavez, who's been hostile to the United States and its closest Latin ally, Mexico.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??


This is fairly straightforward. We have been losing the battle to maintain our spanish elites in power across central and south america.

We have struggled to convince these nations to exchange their enslavement to spanish elites with enslavement to america's global empire.

By struggle, i mean that we have financed, armed, trained, and assisted brutal dictators seize power, declare martial law, and kill their political opponents.

We have "lost" cuba, veneseula, bolivia, and ecuador. A whole flock of south american nations have left our sphere, but are hesitant to shove it in our face. We tend to get angry. When we get angry we fund death squads, and find a general or three to seize power.

We would have lost the last mexican election if it was fair. Obregon, rather than Calderon, would have been president. Besides supplying mexico's brutal "spanish" elite with the political, economic, and military support necessary to keep them in power, the US also acts as a social, political, and economic safety valve for those disgruntled and impoverished by their american-backed tyranny.

Mexico, like the us, needs to revive and restore its revolutionary principals.

The long bloody road to freedom

March 5, 2007 (edited 11-28-07)

Central America has been ruled with an iron fist by Spanish Colonial Elites since the conquest.

These elites have maintained power for the last 100 years by trading their country's resources, both human and natural, for American military, political, and economic support for their regimes.

The American program to dominate Central and South America has been an ugly affair from the start. After Cuba gained independence, our continential dominance began to seriously fail during the '70s, leading Nixon and Kissenger to commit crimes against humanity in Chile, and spreading waves of death squads across Central and South America.

This was a losing battle, and by the early '80s Regan was facilitating the movement of large amounts of drugs into the United States from both Afghanastan and Colombia to fund death squads across Central and South America to prop up our tottering dictatorships. Regan's coke money also funded Osama's earlier Afgan war against the Russians. Our actions then are still driving events in Central and South America, as well as afghanistan and iraq, today.

The perfect example in s america is our President of Colombia. Uribe is directly linked to the Right wing private armies and death squads that are attempting to maintain their control of both the nation and cocaine trade of Colombia.

We must adopt this handy rule: We can take political power with force, but we cannot maintain political power with force alone. To maintain power, we must match our military force with an equally powerful political or moral force that operates within the value system and for the benefit of the people we have invaded, occupied, or installed a dictator over.

Despite our powerful propaganda and loud claims to be the bearer of the political and moral principals of freedom, justice, and democracy, our support of dictators and death squads in Central and South America has made our claims to hold a moral high ground hollow, and has been the main fuel for both radical indiginious, marxist, and in the case of the Middle-East, radical islamic alternatives to our violent imposition of false democracy and hollow freedoms on conquored people.

As we have no moral force equal to our military force, we are doomed to walk down a long, bloody trail to failure in every region of the world we rule through proxies or direct occupation.

We are coming to the end of our long, bloody trail of domination in South America.

South America has effectivly taken the control of their political and economic affairs out of our hands, and are, for the first time in 500 years, almost in complete charge of their own affairs. Central America is not far behind South America.

The Agent of our Empire in Guatemala and Hondorus during the formation of the death squads was John Negroponte. Today's death squads are the children of American foreign policy, the children of Negroponte, Poindexter, North, and the crew of criminals that was the Regan administration.

The death squads used by the authoritarian and military governments they supported are still using extra-judicial violence to maintain political and economic control over their people in Mexico, Guatemala, and Colombia.

The recent "election" in Mexico, and the subsequent violent suppression of democracy in Oxacha highlight the fraud and violence employed by the spanish elite mafia that rules over mexico.

Until we stop the corporate criminals in the United States from suppressing Our Constitution, perverting our democracy, and stealing our government, people around the world will continue to have their political and economic rights violently stolen from them with the help of the us.

Before we can bring the benefits of democracy and freedom to the world, we must first establish them here.

Also See:

The Bite of Corruption, lat, August 6, 2006

Mexico to boost tapping of phones and e-mail with U.S. aid, lat, May 25, 2007

Mexican Plutocracy's Robber-Baron Concessions, NY Times, August 27, 2007

U.S. May Provide Billions to Mexico to Fight Drug Cartels, NY Times, August 14, 2007

Search the Corruption Database under



Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


All Archives

Top of Page

2) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Bush vetoes bill outlawing CIA waterboarding

WASHINGTON, Mar. 8, 2008 (Reuters) — President George W. Bush on Saturday vetoed legislation passed by Congress that would have banned the CIA from using waterboarding and other controversial interrogation techniques.

"Because the danger remains, we need to ensure our intelligence officials have all the tools they need to stop the terrorists," Bush said in his weekly radio address. He added that the vetoed legislation "would diminish these vital tools."

House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said Democrats would try to overturn Bush's veto and said U.S. moral authority was at stake.

"We will begin to reassert that moral authority by attempting to override the president's veto next week," Pelosi said.

Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts called Bush's veto "one of the most shameful acts of his presidency."

It is unlikely that Democrats, the majority party in Congress, could muster enough votes to overturn Bush's veto. The bill passed the House and Senate on partisan votes, short of the support needed to reverse the president.

The House approved the legislation in December and the Senate passed it in February despite White House warnings it would be vetoed.

CIA Director Michael Hayden told Congress last month that government interrogators used waterboarding on three suspects captured after the September 11 attacks.

The U.S. Army Field Manual prohibits waterboarding and seven other interrogation methods and the bill would have aligned CIA practices with the military's.

In a message to CIA employees on Saturday after Bush's veto, Hayden said the CIA would continue to work strictly within the law but said its needs were different from that of the U.S. Army and that the CIA needed to follow its own procedures.

"There are methods in CIA's program that have been briefed to our oversight committees, are fully consistent with the Geneva Convention and current U.S. law, and are most certainly not torture," Hayden said.

In his remarks, Bush did not specifically mention waterboarding.

But he said: "The bill Congress sent me would not simply ban one particular interrogation method, as some have implied. Instead, it would eliminate all the alternative procedures we've developed to question the world's most dangerous and violent terrorists."

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??

(The below was originally written for CU 38_2 on March 7, 2007. updated 3-8-08)



Bush is confused. The American Constitution was not made to give rights to foreigners. The Constitution was designed to set the terms of our government's legitimacy by limiting the power of each branch. Bush has exceeded those limits, and is a criminal.

By dividing power between the branches, and restraining and checking the use of power by each branch, our forefathers believed they could prevent despots like Bush from rising. Bush has risen, and our rights and protections have fallen.

These divisions protect not just American rights, but even more importantly define and protect American Values as well.

Bush is an affront to both.

The President has illegally consolidated powers the Constitution wisely divided.

One of the Constitution's most important checks on arbitrary power is the division of wartime authority between the President and Congress.

The Constitution requires that Congress declare war, sets the objectives of the war, and establishes the rules for the war. Bush has rejected these laws

The President then gets to lead the country within the rules established by Congress. Bush has violated these rules.

Congressional restraints are inherent in the grant of war powers, and do not end at our borders. Bush has claimed the whole world is a battlefield, giving himself unlimited powers everywhere.

Congress has failed miserably to check bush's constitutional and legislative crimes. Congress has not declared war, set the objectives, means, nor rules for this “war.” Except for their strange grant of ill-defined "war powers" to bush, and their hideous and unconstitutional revocation of habius corpus.

Bush has pushed Congress aside, and made rules for captures that authorize kidnapping, indefinite detentions, and torture. These are criminal acts prohibited by the constitution and long standing law.

Now the President has created a secret military “justice” system that will convict the victims of these crimes, in secret, with none of the judicial safeguards an honest process would require. Virtually all of the President's Actions, in Iraq, and the “war on terror” are crimes against our Constitution and laws.

These crimes are not bush's alone: These crimes began in Congress, when they abused their war powers by not declaring war. Congress granted the President vague “war powers,” but Congress has no power to grant the President Unconstitutional powers, be they violations of the power to make war, conduct illegal searches, or use torture.

The President has no right to interpret any law as absolving him of his Constitutional restraints or his oath to obey the law.

Yet the The President has twisted these “war powers” into a declaration of endless war unbounded by borders, or the rule of law. The President's acts are a declaration of war against the Constitution and the citizens of the united states. Congress has confirmed each of these illegal powers.

Congress joined the President in his crimes when they passed a bill which removed the President's prisoners from judicial review, and stripped them of Habeas Corpus

The Constitution is clear:

The Privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

Our government, and our President, are restrained by the Constitution anywhere they use the power of their office, be it inside or outside the country. Both Congress and the President have broken the law, and violated the specific words of our Constitution.

If Bush is confused or not, he is a criminal. He is purposely using the pretext of “foreigners,” “terrorism,” and fears of foreign threats, to manufacture Presidential Powers the Constitution specifically prohibits.

As far as our Constitutional limits assigns “rights” to foreigners, these “rights” reflect our political values, not theirs. This is what made us different from the rest of the world. Rather than being unique in our defense of individual rights, what distinguishes us today is that we are the most powerful opponent of democratic and human rights in the world.

Without Constitutional limits we would have a President capable of searching, arresting, detaining, torturing, and killing people, at will, anywhere in the world. A tyrant.

How about this: The Constitution is the Club, Bush, Congress, the “free” press, and the Corporations are the baby seals, and hunting season is opening soon.

Pick up a club: The Initiative

Top of Page

Also See:

Bush could bypass new torture ban, Waiver right is reserved, Globe, January 4, 2006

ABA Clear: Bush Policy allows Torture, ap, August 10, 2007

essay: liars in the Corporate Press cannot call torture torture, committee, 8-07

Liars in Congress to ban torture: They already did, and bush ignored them, NYT, December 7, 2007

Torture Links

Search the Corruption Database under


Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


All Archives

Top of Page

3) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

The meaning of Gaza’s ‘shoah’

Jonathan Cook, middle east online, 3-8-08

Israel’s immediate priorities are: to provoke Hamas regularly into violence to deflect it from the path of organising mass peaceful protest; and to weaken the Hamas leadership through regular executions. But Israel’s ultimate goal is Gaza’s depopulation; to force Palestinians to break out again into Egypt – but this time, there will be no chance of return, notes Jonathan Cook.

Israel plots another Palestinian exodus

Israeli Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai’s much publicised remark last week about Gaza facing a “shoah” -- the Hebrew word for the Holocaust -- was widely assumed to be unpleasant hyperbole about the army’s plans for an imminent full-scale invasion of the Strip.

More significantly, however, his comment offers a disturbing indication of the Israeli army’s longer-term strategy towards the Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Vilnai, a former general, was interviewed by Army Radio as Israel was in the midst of unleashing a series of air and ground strikes on populated areas of Gaza that killed more than 100 Palestinians, at least half of whom were civilians and 25 of whom were children, according to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem.

The interview also took place in the wake of a rocket fired from Gaza that killed a student in Sderot and other rockets that hit the centre of the southern city of Ashkelon. Vilnai stated: “The more Qassam fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they [the Palestinians of Gaza] will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves.”

His comment, picked up by the Reuters wire service, was soon making headlines around the world. Presumably uncomfortable with a senior public figure in Israel comparing his government’s policies to the Nazi plan to exterminate European Jewry, many news services referred to Vilnai’s clearly articulated threat as a “warning”, as though he was prophesying a cataclysmic natural event over which he and the Israeli army had no control.

Nonetheless, officials understood the damage that the translation from Hebrew of Vilnai’s remark could do to Israel’s image abroad. And sure enough, Palestinian leaders were soon exploiting the comparison, with both the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the exiled Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, stating that a “holocaust” was unfolding in Gaza.

Within hours the Israeli Foreign Ministry was launching a large “hasbara” (propaganda) campaign through its diplomats, as the Jerusalem Post reported. In a related move, a spokesman for Vilnai explained that the word “shoah” also meant “disaster”; this, rather than a holocaust, was what the minister had been referring to. Clarifications were issued by many media outlets.

However, no one in Israel was fooled. “Shoah” -- which literally means “burnt offering” -- was long ago reserved for the Holocaust, much as the Arabic word “nakba” (or “catastrophe”) is nowadays used only to refer to the Palestinians’ dispossession by Israel in 1948. Certainly, the Israeli media in English translated Vilnai’s use of “shoah” as “holocaust”.

But this is not the first time that Vilnai has expressed extreme views about Gaza’s future.

Last summer he began quietly preparing a plan on behalf of his boss, the Defence Minister Ehud Barak, to declare Gaza a “hostile entity” and dramatically reduce the essential services supplied by Israel -- as long-time occupier -- to its inhabitants, including electricity and fuel. The cuts were finally implemented late last year after the Israeli courts gave their blessing.

Vilnai and Barak, both former military men like so many other Israeli politicians, have been “selling” this policy -- of choking off basic services to Gaza -- to Western public opinion ever since.

Under international law, Israel as the occupying power has an obligation to guarantee the welfare of the civilian population in Gaza, a fact forgotten when the media reported Israel’s decision to declare Gaza a hostile entity. The pair have therefore claimed tendentiously that the humanitarian needs of Gazans are still being safeguarded by the limited supplies being allowed through, and that therefore the measures do not constitute collective punishment.

Last October, after a meeting of defence officials, Vilnai said of Gaza: "Because this is an entity that is hostile to us, there is no reason for us to supply them with electricity beyond the minimum required to prevent a crisis.”

Three months later Vilnai went further, arguing that Israel should cut off “all responsibility” for Gaza, though, in line with the advice of Israel’s attorney general, he has been careful not to suggest that this would punish ordinary Gazans excessively.

Instead he said disengagement should be taken to its logical conclusion: “We want to stop supplying electricity to them, stop supplying them with water and medicine, so that it would come from another place”. He suggested that Egypt might be forced to take over responsibility.

Vilnai’s various comments are a reflection of the new thinking inside the defence and political establishments about where next to move Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians.

After the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, a consensus in the Israeli military quickly emerged in favour of maintaining control through a colonial policy of divide and rule, by factionalising the Palestinians and then keeping them feuding.

As long as the Palestinians were too divided to resist the occupation effectively, Israel could carry on with its settlement programme and “creeping annexation” of the occupied territories, as the Defence Minister of the time, Moshe Dayan, called it.

Israel experimented with various methods of undermining the secular Palestinian nationalism of the PLO, which threatened to galvanise a general resistance to the occupation. In particular Israel established local anti-PLO militias known as the Village Leagues and later backed the Islamic fundamentalism of the Muslim Brotherhood, which would morph into Hamas.

Rivalry between Hamas and the PLO, controlled by Fatah, has been the backdrop to Palestinian politics in the occupied territories ever since, and has moved centre stage since Israel’s disengagement from Gaza in 2005. Growing antagonism fuelled by Israel and the US, as an article in Vanity Fair confirmed this week, culminated in the physical separation of a Fatah-run West Bank from a Hamas-ruled Gaza last summer.

The leaderships of Fatah and Hamas are now divided not only geographically but also by their diametrically opposed strategies for dealing with Israel’s occupation.

Fatah’s control of the West Bank is being shored up by Israel because its leaders, including President Mahmoud Abbas, have made it clear that they are prepared to cooperate with an interminable peace process that will give Israel the time it needs to annex yet more of the territory.

Hamas, on the other hand, is under no illusions about the peace process, having seen the Jewish settlers leave but Israel’s military control and its economic siege only tighten from arm’s length.

In charge of an open-air prison, Hamas has refused to surrender to Israeli diktats and has proven invulnerable to Israeli and US machinations to topple it. Instead it has begun advancing the only two feasible forms of resistance available: rocket attacks over the fence surrounding Gaza, and popular mass action.

And this is where the concerns of Vilnai and others emanate from. Both forms of resistance, if Hamas remains in charge of Gaza and improves its level of organisation and the clarity of its vision, could over the long term unravel Israel’s plans to annex the occupied territories -- once their Palestinian inhabitants have been removed.

First, Hamas’ development of more sophisticated and longer-range rockets threatens to move Hamas’ resistance to a much larger canvas than the backwater of the small development town of Sderot. The rockets that landed last week in Ashkelon, one of the country’s largest cities, could be the harbingers of political change in Israel.

Hizbullah proved in the 2006 Lebanon war that Israeli domestic opinion quickly crumbled in the face of sustained rocket attacks. Hamas hopes to achieve the same outcome.

After the strikes on Ashkelon, the Israeli media was filled with reports of angry mobs taking to the city’s streets and burning tyres in protest at their government’s failure to protect them. That is their initial response. But in Sderot, where the attacks have been going on for years, the mayor, Eli Moyal, recently called for talks with Hamas. A poll published in the Haaretz daily showed that 64 per cent of Israelis now agree with him. That figure may increase further if the rocket threat grows.

The fear among Israel’s leaders is that “creeping annexation” of the occupied territories cannot be achieved if the Israeli public starts demanding that Hamas be brought to the negotiating table.

Second, Hamas’ mobilisation last month of Gazans to break through the wall at Rafah and pour into Egypt has demonstrated to Israel’s politician-generals like Barak and Vilnai that the Islamic movement has the potential, as yet unrealised, to launch a focused mass peaceful protest against the military siege of Gaza.

Meron Benvenisti, a former deputy mayor of Jersualem, noted that this scenario “frightens the army more than a violent conflict with armed Palestinians”. Israel fears that the sight of unarmed women and children being executed for the crime of trying to free themselves from the prison Israel has built for them may give the lie to the idea that the disengagement ended the occupation.

When several thousand Palestinians held a demonstration a fortnight ago in which they created a human chain along part of Gaza’s fence with Israel, the Israeli army could hardly contain its panic. Heavy artillery batteries were brought to the perimeter and snipers were ordered to shoot protesters’ legs if they approached the fence.

As Amira Hass, Haaretz’s veteran reporter in the occupied territories, observed, Israel has so far managed to terrorise most ordinary Gazans into a paralysed inactivity on this front. In the main Palestinians have refused to take the “suicidal” course of directly challenging their imprisonment by Israel, even peacefully: “The Palestinians do not need warnings or reports to know the Israeli soldiers shoot the unarmed as well, and they also kill women and children.”

But that may change as the siege brings ever greater misery to Gaza.

As a result, Israel’s immediate priorities are: to provoke Hamas regularly into violence to deflect it from the path of organising mass peaceful protest; to weaken the Hamas leadership through regular executions; and to ensure that an effective defence against the rockets is developed, including technology like Barak’s pet project, Iron Dome, to shield the country from attacks.

In line with these policies, Israel broke the latest period of “relative calm” in Gaza by initiating the executions of five Hamas members last Wednesday. Predictably, Hamas responded by firing into Israel a barrage of rockets that killed the student in Sderot, in turn justifying the bloodbath in Gaza.

But a longer-term strategy is also required, and is being devised by Vilnai and others. Aware both that the Gaza prison is tiny and its resources scarce and that the Palestinian population is growing at a rapid rate, Israel needs a more permanent solution. It must find a way to stop the growing threat posed by Hamas’ organised resistance, and the social explosion that will come sooner or later from the Strip’s overcrowding and inhuman conditions.

Vilnai’s remark hints at that solution, as do a series of comments from cabinet ministers over the past few weeks proposing war crimes to stop the rockets. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, for example, has said that Gazans cannot be allowed “to live normal lives”; Internal Security Minister, Avi Dichter, believes Israel should take action “irrespective of the cost to the Palestinians”; and the Interior Minister, Meir Sheetrit, suggests the Israeli army should “decide on a neighborhood in Gaza and level it” after each attack.

This week Barak revealed that his officials were working on the last idea, finding a way to make it lawful for the army to direct artillery fire and air strikes at civilian neighbourhoods of Gaza in response to rocket fire. They are already doing this covertly, of course, but now they want their hands freed by making it official policy, sanctioned by the international community.

At the same time Vilnai proposed a related idea, of declaring areas of Gaza “combat zones” in which the army would have free rein and from which residents would have little choice but to flee. In practice, this would allow Israel to expel civilians from wide areas of the Strip, herding them into ever smaller spaces, as has been happening in the West Bank for some time.

All these measures – from the intensification of the siege to prevent electricity, fuel and medicines from reaching Gaza to the concentration of the population into even more confined spaces, as well as new ways of stepping up the violence inflicted on the Strip – are thinly veiled excuses for targeting and punishing the civilian population. They necessarily preclude negotiation and dialogue with Gaza’s political leaders.

Until now, it had appeared, Israel’s plan was eventually to persuade Egypt to take over the policing of Gaza, a return to its status before the 1967 war. The view was that Cairo would be even more ruthless in cracking down on the Islamic militants than Israel. But increasingly Vilnai and Barak look set on a different course.

Their ultimate goal appears to be related to Vilnai’s “shoah” comment: Gaza’s depopulation, with the Strip squeezed on three sides until the pressure forces Palestinians to break out again into Egypt. This time, it may be assumed, there will be no chance of return.

Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His new book, “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” is published by Pluto Press. His website is

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??

Arabs in Israel Live under Jim Crow Apartheid

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., August 6, 2007

The "democracy" of Israel sits on lands that have were ethnically cleansed after the British were driven out by European Jews. They drove the British out using terrorism and violence. The ethnic cleansing which followed swept away Palestinian families from their homes and lands to make way for the state of Israel.

Can a country born in terrorism and violence escape the legacy of its birth? So far, the answer in an unequivocal no.

Domestically, separate schools for Arab children reflects the contradictions of a state born by one people denying another people their existence. Those that remain are marginalized in education, economics, and politics.

Externally, the political security of Israel is based on a ring of Arab states held to subservience by American supported Dictators, Kings, and Emirs. Militarily, the security of Israel is based on us arming them to the teeth with the most sophisticated weaponry in the world.

What kind of "democracy" is it when equal access to rights and resources is based on religion. It is a democracy established on inequality.

I have experienced the grim legacy of my own country's birth in a two hundred year genocide of the American Indians countless times by Israelis who, after getting a few beers in them, explain that the birth and expansion of Israel in these terms: "it's just like the Indians (American Indians) when you settled here." Ah, touche! Genocide to Genocide to Genocide.

That begs the question of, "who am I, and just what are we, as Americans?" Israel offers those who are on the other side of the American Dream the opportunity to fight the same fight we lost against the Indian killers. Israel is the place where people of good will can come together to fight the worse elements of American Corporate Fascism.

Israel is a good place to take a stand against the politics of intolerance. Israel is the best place to take a stand against imposing authority using military power. And above all else, Israel is the place where people of good will from all walks of life can come together to repudiate the use of religion to first justify terror, then invasion, and finally the endless occupation and oppression of Palestine.

Israel is the original source of the expanding use of religion to justify terrorism around, by their first use of terrorism, and as a last resort of the desperate against terms of victory they can never accept. Until we nip the source, Israel, in the bud, this ugly plant will continue to propagate itself and grow.

Top of Page

Also See:

rice backs Israeli naming Gaza “Hostile Entity:”a War Crime, bbc, 9-20-07

UN: cutting off gaza is an international crime, haaretz,9-20-07

Israel approves Gaza power cuts, BBC NEWS: 10-25-07

Israel abdicates legal responsibilities for gaza, yet another war crime, ap, 1-24-08

Israel wants its prison re-secured, hosni wants to save face, gaza wants food, meo, 1-28-08

Israel intentionally making civilians suffer in gaza, lat, 1-28-08

US Kills UN resolution against israeli crime of collective punishment, meo, 1-30-08

Israeli crime of collective punishment sparks Gaza humanitarian crisis, suffering, ap, 2-15-08

Search the Corruption Database under


Israel Links

Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


All Archives

Top of Page

4) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Sharif and Zardari join forces in bid to oust Musharraf from power in Pakistan

Daily Mail, 9th March 2008


Pakistan's president and ally of the West in the war on terror suffered a major blow when his two main opposition rivals agreed to unite in a coalition against him.

Pervez Musharraf will now face the combined efforts of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and the late Benazir Bhutto's husband, Asif Ali Zardari, to oust him from power.

In a particularly ominous sign for Musharraf, Sharif and Zardari, the new leader of Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP), agreed to restore judges who Musharraf dismissed when he imposed emergency rule in early November.

Bhutto's PPP won the most seats in a February 18 general election but not enough to rule alone.

Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League, the PML (N), party came second and, while it had promised to support the PPP, Sharif had not previously confirmed his party would join the PPP in forming a government.

The agreement between the PPP and PML (N) would appear to dash any hope that US ally Musharraf might have had that the party that backs him, the Pakistan Muslim League, which came a poor third in the election, might join a coalition.

Analysts had previously said Sharif might have wanted to stay out of a PPP-led government, which is going to have to take some unpopular economic decisions, in order to be in a better position to win power in the next election.

The two parties said the reappointment of the dismissed judges would occur through a parliamentary resolution within 30 days of the formation of the government.

Western allies and Pakistan's neighbours, concerned about instability in a nuclear-armed state already reeling from suicide bombings by Al Qaeda-inspired militants, fear more political upheaval if new leaders seek confrontation with the president.

"Musharraf and his cronies have been saying it's a hung parliament. Even if it is, it's against dictatorship," Sharif told the news conference in the hill town of Bhurban.

"This is the people's verdict against him ... he should accept the facts and he should not create hurdles and rifts."

Musharraf said last week it would be a week or two more before the new national and provincial assemblies were convened but Sharif called for them to be convened immediately.

The PPP has yet to nominate a candidate for Prime Minister, but Sharif said he had agreed the Prime Minister should come from the PPP

Zardari's deputy chairman, Makhdoom Amin Fahim, has been regarded as the likely choice for the job, but a delay in nominating him has led to doubts.

Another candidate is Ahmed Mukhtar, a former commerce minister in Bhutto's cabinet.

Another small party expected to join the coalition is a secular, ethnic Pashtun nationalist party from the North-West.

The leader of the Jamiat-e-ulema-e-Islam religious party, Fazl-ur-Rehman, has also agreed "in principle" to join.

Top of Page

5) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Lawyers Demand Release of Judges in Pakistan

NYT, 3-9-08


RAWALPINDI, Pakistan — Beside racks of hanging meat and barrows of oranges in the alleys of the old town here, Aitzaz Ahsan, leader of the lawyers movement in Pakistan, was back on the campaign trail on Saturday, calling for the release of top justices from house arrest.

...Mr. Ahsan said the recent parliamentary elections were not enough proof that President Pervez Musharraf’s government was dedicated to democracy. He insisted that the next step had to be the release of the former chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, who was fired along with the rest of the Supreme Court during a state of emergency imposed by Mr. Musharraf on Nov. 3. Mr. Chaudhry and nine other justices remain under house arrest.

“Our struggle is to make Pakistan a state where the judiciary is independent, and what Musharraf did to the chief justice is an example of how under him no judge is ever independent,” Mr. Ahsan said to a crowd of lawyers who chanted for Mr. Musharraf’s resignation.

The recent parliamentary elections resulted in a huge victory for the opposition Pakistan Peoples Party, the party of the former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, who was assassinated. Mr. Ahsan is a senior party member, but is now at loggerheads with the party over the issue of the release of the chief justice and the restoration of an independent judiciary.

Mr. Chaudhry and his family have been stuck inside their home in Islamabad behind barricades of barbed wire and rows of policemen, with only furtive telephone connections to the outside world.

Mr. Ahsan insists that little more is needed to resolve Mr. Chaudhry’s situation than for the police cordon to be removed from around his home. Once that is done, the judge has pledged to walk to the Supreme Court building not far from his house. An executive order could then be written reinstating the chief justice, the lawyers say.

But Asif Ali Zardari, the leader of the Pakistan Peoples Party and the widower of Ms. Bhutto, contends that the restoration of the judiciary and Mr. Chaudhry should be decided by the new Parliament, a far longer process.

Between those positions, the Pakistan Muslim League-N, led by Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister and an opponent of Mr. Musharraf, argues that a resolution calling for the return of the full bench of judges should be passed by the new Parliament as soon it convenes.

Behind the scenes, the United States is trying to dampen enthusiasm for Mr. Chaudhry, whom Washington sees as too much of a Musharraf opponent.

The United States ambassador, Anne Patterson, met with Mr. Zardari, and suggested that the Supreme Court judges except Mr. Chaudhry should be reinstated, said Shahbaz Sharif, a senior member of the Pakistan Muslim League-N.

In a meeting with Ms. Patterson this week, Tariq Mahmood, a former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, said he told her that the United States should “appreciate the results of the elections” in which secular political parties received an overwhelming vote.

He said he told the ambassador: “My message was very simple: You love democracy, you live in a democracy, why do you want to deprive us? You are always supporting the dictator.

Mr. Mahmood said he got the impression that the United States was more concerned with Mr. Musharraf and the fight against terrorism than with an independent judiciary. “As far as the war on terror is concerned, this can be better fought by the parties,” Mr. Mahmood said. “This perception that the Americans have is slightly different to how we are.”

For the past year, Mr. Chaudhry has been a rallying point for the opposition in Pakistan. On March 9 last year, Mr. Musharraf dismissed Mr. Chaudhry, but after a lengthy campaign by lawyers in Pakistan’s major cities and after legal arguments led by Mr. Ahsan, the chief justice was reinstated on July 20.

Then, after a series of judicial decisions that displeased his government, Mr. Musharraf, nervous about how Mr. Chaudhry would rule on the legality of his own October re-election, fired Mr. Chaudhry and the other judges on Nov. 3.

Top of Page

6) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

APDM to convene APC to pursue missing persons case’

* Liaquat says missing persons case should be top priority of incoming govt

* Claims 528 people still missing despite SC’s suo motu notice

Daily Times, Staff Report, 3-9-08


LAHORE: The All Pakistan Democratic Movement (APDM) announced on Saturday that it would convene an all-parties conference (APC) with the consensus of all political parties to pursue the missing persons case.

Liaquat Baloch, APDM central leader, told a press conference that the recovery of missing persons should be the top priority of the incoming government. He said the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) had won the elections because they had advocated the restoration of the sacked judiciary, the restoration of the constitution and the recovery of the missing persons. If the two parties did not fulfill their promises after coming into power, then the general public would not support them, he added.

He claimed that former chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had been removed from office after he took serious notice of the recovery of the missing persons case. He said the APDM expected Chaudhry, after his restoration, to re-open this case for redress of the aggrieved families.

Still missing: Baloch said that despite the suo motu notice of the Supreme Court, 528 people were still missing and their family members were in suffering. He urged the members of civil society and other organisations to join hands with the APDM for the recovery of the missing people.

He said the PPP and the PML-N, after coming into power, should hold all those people accountable that sent “innocent” Pakistanis to America by declaring them as terrorists.

On the lawyers’ “Black Flag Week”, Baloch said that the APDM fully supported the lawyers’ community on the supremacy of the judiciary, and the restoration of the sacked judges and the Constitution. He said the APDM had boycotted the general elections to protest the sacking of the superior judiciary

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??


Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., March, 2008

US Supports Tyrants and illegal Nuclear Programs in Pakistan and India

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., June 26 , 2007

The situation with Pakistan is not going to end well for American interests. The main flaw in our relationship with Pakistan is we are supporting a nuclear armed military dictator. If he is toppled, the next government may deeply resent our interference in their internal affairs. This is complicated by our support for India's illegal nuclear weapons program.

The central flaw in our foreign policy is that it is guided by no principals, only self-interest. Our toleration and support of both nation's illegal weapons programs increases regional instability to achieve our short-term goals.

In India, we pander to their illegal nuclear program to gain economic benefits from India's expansion, while simultaneously using India as a strategic counter-balance against Chinese power in the region.

In Pakistan, we have made a dirty deal with the dictator Musharraf. We silenced our objections to both the dictatorship, and its nukes, and paid him billions of dollars, in exchange for his "official" support for our Terror War.

Supporting a military dictator to fight for "freedom and democracy" exposes the lie at the center of our foreign policy.

The problem is that the Pakistani people support neither Musharraf, nor our terror war against their tribal brothers in Afghanistan. When Musharraf is deposed, the guns and money we bribed Musharraf with, as well as control of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, will fall under the control of unknown people. There is a good chance that Pakistan's next government will wholly reject American sponsored dictators, and resent us for supporting the dictator who ruled them.

India, on the other hand, may well end up becoming a better friend of China and Russia than the United States. Our economic and nuclear support for India may well backfire as China, Russia, and the Arabic nations reposition themselves, and their relationships with each other, as the world balance of power and control of middle eastern oil shifts away from American control.

Our best option was to maintain a firm rejection of both country's nuclear programs, with the goal being complete disarmament, and complete verification that both countries nuclear programs have no military component.

Combined with diplomatic efforts to defuse the situation in Kashmir, we could have lessened the tensions driving both countries to develop and evolve better nukes.

The Bush Administration's threats of unilateral military action, combined with repeated threats to use nukes in a first strike, has hardened the resolve of nations around the world to obtain a nuclear deterrent to the American Nuclear Menace.

In our dealings with both Pakistan and India, we have committed ourselves to a policy of supporting the illegal nuclear programs in both countries, ignoring Kashmir and the underlying conflict, to achieve short-term tactical advantages.

Our strategy of unconditionally supporting Musharraf's dictatorship ensures that violent domestic resistance will increase. Domestic resistance Musharraf's dictatorship has been enhanced and hardened by our support. Our support for Musharraf has hastened his rejection by his own people.

The ultimate result of our short-sighted Pakistani policy will be the emergence of an independent Pakistani government, armed with nuclear weapons, enraged by America's support for Musharraf's dictatorship.

India, on the other hand, will take all of our military and economic support, and do whatever the hell they see as best for their country, not ours.

The full weight and power of our nation has been focused to achieve our regional goals through bribes and threats. Using bribes and threats as the basis of our relationships with India and Pakistan assures that we will have little influence when changes in political fortunes bring administrations that will not respond to bribes and threats.

Our participation in Pakistan has enraged their people, while protecting their nuclear program from outside scrutiny and international pressure. Our diplomacy with India has effectively recognized and accepted their illegal nuke program, receiving nothing in return.

Overall, our relationships with both countries have increased the ability of each to nuke the other, and has laid the groundwork for further regional, and global, instability.

Until we develop a set of basic principals to guide our foreign policy, our diplomacy of bribes and threats will continue to assure that international relations are based on greed and violence.

Top of Page

Also See:

Corruption Updates 44, 3rd article on page, “American backed Dictator Attempting to Crush Pakistan's Judiciary"

Corruption Updates 38, 10th article on the page, "American Dictator Removes Chief Justice in Pakistan"

Our Paki Dictator reveals his true source of power: Martial Law, Washington Post, November 4, 2007

US continues to back Paki dictator after arrest of supreme court, closing media, and arresting moderate opponents, Christian Science Monitor, Nov 6, 2007

Musharraf imprisoned supreme court, killed media, and arrested opponents with Bush Approval, Dawn, 11-3-07



Pakistan Holds 2 in Pearl Killing: False, These Men Kidnapped 4 years Ago, THE NEW YORK TIMES, 6-6-07

Paki Security chief gets jail warning for kidnapping, BBC NEWS: 8-20-07

Pakistan Govt releasing kidnap-torture victims captured in bush terror war, NYT, December 19, 2007

Many Pakistanis 'still missing,' BBC, 2-25-08

Will US broker a Musharraf-Bhutto alignment between Army and Secular Corruption?

Musharraf strikes deal with Bhutto: Bhutto sells out to American Dictatorship, Financial Times, August 29, 2007


Search the Corruption Database under




Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


All Archives

Top of Page

7) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

NATO adviser for talks with Taliban

* Ullman says US should play minimum role in Pakistan

* Appears sceptical about NATO winning the war in Afghanistan

By Iqbal Khattak

Daily Times, 3-9-08


PESHAWAR: A senior North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) adviser urged the United States on Saturday to hold a dialogue with the Taliban.

He supported Islamabad’s negotiations with the Taliban as “very, very important and we (the US) should [also] do that. For the time being, we try to minimise our footprints,” he added.

Minimum role: Addressing the Area Study Centre of the University of Peshawar, Harlan Ullman, member of the board of advisers to the Supreme NATO commander, said, “The US should play absolutely a minimum role ... minimum fingerprints in Pakistan and I think we should give far more responsibility to Pakistan. To do that, we have to give it far more capacity and capability.”

Ullman said Pakistan should be helped by being given “the tools” to aid its reforms and developments. “We need to come up with a plan not only in terms of military, intelligence and law enforcement, but also everything else Pakistan needs. As Churchill said ‘give us the tools and we will do the job,’ but we also [need to encourage] economic development,” he added.

He said only “repairing” the underlying issues, rather than staging combat, could win the battle. He expressed concern at the US’ ‘fixation’ on the “so-called” war on terror, saying: “And we really have induced or coerced friends and allies to be part of the war. In this particular case, we are dealing with symptoms and not the causes, which are much more profound.”

The adviser told the audience that if there were some form of large scale intervention by the part of the US “which I would profoundly oppose — say for example if [a] substantial number of ground forces are sent in (Pakistan) — I know what is going to happen in Pakistan. And in this particular case, our future (course) should be to trust Pakistanis more.”.” He said growing direct “foreign adventure” in the Tribal Areas or settled parts of Pakistan would destabilise the country, adding that the American military commanders are “very, very, very well aware” of it.

Sceptical: Ullman said he was sceptical that NATO would win the war in Afghanistan. “The Afghan war, I don’t think NATO is winning because we are failing on social and public sector side,” he said. Calling the region a “strategic centre of gravity” in terms of how “we (US and allies) are waging this geo-strategic battle”, he said the battle was not progressing as well as it could, as the US is heavily engaged in Iraq and its reputation abroad was not very strong.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., March, 2008

Top of Page

Also See:

China arms Taliban, bbc, 9-7-03

british army broken by iraq and afghan wars, bbc, 1-28-08

close to a failed state, lat, 1-31-08

risk of state failure,  bbc, 1-31-08

canada to pull out, javno, 1-30-08


grim news out of Afghanistan, committee, 1-24-08

this will not end well, committee, 6-07


insurgencies spread in afghanistan and pakistan, reuters, 2-3-08


BBC hides Nato Conflict over Afghanistan, bbc, 2-7-08


US warns NATO on Afghanistan, bbc, 2-11-08


Search the Corruption Database under




Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


All Archives

Top of Page

8) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

U.S. role in Philippine raid questioned

A Philippine general says American intelligence guided his troops in a hunt for militants, but eight villagers were slain.

By Paul Watson

Los Angeles Times, March 9, 2008


IPIL, PHILIPPINES — In a hut on stilts with paper-thin walls of bamboo strips, an off-duty Philippine soldier was asleep alongside four members of his family when the crackle of assault rifle fire and shudder of grenade blasts awakened them early last month.

Within minutes, Cpl. Ibnun Wahid, 35, was dead, along with seven other villagers, including two children, age 4 and 9, two teenagers and two women, one of them pregnant. All were shot at close range, witnesses said in interviews and sworn affidavits gathered by the provincial governor's staff to support expected criminal charges.

Like many on Sulu island, provincial Gov. Abdusakur Tan believes the dead were victims of coldblooded killings by government troops. The independent Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines has called for charges to be filed against troops and officers involved in gathering intelligence for and planning the operation, as well those directly responsible for the deaths.

Gen. Ruben Rafael, commander of Philippine troops on the island, also known as Jolo, said in an interview that a U.S. military spy plane circling high above this seaside village provided the intelligence that led to the Feb. 4 assault. He said the crew of the P-3 Orion turboprop, loaded with a sophisticated array of surveillance equipment, pinpointed the village as a stronghold and arms depot for the radical Islamist Abu Sayyaf movement. Government soldiers were ambushed in the area in August, Rafael said.

Maj. Eric Walker, commander of U.S. forces on the island, declined an interview request, and the U.S. military spokesman for the region referred questions to the U.S. Embassy in Manila.

Without specifically confirming any flights over Ipil, U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Karen Schinnerer said that "an aerial reconnaissance vehicle" gathered intelligence over Sulu "at the request of, and in coordination with," Philippine forces.

No witnesses have said there were U.S. forces on the ground when the killings occurred, and Schinnerer said that none were. She also said that intelligence gathering does not violate a prohibition against U.S. forces engaging in combat here.

The human rights commission report recommending criminal and administrative proceedings against troops and officers involved in the operation was written before a Times reporter informed the panel of Rafael's account of U.S. surveillance. The commission gets its mandate from the Philippine Constitution.

Asked whether the U.S. military would assist Philippine authorities in any prosecution arising from the assault, Schinnerer said, "It would be inappropriate to speculate on what remains a hypothetical situation." But, she added, "as a general rule, the U.S. would provide such support to the [Philippine government] if asked."

Under the Philippine Constitution, the hundreds of U.S. military advisors in the southern Philippines are not allowed to engage in combat while helping train local forces in the hunt for militants with Abu Sayyaf and the Indonesia-based Jemaah Islamiah.Both groups are allied with Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network.

Two soldiers were killed and five wounded in the Ipil operation, statistics the army cites as proof of a battle with militants. Villagers contend that the soldiers were killed in their own crossfire. Commission investigators found that was a possibility, but suggested Wahid may have opened fire on the troops as they swarmed around his house.

The Philippine military said an internal investigation had cleared its troops of any wrongdoing, which many here see as a whitewash.

Sulu Gov. Tan, taking a rare stand against the powerful military, has directed provincial officials and police to build a separate criminal case against as yet unidentified soldiers and commanders involved in the Ipil assault.

Counterinsurgency missions on Sulu have been held up as a model in the battle against militants because a combination of aid programs and military force has brought relative peace to the island. But insurgents are staging a comeback, and clashes have escalated over the last year

He drew his licensed .45-caliber handgun from its holster and went out on the rickety bamboo porch, ready to defend his family, which insists he did not fire it. When he saw fellow soldiers, he put the gun down, raised his hands and shouted, "Papa Alpha, Papa Alpha," signaling he was in the Philippine army, said his wife, Rawina Lahim Wahid, 24.

Soldiers tied Wahid's hands behind his back. Then one leveled an assault rifle at his head, and pulled the trigger, his widow said. The weapon jammed. The soldier recocked the M-16 and fired a bullet into Wahid's head, said family members, who were later released.

On the other side of the small, southern Philippine village, 17 members of three families were fleeing the gunfire in a long canoe. They headed straight toward a blocking unit of Philippine soldiers on the edge of a thick mangrove swamp.

From a few yards away, the soldiers opened fire, and kept shooting, ignoring the screaming villagers' pleas, witnesses said.

"It was not an accident," said Saida Failan, 21, whose 4-year-old daughter, Marisa, was shot dead. "We were shouting, 'Stop firing, we are civilians!' and children were crying."

Soon after sunrise, Philippine troops prepared to move the bodies by boat, but Rawina Wahid refused to let them take her husband's corpse without her. "I was afraid they were going to throw him in the ocean, so there would be no evidence," she said.

She said she joined them and was taken to a naval vessel offshore, which she was unable to identify. Rafael said it was a Philippine military "support ship."

As she stepped onto the boat, she said, she saw four foreign men in American camouflage fatigues, each armed with an assault rifle, standing next to a second deck railing.

"They were smiling," she said. "They were happy."

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??

After our Phillippino dictator, Marcos, wore out his welcome, we have been having a hard time regularizing political and economic corruption in the Philippines. A political-economic axis of corporate elites has been unable to form.

The lack of stable, local authority in the Philippines, assures chaos until they have their own “American” revolution, and throw out their foreign supported corrupt politicians.

With no stable governmental institutions, political corruption in the Philippines is personal, informal, and endemic. The after affects of our colonial brutality in the Philippines has left a stubborn legacy of political corruption and social disorder.


Top of Page

Also See:

Corruption Updates 41, 8th article on the page, Philippines:Estrada associate guilty of graft

Corruption Updates 82, 1th article on the page, National Archives are Target in Cheney Fight on Secrecy Data

Corruption Updates 92, 10th article on the page, Manila terror law draws criticism: Another Corporate Fascist Bitch State Adopting Bush Police State Rule

Corruption Updates 93, 2nd article on the page, Newark: Sentence for Man in Espionage Plot

Corruption Updates 108, 10th article on the page, Philippine Toll in Islamist Attacks Is the Region’s Highest


Search the Corruption Database under

Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:



All Archives

Top of Page

9) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Ex-F.B.I. Chief’s Book Revisits Watergate


nyt, March 9, 2008

WASHINGTON — Long after the death of the chief players, a new book challenges some assumptions and offers new theories about Watergate, asserting for instance that President Richard M. Nixon and his aides learned about a spy in their midst from a highly unlikely source.

The book is by L. Patrick Gray III, who was acting director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation from J. Edgar Hoover’s death in May 1972 until April 1973, when he quit after it became clear that he had been manipulated by the Nixon White House. The humiliation made him consider suicide, Mr. Gray’s book says, but he did not want to be “a convenient dead target for Nixon and his rats.”

Mr. Gray worked on the book for years before his death at 88 on July 6, 2005. Titled “In Nixon’s Web: A Year in the Crosshairs of Watergate,” it was completed by his son Ed and is being published by Times Books, an imprint of Henry Holt & Company.

The book asserts that the famous “smoking gun” tape recording of June 23, 1972, created a lasting misimpression. On that tape, recorded just six days after the Watergate burglary, H. R. Haldeman, Nixon’s chief of staff, is heard telling him that the F.B.I. is getting too close to the truth “because Gray doesn’t exactly know how to control them.”

Mr. Gray wrote that Mr. Haldeman had lied. “I never tried to ‘control’ the F.B.I. in this or any other investigation,” he wrote, recalling that he had warned Nixon that the president’s top aides were interfering with the inquiry, even as he naïvely kept faith in the president himself.

The book says the White House learned early on that W. Mark Felt, an F.B.I. official who had wanted the job that Mr. Gray got, was a news leaker. Attorney General Richard G. Kleindienst advised him in 1972 to fire Mr. Felt, Mr. Gray wrote.

“Where’s all this coming from?” Mr. Gray asked.

“From John Mitchell,” Mr. Kleindienst replied, referring to the former attorney general who was heading the Nixon’s re-election campaign.

But who was Mr. Mitchell’s source? “It’s Roswell Gilpatric,” Mr. Kleindienst said.

Mr. Gilpatric had been deputy secretary of defense under President John F. Kennedy and was close to the Kennedy family. Mr. Kleindienst said Mr. Gilpatric, then a lawyer for Time, had learned from a magazine reporter that one of his sources was Mr. Felt. Because Mr. Gilpatric disapproved of what Mr. Felt was doing, he tipped off his acquaintance Mr. Mitchell, the book says.

Mr. Felt retired from the F.B.I. in early 1973. In 2005, it was revealed that he had been Deep Throat, a chief source for The Washington Post’s coverage of the Watergate affair.

The book chips away at the images of Richard M. Helms, then director of central intelligence, and his deputy, Vernon A. Walters. Their obituaries in 2002 credited them with resisting pressure to help in the Watergate cover-up. But the book asserts that Mr. Helms and Mr. Walters lied to Senate investigators to conceal C.I.A. ties with the Watergate conspirators E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy.

Mr. Gray wrote that he was furious when prominent senators said in 1973 that the C.I.A. had stood up to the White House and that Mr. Walters had implicated him in the cover-up.

But Mr. Gray could hardly defend himself at the time. He had just resigned over disclosures that he had been sharing F.B.I. files on the Watergate break-in with the White House and that he had burned papers from the White House safe of Mr. Hunt after being told by Nixon advisers that they were secret national security documents. (Investigators later determined that they were forgeries to be used in dirty tricks against the Kennedys.)

In 1978, Patrick Gray was indicted (along with Mr. Felt and another former F.B.I. official) on charges of conspiring, in their pursuit of radicals, to violate the rights of citizens. In 1980, charges against Mr. Gray were dismissed for lack of evidence, after legal fees had nearly bankrupted him. The two other defendants were convicted and fined but were pardoned by President Ronald Reagan.

Ed Gray said his father had been much too trusting during the Watergate era. “But those other guys, who were far less naïve,” he said of President Nixon and top White House aides, “were criminals.”

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., March, 2008

Top of Page

Also See:

Hoover's 1950 police state plan: it still lives in us govt, nyt, 12-13-07


american police state


Search the Corruption Database under

Federal Bureau of Investigation


Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


All Archives

Top of Page

10) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Israel okays illegal settlement expansion

middle east online, 3-9-08

Olmert approves construction of hundreds of illegal housing units at Jewish settlement in West Bank.

TEL AVIV - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has approved the construction of hundreds of new illegal housing units at a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank, the housing ministry said on Sunday.

"After a series of consulations with the prime minister, Housing Minister Zeev Boim has approved the relaunching of construction in Givat Zeev," the ministry said in a statement.

The move was swiftly denounced as hampering efforts to advance faltering peace talks that Israelis and Palestinians revived to much fanfare under US stewardship in late November, but that have been stagnant since.

"We condemn in the harshest terms this decision," senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat said.

"We consider that with this decision, Israel wants to demolish the peace process and demolish the international efforts to advance the peace process," he said.

"We ask the American administration to... pressure Israel to reverse this decision."

The head of Israel's main anti-settlement group Peace Now, Yariv Oppenheimer, echoed the sentiment.

"This is a scandalous decision that will affect the negotiations with the Palestinians," he said. "This government, which has pledged to dismantle settlements, has done nothing but reinforce them."

Ongoing Israeli settlement activity has been one of the major reasons why the peace talks that the two sides relaunched at a US conference more than three months ago have made little progress.

The Palestinians have demanded that Israel halt all illegal settlement activity in the occupied West Bank -- the larger half of their promised state -- and the annexed east Jerusalem, which was illegally occupied by the Israelis in 1967.

The expansion project discussed by Boim and Olmert foresees the eventual building of 750 new housing units in Givat Zeev, but Sunday's decision gives the green light for the immediate construction of some 200 new units, Israeli media said.

"The construction of hundreds of new units responds to a policy aimed at meeting housing needs as Jerusalem demographics develop," he said. "I intend to continue this policy in order to strengthen Jerusalem and its surrounding areas."

Givat Zeev is located north of Jerusalem and south of the West Bank political capital of Ramallah. Founded in 1981, it currently has 11,000 mostly secular residents.

More than 280,000 Israelis currently live in settlements in the West Bank, according to government figures, with another 200,000 estimated to live in settlements in east Jerusalem.

There are also more than 100 wildcat outposts scattered throughout the West Bank.

The international community considers all Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land illegal.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here??

Hidden History of Israel: Born in Terror, Ethnic Cleansing, and Genocide; Perpetuated by Crimes against Humanity

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., September 20, 2007

"Israel" Thievery of Arab Lands continues from 1948 to Present

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., July 20, 2007

Israel has no legitimate basis. Israel is based on violence, ethnic cleansing, and the military, economic and political power of the United States, and nothing else.

All of Israel is occupied land gained through terrorism, war, and other crimes against humanity.

Until the US recognizes these facts, the middle east will resist, and eventually overthrow, our Saudi, Jordanian, and Egyptian Dictators. Then the middle east will destroy Israel.

Until the US defines "democracy" as something more than a thin cover for Corporate control of our nation's politics, our middle eastern foreign policy will continue to be nothing more than a tool of the Oil and Israel lobbies. Both political parties have been corrupted by these fascistic interests, and both parties are incapable of dealing honestly with the middle east.

The dismal situation in Iraq represents the final failure of Democracy in America, not the spread of American Democracy.

America's unwarranted attack on Iraq represents the victory of wealth and power over our American democracy, and our foreign policy. In the case of the Iraq war, we got an example of the massive power of the Oil and Israeli lobbies to easily use America's power and wealth to advance their criminal agendas. They have stolen yet another nation. Except this time their hand is wedged tight in the cookie jar.

The Iraq war, and how it came about, does not represent the actions of a democratic country. The Iraq war represents the actions of a corporate fascist state.

Unfortunately for us, the majority of Arabs who are suffering under our various middle eastern dictators and the iron fist of our Jewish colony, have concluded that what we call "democracy" is completely unjust, patently immoral and unacceptable, and are instead embracing political forms based on religion.

Sadly, these religiously based systems, despite their considerable drawbacks and shortcomings, provide considerably more justice than our "democratic" system delivers.

The fault for the rise of extreme islamic radicalism lies with us, with us for allowing our own corporate christian taliban to smash our democracy, and seize the reigns of our foreign policy.

The rise of radical islam is nothing more than a response to our own extreme corruption, which is also the source of the loss of our own democracy.

This tragedy did not begin with 911, as our political and media liars constantly tell us. 911, and many more tragedies to come, began with the loss of our democracy, and our imposition of dictators and tyrants on countries in every continent in the world.

Resistance to American-supported puppet governments around the world is growing rapidly as colonized nations are rejecting our farcical "democratic" governments run by dictators, and seizing the right to define their own identities, cultures, and political systems.

This inevitable post-colonial evolution will only stop if America recognizes the right of every country in the world, especially the nations sitting on top of Oil, mineral resources, and labor, to self-determination and self-definition without us threatening them with war, death squads, or military coups to seize their assets.

If we continue to pursue our program of corporate globalism, the post colonial revolution we are experiencing will end with the violent destruction of our middle eastern dictatorships, Israel, and the shattering of our globalized web of corporate thievery.

A Democrat Congress and President is not going to change this scenario one iota. Until we reimpose democracy on our corporate politicians and release our "free" press from its corporate bondage, the corporate politicians of both parties will only be capable of spreading our corruption and tyranny, not our Democratic Principals, around the world.

The global revolution of democracy must start here, not over there.


Top of Page

Also See:

Mearsheimer and Walt, March 2006, THE ISRAEL LOBBY AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY.

Book Review by Stepen Lendman: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, by Ilan Pappe.

Book Review by Kim Petersen: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, by Ilan Pappe.

Corruption Updates 37, 1st article on the page, "Poll: Israel, Iran, US most Negative Countries in World"

Corruption Updates 42, 4th article on the page, "Bolton Admits US ALLOWED ISRAEL TO DESTROY LEBANON"

Corruption Updates 64, 3rd article on the page,"British Academics’ Union Endorses Israel Boycott"

Corruption Updates 64, 4th article on the page, "Largest Labor Union in Britain May Consider a Boycott of Israel"

Corruption Updates 83, 10th article on the page, "Top Official of Hamas Is Rebuffed Over Talks"

Corruption Updates 90, 10th article on the page, "Israeli Settlements Found to Grow Past Boundaries"

Israel, $30 Billion in Military Aid From U.S. essay: Bush Wars Push Saudi Arabia..., nyt, 8-15-07

Al-Ahram, Egypt, 30 August - 5 September, 2007; Israel eyes Gaza

Al-Ahram, Egypt, 30 August - 5 September, 2007; 'No elections if Hamas will win'

BBC NEWS: 10-25-07; Israel approves Gaza power cuts

NY Times, September 12, 2007; U.S. Confirms Israeli Strikes Hit Syrian Target Last Week

NYT, July 23, 2007; In Arabic Textbook, Israel Calls ’48 War Catastrophe for Arabs: Arabs in Israel Live under Jim Crow Apartheid

NYT, July 31, 2007; U.S. Arms Plan for Mideast Aims to Counter Iranian Power: Bush fuels middle eastern Arms Race

Israel to Get $30 Billion in Military Aid From U.S., NYT, August 17, 2007

NY Times, September 12, 2007; U.S. Confirms Israeli Strikes Hit Syrian Target Last Week

BBC NEWS: September 14, 2007; Small Israeli force enters Gaza

Al Ahram, 13 - 19 September 2007; Marching to war with cold feet

rice backs Israeli naming Gaza “Hostile Entity:”a War Crime, bbc, 9-20-07

UN: cutting off gaza is an international crime, haaretz,9-20-07

'Israeli warplanes raid' Lebanon, BBC NEWS, 9-18-07

Iran: Retaliation for Any Israeli Attack, AP, September 19, 2007

Israel approves Gaza power cuts, BBC NEWS: 10-25-07

Corruption Updates 127, 3rd article on the page, IAEA chief lashes out over Israeli raid in Syria

Agence France-Presse, October 28, 2007: ElBaradei: No Evidence Iran is Making Nukes

Corruption Updates 127, 4th article on the page, Sabra and Shatila Massacres, 25 years later

Election power of the Israel lobby, aljazeera, 12-30-07

Bush Who? goes to Israel, independent (UK) 1-7-08

Israel esclates violence as tribute to bush policies, bbc, 1-7-08

Bush predicts Victory in Middle-east, ft, (uk) 1-6-08

Israel tribunals (bush courts) assure convictions, ap, 1-6-08

Kill Bush: American Taliban, daily times, (pk) 1-7-08

Bush has little respect in Mid-East, ft, 1-9-08

Will Israel sneak attack Iran?

Israel threatens Iran with sneak attack, ap, 9-29-04

Is Israel Planning a Nuclear Strike on Iran? der spiegel, 1-8-07

Pentagon ready for spring attack on Iran, guardian, 2-10-07

Iran and Russia cooperating on mutual defense, BBC, Nov 13, 07

Israel ready to attack Iran, ap, 1-14-08

rogue nuke nation Israel fires ballistic missile, aljazeera, 1-17-08

US: Israel's Bitch, aljazerra, 1-17-08


Bush visits his Egyptian dictator, lat, 1-17-08


Hammas breaks Rafa wall

Hamas breaks blockade, apa, 1-25-08

Israel abdicates legal responsibilities for gaza, yet another war crime, ap, 1-24-08

Gaza: free for a day, independent, 1-24-08


Israel wants its prison re-secured, hosni wants to save face, gaza wants food, meo, 1-28-08

Israel intentionally making civilians suffer in gaza, lat, 1-28-08

hamas assists egyptians to close border, meo, 1-29-08

US Kills UN resolution against israeli crime of collective punishment, meo, 1-30-08

Snow further complicates relief supplies to Gaza, irni, 1-30-08

no end in sight to gaza's suffering, al ahram, 1-31-08

egypt secures rafa crossing, guardian, 2-4-08

Israeli crime of collective punishment sparks Gaza humanitarian crisis, suffering. ap, 2-15-08


Hamas ends their one sided cease fire

Hamas Claims Responsibility for Blast, nyt, 2-5-08

guns blaze across Gaza border, yorkshire post, 2-5-08


war crimes, but no trials: cluster bombs in lebanon, lat, 2-1-08

Gunmen attack Israeli embassy in Mauritania, meo, 2-1-08

UK police tip embassy, let jewish war criminal escape arrest, yalibnan, 2-10-08

Arab bitch states expect israel to destroy iran nuke tech, dawn, 2-12-08

end of the "two-state" farce? nyt, 2-22-08


jew leader calls for holocaust on palestinians; bloodbath follows, aljezeera, 3-1-08


'US plot against Hamas' revealed, aljazeera, 3-4-08


israeli MP vows to expel arabs after gaza demo, middle east online, 3-5-08

third intifada in sight, Al Ahram, 3-5-08

A jew view of hamas, arab news, 3-6-08

gaza conditions worst since 1967, bbc, 3-6-08


US allows egypt to talk to  hamas, meo, 3-8-08

hostile entity holocaust: the jew's final solution for gaza, meo, 3-8-08


Top of Page

Search the Corruption Database under

Israel (17 Abstracts)


Does this piss you off? Make you happy? Want to speak your mind about this? Comment about this subject, or take it to the next level at:


Previous page: Page 161                      Next page: Page 163

Contact Us:


All Archives

Top of Page

Today's Headlines

Raid on Ecuador

1] Mexican Students killed in colombia's cross-border raid (an an additional report from 3-12-08)

1b] tensions cool a bit between ecuador, colombia, and Venezuela, miami herald, 3-7-08

Bush demands illegal power to Torture

2] bush veto preserves torture as us tool of state

War crimes, and Crimes against humanity deepen in Palestine

3] hostile entity holocaust: the jew's final solution for gaza

March 10

Pakis rejecting american dictator

4] Sharif and Zardari join forces in bid to oust Musharraf from power in Pakistan

5] Lawyers Demand Release of Judges in Pakistan

6] Pakistan: APDM to convene APC to pursue missing persons cases

7] NATO adviser for talks with Taliban

8] U.S. role in Philippine raid questioned

9] Ex-F.B.I. Chief’s Book Revisits Watergate

10] Israel okays illegal settlement expansion