Sunday, January 18, 2009

Masters In Distortion Of The Truth....

Masters In Distortion Of The Truth.
In the Middle East, it is widely believed that the war against Gaza is
an extension of the 2006 war against Lebanon. Without question, the war
in the Gaza Strip is a part of the same conflict.

Moreover, since the Israeli defeat in 2006, Tel Aviv and Washington have
not abandoned their design to turn Lebanon into a client state.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, in
so many words, during his visit to Tel Aviv in early January that today
Israel was attacking Hamas in the Gaza Strip and that tomorrow it would
be fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon.[1]

Ehud Olmert and Nicolas Sarkozy, PNAC.

Lebanon is still in the cross-hairs. Israel is searching for a
justification or a pretext to launch another war against Lebanon.

Washington and Tel Aviv had initially hoped to control Beirut through
client political forces in the March 14 Alliance. When it became
apparent that these political forces could not dominate Lebanon
politically the Israeli military was unleashed on Lebanon with a goal of
bringing about the ultimate downfall of Hezbollah and its political
allies. [2] Areas where support for Hezbollah and its political allies
were strongest saw the harshest Israeli attacks in 2006 as part of an
attempt to reduce, if not remove, popular support for them.

After the 2006 war, the second Israeli defeat in Lebanon, Washington and
Tel Aviv with the help of Jordan, the U.A.E., Egypt, and Saudi Arabia
started arming their clients in Lebanon to wield an internal armed
option against Hezbollah and its allies. In the wake of both the
short-lived internal violence between the Lebanese National Opposition
and the March 14 Alliance and the Doha Accord, which was reached in
Qatar on May 21, 2008 as a result of the failure of this internal armed
option against Hezbollah and its allies, the Israeli-U.S. objective to
subdue Lebanon has been dramatically impaired.

A "national unity government" was formed in which the Lebanese National
Opposition — not just Hezbollah — hold veto power through one-third of
the cabinet chairs, including that of the post of deputy-prime minister.

The objective in Lebanon is "regime change" and to repress all forms of
political opposition. But how to bring it about? The forecast of the
2009 general-elections in Lebanon does not look favourable for the March
14 Alliance. Without an internal political or armed option in Lebanon,
which could result in the installation of a U.S.-sponsored "democracy,"
Washington and its indefictible Israeli ally have chosen the only avenue
available: a military solution, another war on Lebanon. [3]

Crossing Arms III: Israel Simulates a Two-Front War against
Lebanon and Syria.

This war is already in the advanced planning stage. In November 2008,
barely a month before Tel Aviv started its massacre in the Gaza Strip,
the Israeli military held drills for a two-front war against Lebanon and
Syria called Shiluv Zro’ot III (Crossing Arms III).[4]

The military exercise included a massive simulated invasion of both
Syria and Lebanon. Several months before the Israeli invasion drills,
Tel Aviv had also warned Beirut that it would declare war on the whole
of Lebanon and not just Hezbollah.[5]

Israel's justification for these war preparations was that Hezbollah has
grown stronger and become a partner in the Lebanese government since the
Doha Accord. The latter was signed in Qatar between the March 14
Alliance and the Lebanese National Opposition. It is worth noting that
Hezbollah was a member of the Lebanese coaltion government prior to the
2006 Israeli war on Lebanon.

No doubt, Tel Aviv will also point to Hezbollah's support of Hamas in
Gaza as another pretext to wage under the banner of combating Islamic
terrorism a pre-emptive war on Lebanon. In this context, Dell Lee Dailey
the head of the counter-terrorism section of the U.S. State Department,
had told Al-Hayat in an interview that an Israeli attack on Lebanon was
"imminent" as part of the fight against terrorism. [6]

Blitzkrieg in the Making

Tel Aviv has been mapping a large-scale blitzkrieg against Lebanon as a
whole, which includes an immediate land invasion. [7] Just before the
Israeli massacre in the Gaza Strip started, Israeli officials and
generals had promised that no Lebanese village would be immune from the
wrath of Israeli aerial bombardments, regardless of religion, sect,
and/or political orientation. [8]

In substance, Tel Aviv has promised to totally destroy Lebanon. Israel
has also confirmed that in any future war against Lebanon, the entire
country rather than Hezbollah will be the target. In practice, this was
already the case in 2006’s Israeli aerial attacks on Lebanon. [9]

The Jerusalem Post quotes Brigadier-General Michael Ben-Baruch, one of
the individuals who oversaw the invasion drills, as saying, "In the last
war, we fired to disrupt Hezbollah activity," and, "The next time we
will fire to destroy." [10]

In the wake of Israel's 2006 defeat, the Israeli government admitted
that its "big mistake" was it exercised restraint rather than attacking
Lebanon with the full strength of its military. Israeli officials have
intimated that in the case of a future war against the Lebanese that all
civilian and state infrastructure will be targeted.

Beirut’s New Defence Doctrine: A Threat to Israeli Interests and
Objectives to Control Lebanon by the PNAC thugs and killers, of the
newfound Siamese twins, CIA/MOSSAD and the White House Murder Inc.

Why is Lebanon in the cross-hairs again?

The answer is geo-political and strategic. It is also related to the
political consensus process and the upcoming 2009 general-elections in
Lebanon. Following the formation of a unity government in Beirut under a
new president, Michel Suleiman (Sleiman), a new proactive defence
doctrine for the country was contemplated. The objective of this defence
doctrine is to keep Israel at bay and bring political stability and
security to the country.

President Michel Suleiman

At the "National Defence Strategy" dialogue, held by the 14 Lebanese
signatories of the Doha Accord, all sides have agreed that Israel is a
threat to Lebanon.

In the months prior to the Israeli military campaign against Gaza,
important diplomatic and political steps were taken by Beirut. President
Michel Suleiman accompanied by several cabinet ministers visited
Damascus (his first bilateral state visit; August 13-14, 2008) and
Tehran (November 24-25, 2008).

President Suleiman and Syrian President Al Assad, PNAC Killers.

In turn, General Jean Qahwaji (Kahwaji) the commander of the Lebanese
Armed Forces was also in Damascus (November 29, 2008) for consultations
with his Syrian counterpart General Al-Habib. While in Damascus, General
Qahwaji also met with General Hassan Tourkmani, the defence minister of
Syria, and the Syrian President. [11] His trip followed the visit of
Lebanon's interior minister, Ziad Baroud, to Syria and was within the
same framework. [12] Meanwhile, Lebanon’s defence minister, Elias Murr,
went on an official visit to Moscow (December 16, 2008).

What started to emerge from these talks was that both Moscow and Tehran
would provide weaponry to the Lebanese Armed Forces, which previously
had been the recipients of lower-end U.S. made ordinance. The U.S. has
always forbidden the Lebanese military from purchasing any heavy weapons
that could challenge Israel's military strength.

It was also revealed that Russia would donate 10 MiG-29 fighter jets to
Beirut in line with Lebanon's new defence strategy. [13] The use of the
Russian MiG-29s would also entail the required installation of early
warning and radar systems. Russian tanks, anti-tank rockets, armoured
vehicles, and military helicopters are also being sought by Lebanon. [14]


Iran has offered to supply the Lebanese military with medium-range
missiles as part of a five-year Iranian-Lebanese defence agreement. [15]
While in Iran, Michel Suleiman held talks with Iranian defence officials
and went to an Iranian defence industry exposition.

While the talks with Moscow and Tehran aimed at arming the Lebanese
Armed Forces, the talks with the Syrians were geared towards
establishing and strengthening a joint security and defence framework
directed against Israeli aggression. [16]

Integrating Hezbollah into the Lebanese Armed Forces

Moreover, Michel Aoun, leader of the Free Patriotic Movement and the
Reform and Change Bloc in the Lebanese Parliament also visited Tehran
(October 12-16, 2008; ahead of Michel Suleiman's official visit), and
later Damascus (December 3-7, 2008). [17] Michel Aoun who is a central
figure in the "political consensus" has endorsed and reaffirmed his
political alliance with Hezbollah.

Michel Aoun

While calling for the peaceful disarmament of Hezbollah within a
Lebanese defence strategy, he has accepted that Hezbollah fighters will
eventally integrate into Lebanon's army. This disarmement process would
only occur when the time is right and Israel no longer poses a threat to
Lebanon. Hezbollah has broadly agreed to this, if and when there no
longer exists an Israeli threat to the country's security. This position
on Hezbollah's arms is spelled out in clause 10 (The Protection of
Lebanon) of the February 6, 2006 memorandum of understanding (MoU) with
Hezbollah that Michel Aoun signed on behalf of his political party, the
Free Patriotic Movement.

Following his return from Tehran, Aoun also presented his case for the
formation of a new Lebanese defence strategy and promised that the
outcome of his visit to Iran would materialize in about six months. Aoun
has also said that Iran, as the "major regional power between Lebanon
and China" is of strategic importance to Lebanese interests. [18]

Hezbollah Paramilitary Forces

Washington's political cohorts in Lebanon are alarmed at the direction
Lebanon is taking under its new defence strategy. They have criticized
weapons purchases from Iran and defensive cooperation with Syria. This
includes attacks on General Jean Qahwaji's visit to Syria, which was
mandated by the entire Lebanese cabinet. [19] Additionally, within these
pro-U.S. forces in Lebanon there has been a push for a "Swiss-like"
"neutral defence policy" for Lebanon within the Middle East. Such a
"neutral" position would benefit the U.S. and Israel geo-politically and
strategically. Needless to say, with the threat of Israeli military
aggression looming, this position is proving to be rather unpopular
within Lebanon.

Ending Israeli-American pressure on Beirut to Naturalize Palestinian

The formation of a new proactive defence doctrine implies that Hezbollah
fighters would be incorporated in the Lebanese Armed Forces and that the
existing paramilitary forces of Hezbollah would be disbanded once
certain conditions are met.

Therefore, one of Lebanon’s key political questions would be resolved.
With the integration of Hezbollah fighters into the country's army
together with military aid from Russia and Iran, Lebanon would acquire
defensive capabilities, which would enable it to confront the threat of
Israeli military aggression. These developments, which go against the
prevailing pattern of U.S. client regimes in the Middle East modelled on
Egypt and Saudi Arabia, have sounded an alarm bell in Tel Aviv,
Washington, and London.

In response to Lebanon's rapprochement with Russia and Iran, two senior
US State Department officials were rushed to Beirut in December.[20]
During this mission, Dell Lee Dailey and David Hale, respectively
Coordinator of the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism and
Deputy-assistant Secretary responsible for Middle Eastern affairs,
renewed the veiled threats of an Israeli attack against Lebanon, while
casually placing the blame on Hezbollah.[21] These threats are aimed at
Lebanon as a whole. They are intended to disrupt the creation of
Lebanon's new defence doctrine.

The clock is ticking for Israel, the U.S., and NATO to obstruct the
implementation of Beirut's new national defence doctrine.

Israel would no longer have any justifications for carrying out military
incursions into Lebanon if Hezbollah were to become a full political
party under a new Lebanese defence strategy. Moreover, if Beirut were
able, under a new defence arrangement, to protect its borders against
Israeli military threats it would not only end Tel Aviv’s ambitions to
politically and economically dominate Lebanon, but it would also end
Israeli pressure on Lebanon to naturalize the Palestinian war refugees
waiting to return to their ancestoral lands that are occupied by Israel.

Clearly the issue of Palestinian naturalization in Lebanon is also tied
to Lebanon's political consensus process and new defence strategy and
was discussed by Michel Suleiman with Iranian officials in Tehran. [22]

The Middle Eastern Powder Keg: A World War III Scenario?

In 2006, when Israel attacked Lebanon, the war was presented to
international public opinion as a conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.
In essence the 2006 war was an Israeli attack on all of Lebanon. The
Beirut government failed to take a stance, declared its "neutrality" and
Lebanon's military forces were instructed not to intervene against the
Israeli invaders. The reason for this was that the political parties of
the Hariri-led March 14 Alliance that dominated the Lebanese government
were expecting the war to end quickly and for Hezbollah (their political
rival) to be defeated, and eventually excluded from playing a meaningful
role on the Lebanese domestic political scene. Exactly the opposite has
occurred since 2006.

Moreover, had the Lebanese government declared war on Israel, in
response to Israeli aggression, Syria would have been obligated through
a Lebanese-Syrian bilateral treaty, signed in 1991, to intervene in
support of Lebanon.

In the case of a future Israeli war against Lebanon, the structure of
military alliances is crucial. Syria could indeed intervene on the side
of Lebanon. If Syria enters into the conflict, Damascus could seek the
support of Tehran in the context of a bilateral military cooperation
agreement with Iran.

A scenario of escalation is, therefore, possible, which could
potentially spin out of control....

If Iran were to enter on the side of Lebanon and Syria in a defensive
war against Israel, the U.S. and NATO would also intervene leading us
into a broader war.

Both Iran and Syria have military cooperation agreements with Russia.
Iran also has bilateral military cooperation agreements with China. Iran
is also an observer member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
(SCO). Iran’s allies including Russia, China, the member states of the
Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), and the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO) could all be drawn into the broader



Arithmetics of Disdain,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Petition USA

Dear Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, , thanks for your
great work defending the USA Constitution, with
between Churches and State and Free Speech,
and my questions are:1) since most likely the Senate

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

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

orthodox Israeli-American and with dual citizenship,
American and Israeli, , NYT Sept.
18.07 "Washington outsider with many sides"
for info on Mukasey as Judge of the WTC-
Insurance 9/11 case , will he respect other
religions exactly thesame as his?2) since he is an

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

him in the United States of America?

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

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

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

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

5) Michael Mukasey

and his son Marc are strong AIPAC supporters ,

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

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

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

leaseholders of the WTC,SIlverstein-Goldman-

Pacific-etc., and the 23 Insurance Companies these

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

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

as adviser to Giuliani , the neocon Pedhoretz,

has repeatedly pushed with Pr.Bush to bomb Iran,

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

are pushing to brand Iran's Military a terrorist

Organization, is this the beginning of a concerted

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

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

incompetent and criminal decisions against the

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

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


US Citizens


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

Saakashvili Ordered me to Get Rid of Patarkatsishvili’ – Okruashvili

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


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