Saturday, November 8, 2008

Obama a Future Extension of Bush’s House

US President George W. Bush makes remarks on the presidential transition as Vice President Dick Cheney (R) listens at the South Lawn of the White House, on 6 November 2008; in Washington, DC. It appears that Alcoholism has taken more of a toll on Bush; then his terrorist, criminal activities have; while in the White House.

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
November 8, 2008

Audio
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Earlier this week, more than 120 million Americans went to the polls and voted for a new President and Congress. No matter how we cast our ballots, all Americans have reason to be proud of our democracy. Our citizens have chosen a President who represents a triumph of the American story -- a testament to hard work, optimism, and faith in the enduring promise of our Nation.

When I called President-Elect Obama to congratulate him on his historic victory, I told him that he can count on my complete cooperation as he makes his transition to the White House. Ensuring that this transition is seamless is a top priority for the rest of my time in office. Our country faces economic challenges that will not pause to let a new President settle in. This will also be America's first wartime presidential transition in four decades. We're in a struggle against violent extremists determined to attack us -- and they would like nothing more than to exploit this period of change to harm the American people.

So my Administration will work hard to ensure that the next President and his team can hit the ground running. For more than a year now, the White House and agencies throughout the Federal government have been preparing for a smooth transition. We've provided intelligence briefings to the President-Elect, and the Department of Justice has approved security clearances for members of his transition staff. In the coming weeks, we will ask Administration officials to brief the Obama team on major ongoing policy issues, ranging from the financial markets to the war in Iraq. I will keep the President-Elect fully informed on important decisions during this critical time for our Nation. Taken together, these measures represent an unprecedented effort to ensure continuity throughout the executive branch.

A successful transition is just one of the many important tasks remaining for my Administration. Yesterday we learned that America's economy lost jobs in the month of October, and I will continue working hard to return our Nation to the path of prosperity and growth. To help address the global financial crisis, my Administration will host an historic international summit in Washington on November 15. We will also keep urging Congress to approve America's free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama and South Korea. We will continue working to defeat the terrorists and extremists abroad, to keep the American people safe here at home.

Americans expect their President to conduct the people's business. I will continue to uphold this solemn obligation for as long as this office remains in my trust. In the meantime, I join the American people in wishing President-Elect Obama every success. Laura and I wish the Obama family as much joy and happiness as our family has found in this wonderful house.

Thank you for listening.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

HRM Deborah of Palestine at the History Cafe

Visiting the History Café, is HRM Deborah of Palestine appearing as lady liberty with truth VS the US afraid that history has caught up with there lies, to shaking in fear by former US President George W. Bush as Uncle Sam; who doesn’t know how apologize to lady liberty nor confess Bush lost the country in International Court.

Too furthermore, lady liberty was given the country with the blessing’s of the American people and courtesy of the global community.

Nevertheless, by International law the current US elections are illegal; as of now, the US as no Presidency nor is the US a Democracy.

All US military will immediately leave Iraq and Afghanistan, both these wars to be declared as over and the closing of Guantanamo Bay.


Update:
At this time, Barack Obama is in violation of International Law as to my understanding, as well as Joe Biden.


It was reported to me yesterday, International Courts decision regarding the holder and forfeiture of the USA, because of noncompliance and criminal action on the part of US President George W. Bush and the forgoing actions required for US noncompliance by the global community and myself.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, November 2, 2008

I will change the world


2 November 2008

New York-Barack Obama has promised to "change the world" if he is elected US President.

With just two days to go he and his opponent John McCain are touring key states in an effort to woo undecided voters.

Senator Obama is still almost seven points ahead in the Real Clear Politics poll of polls, but the gap has narrowed slightly.

At a rally in Henderson, Nevada, he warned his supporters against complacency.

"At this defining moment in history, you can give the country the change we need," he said.

At the same time Senator McCain was rallying his followers in Newport Beach, Virginia.

In a usually safe Republican state, which is threatening to go to the Democrats, he asked for help on the home stretch.

He said: "Let me state the obvious again, we need to win Virginia on the 4th of November and with your help we're going to win and bring real change to Washington.

My friends I need your help in the next three days. Volunteer, knock on doors - with your help we can and will win.

Commentary:

This bit of news while it is horrible and the picture is also a bit humorous, but nevertheless, of the two men being Obama and McCain being qualified for the office of US President; the answer is no, they are both more qualified for a jail cell at Leavenworth.

Towards either of them making the US better, actually one can more see from how both handled the election, as well as Hillary Clinton, that it would be four to eight years of worse then what the US has now and the global community has already seen from this particular country.

As to actually anyone running at this time for this particular office of government qualified, sorry to say, I do not think I have met one.

Let’s take a shorter look at the big picture, Obama has been charged with numerous felonies (high) crime’s not withstanding, terrorism. McCain, it is most assured has been charged with numerous and similar crimes and is being investigated for tax evasion from my understanding, at this time and not forgetting Clinton, it is assured she doesn’t have a clean under slip nor lives within the ideal’s that should actually be offensive to any moral person on the planet.

Bottom line, it would be same story, just new face or worse; if this is possible and most assured, a yes; especially from personal experience, which I do not think this the time or place to elaborate.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Congo’s Revolution against Democratic Tyrannical Oppression

A displaced woman and her child walk past the dead body of a Congolese government rebel soldier who was sent to attack his own people living in oppression, on 1 November 2008; on the outskirts of Goma, in the North Kivu region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

What is occurring in the Congo at this time is another case of Democracy that like the US has run amok, where the President of the country is attacking his own people because they wish freedom from Oppression, Tyranny and Poverty.

The people of the Congo are being attacked and victimized by not just President Joseph Kabila, but his rebel military, with aid from the US government; to squash the revolution and keep the people of the Congo oppressed and in virtual slavery, to create depravity of human life.

From my understanding, the global community nor myself will intercede, because the people of the Congo have the right to choose life over tyrannical oppressive slavery they have now and may Allah (God) help the people of the Congo to achieve the quality of life they do deserve.


No person living upon the earth should ever suffer these types of horror’s, as I have said numerous times before; because everyone upon the earth deserve a good quality of life and not what one see’s in the pictures below.

Even being the Queen of Palestine, I firmly believe in the very best for my people in every aspect that can possibly be achieved and would never advocate such as what is not just occurring in the Congo, but certain other countries in the world that is suffering from Democratic tyrannical behavior and people wonder why, I do not actually care for Democracy as a whole; strictly speaking because of the suffering and horror‘s.- HRM Deborah

A crowd of refugees stand in line as it rains at a help center of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) next to a refugee camp, on 1 November 2008; on the outskirts of Goma, in the North Kivu region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

A baby looks at his mother in an improvised hut at a refugee camp, on 1 November 2008; on the outskirts of Goma, in the North Kivu region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).


A boy hides from the rain at a refugee camp, on 1 November 2008; on the outskirts of Goma, in the North Kivu region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Children play at a refugee camp, on 1 November 2008; on the outskirts of Goma, in the North Kivu region of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Bush on a Patriotic Election without Representation

For Immediate Release
November 1, 2008

Audio
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This Tuesday is Election Day. After months of spirited debate and vigorous campaigning, the time has come for Americans to make important decisions about our Nation's future. I encourage all Americans to go to the polls and vote.

Election season brings out the spirit of competition between our political parties, and that competition is an essential part of a healthy democracy. But as the campaigns come to a close, Republicans, Democrats, and independents can find common ground on at least one point: Our system of representative democracy is one of America's greatest strengths.

The United States was founded on the belief that all men are created equal. Every Election Day, millions of Americans of all races, religions, and backgrounds step into voting booths throughout the Nation. Whether they are rich or poor, old or young, each of them has an equal share in choosing the path that our country will take. And every ballot they cast is a reminder that our founding principles are alive and well.

Voting is one of the great privileges of American citizenship, and it has always required brave defenders. As you head to the polls next week, remember the sacrifices that have been made by generations of Americans in uniform to preserve our way of life. From Bunker Hill to Baghdad, the men and women of American Armed Forces have been devoted guardians of our democracy. All of us owe them and their families a special debt of gratitude on Election Day.

Americans should also remember the important example that our elections set throughout the world. Young democracies from Georgia and Ukraine to Afghanistan and Iraq can look to the United States for proof that self-government can endure. And nations that still live under tyranny and oppression can find hope and inspiration in our commitment to liberty.

For more than two centuries, Americans have demonstrated the ability of free people to choose their own leaders. Our Nation has flourished because of its commitment to trusting the wisdom of our citizenry. In this year's election, we will see this tradition continue. And we will be reminded once again that we are blessed to live in a free nation guided by the will of the people.

Thank you for listening
.
Commentary:
Unlike the radio address that Bush gave today, they are similar to ones that former US President’s have gave in the past especially in time’s of war, during the Great Depression, etc; when the President at that particular time felt, the US was in serious troubles.
Usually also, while they where trying to get the country to rally around them with these types of speeches; in the majority of cases, it was a failure and the president for lack of better explanation, stood alone.

Furthermore, what brings this also to mind is the tone of Bush’s voice in giving this speech; which was more monotone, without enthusiasm. While some former President’s did try to appear with enthusiasm, there was always certain tone’s missing from the voice structure.

How people speak reflects with many factors, in this particular case; words without true meaning. Just like the child that has to read a book report in front of the class and really either do not care or wish too. Another example that comes to mind, is a naughty child having to face the parent wondering what the fallout will be or punishment.

As in this case, Bush probably knows as a president he has failed on all front’s and has lashed out on too many front’s both domestic and globally, to waiting for the chicken to come home to roost on his head; to laying the preverbal egg, with the ever surmountable anger not just in the US, but globally.

Probably, Bush is waiting to further see, the extreme irate crowd coming towards him with the burning torches scenario; which seems to come to not just my mind, but other people's mind's lately. Which again, is reminiscent of the French Revolution(1789–1799) or from and old black and white Frankenstein movie; which if I remember correctly, was in 1931, with Boris Karloff.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Syrian and Palestinian Protestor’s unite Against US Terrorism Attack on Syria

Palestinian men hold their national flag as they walk over a US flag during a sit-in protest at Damascus castle, on 30 October 2008; in reaction to a deadly US raid that targeted a Syrian village near the Iraqi border on October 26.

Thousands of people marched in the streets of Damascus today, waving Syrian flags and banners reading 'No to American terrorism' and 'American democracy' -- the killing of civilians at Abu Kamal,' the area targeted during the raid.
Syrian sits on a statue of Arab and Islamic leader Salah Eddine al-Ayyubi holding Syrian, Palestinian and Lebanese flags during the sit-in protest at Damascus castle.

It is a well known fact, that Palestine does not nor will we ever accept terrorism in any manner, shape or form.

Also, the people of Palestine strongly condemn the recent attack on Syria by the US, to further not accept; the loss of life due to this recent attack in the name of democracy or any form of tyranny towards the Middle East.-HRM Deborah

Further Reading:
American people back Iran's right to enrich uranium: Chomsky (Commentary)

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, October 26, 2008

American people back Iran's right to enrich uranium: Chomsky

26 October 2008

Berlin-The American people support Iran's right to enrich uranium and are "strongly opposed" to issuing any military threats against the Islamic Republic over its nuclear program, said a leading US foreign policy expert in an exclusive phone interview with IRNA in Berlin on Saturday.

Noam Chomsky lashed out at western media reports saying Tehran was "defying the world" over its nuclear program.

"That's a funny definition of the 'world'. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), for example which is the majority of countries, endorses Iran's right to enrich uranium," said Chomsky.

"Now nobody thinks they have the right to develop nuclear weapons, however that's different issue. But the majority of the (American) population agrees (on Iran's right to enrich uranium)," he added.

Iran has repeatedly stressed that having nuclear arms would be against its Islamic teachings and laws.

The distinguished 80-year-old professor emeritus of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) said, "Public opinion here overwhelmingly holds that Iran should have the right to develop nuclear energy..."


Chomsky reaffirmed also that Iran was "of course entitled to uranium enrichment as a member of the NPT."

The US scholar made clear that most Americans reject the Iran policy of President George W. Bush.

"With regard to Iran, a substantial segment of pretty mainstream opinion has been harshly critical of the confrontational approach and has called for negotiations and diplomacy," Chomsky said.

He added there could have been a US-Iranian "rapprochement for the last 10 years."

"It did not happen because of the extremism of the Bush administration was simply directed at making relations harsher, more bitter, militarizing them and that's why the Bush administration even antagonized allies," Chomsky said.

Asked whether the US-Iranian estrangement could finally end, he pointed to the possibility of a "working relationship" between both adversaries.

Chomsky emphasized that a working relationship between the US and Iran could "improve the overall situation" in the Middle East.

"There is a strong establishment pressure ... moving towards a diplomatic and developmental approach rather than a military approach.

The American popular opinion is strongly in support of it," Chomsky added.

He emphasized Washington's hostile stance towards Tehran stems from Iran's refusal "to subordinate itself to the US will." "Iran is an independent actor. It is defiant of the US and that's not tolerated," Chomsky said.

"In fact that's official policy going back to War II in which the US would try to create a world order in which it is dominant. No exercise of sovereignty should be tolerated, if it intervenes with US efforts to construct a certain kind of world order," he added.

The American professor said the US viewed Iran as an "impediment" to its energy interests in the Middle East.

"Nobody is seriously concerned about Iranian aggression. There has been no sign of any. But they are upset about Iran's influence in the region. Also in the background is the concern that Iran might turn East. That's not discussed very much but that's certainly a policy concern," the feisty US political dissident added.

Chomsky's political activism dates back to the Vietnam War in the early 1960s when he established himself as a prominent critic of American foreign and domestic policy.


Commentary:
As to Mr. Noam Chomsky speaking in this manner about Iran, I will admit I was surprised had to agree with him on some points and with no disrespect, on different occasion’s with his views on Palestine; I will admit, I did not always agree with his ideas on numerous issues that appeared contrary, to what actually was going on in the country.

But as far as Iran, he is much more on the spot in my opinion, then he was on Palestine, which I thought was a bit more negative bias of all things; towards the Jewish people.
But this also comes at a time when people where being lied to so badly by the US it made the head swim, which may have been his dilemma also, but this is only a guess.

Even for me wishing so much to do what was good and right for everyone in my country and to actually understand why there was a war, in learning it should have came under the heading that, ‘the truth was stranger then the fiction’ or the US created such a tangled weave they made to practice to deceive; not just everyone in Palestine, but the globe.

Furthermore, in learning the truth, what was so very hard for me and actually stomach wrenching, was how anyone could subject people to such cruelty as the US did because they believe in Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia; which as everyone knows, I certainly do not.


This is one of the reason’s why what occurred to the Black American’s and the cruelty that has been done to them for far to long, kept coming into focus in my mind; to even what actually did occur that created the Holocaust, that the Jewish and Palestinian people where so horribly subjected too. To understand this situation, one did not just take into account the 108 year war, but a much larger scope of history of extermination and slavery of a historical people both Jewish and Muslim of a country known as Palestine, that is very loved by Allah (God) Himself; to what is occuring among people all over the globe.

People may call this situation by any number of definitions today, such as Global Domination or what have you; but the bottom line is death, slavery and sorrow. Which will never be acceptable in any manner of normal human reasoning; in part in the name of Democracy and some in blasphemy of using, 'in the name of Christianity;' which is being seen more on a daily basis.

Nevertheless, what happened in Palestine to create this horrible scenario, was to create what became known as the Gladiator Syndrome, so that two groups of people that happened to be Muslim and Jewish would fight; which was against there will, do to the historical significance that they are family and had always embraced in love for each other in the past.

But yet, this still only part of what has occurred, especially using the known historical 9,000 old opponent’s of the Jewish and Palestinian people against them, namely the Canaanites; in US collaboration; with the Canaanites age old thirst to steal all of Palestine, by blood.

But even yet, as to the global situation, one could continue far into the shadows of the night.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, October 13, 2008

Iran: Supreme Leader: Rule of money in West over

13 October 2008

Tehran-Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Monday that the rule of money in the western world has come to an end and their outcries are heard.

Highlighting the current status of liberal democracy in the West, the Supreme Leader said as the school of Marxism has collapsed, sounds of the decline of the West's liberal democracy are now heard.

The Islamic movement is spreading day by day and the Islamic Revolution as the driving force of such a great ideological movement should strengthen the factors behind its progress, the Supreme Leader said in a meeting with Friday prayer leaders from throughout the country.

The secret of the Islamic Revolutions lies in its spirit of resistance, underlined Ayatollah Khamenei.

The Iranian nation has renewed its allegiance to Islam, the Islamic Revolution and late Imam Khomeini, said the Supreme Leader, adding that the Iranian people have kept their promises to this effect resulting in the supremacy of religious power in Iran.

The Islamic Revolution became victorious at a time when the world was dominated by two schools of thought namely Marxism and Liberalism, said Ayatollah Khamenei.

"Iran strongly stood up to the plots masterminded by global arrogance and by relying on the Almighty God overcame all difficulties. Now there is no sign of Marxism in the world and even Liberalism is on the decline," pointed out the Supreme Leader.

Referring to scandalous collapse of Marxism, the Supreme Leader said they lost their strongholds one by one and finally turned into a spider web and were wiped up completely.

After fall of Marxism, liberalism was tempted to promote the idea of unipolar world, assuming that the whole world was under its influence it had no rival, pointed out Ayatollah Khamenei.

Highlighting the current status of liberalism in the western democracy, the Supreme Leader said that "Political claims and fabricated mottos of this school about human rights and democracy were revealed in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib prison, invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and bombardment of various parts of the world. And today, the rule of money in the West has been broken and their outcries are heard."


The current problems facing the West show to what extent the economic claims of Liberal Democracy was false, said the Supreme Leader, adding that the western analysts have now confessed to inefficiency of their economic theories.

They themselves claim that the era of America's absolute domination of the world is now over, underlined the Supreme Leader.

Ayatollah Khamenei said that some people try to resort to any means to disappoint the Iranian people and deviate them from their right path.

The Islamic Revolution will continue treading its path vigorously despite some minor shortcomings, the Supreme Leader made it clear.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Democracy's arctic edge

12 October 2008
By Victor S. Navasky

Speaking as one who spent almost two years in Alaska, even though it was more than 50 years ago, even though I was only in the peacetime U.S. Army, even though I merely rose to the rank of private first class (53rd Infantry Regiment, Fort Richardson, just outside Anchorage), even though as a member of headquarters company I was issued snowshoes, whereas most Arctic Frontiersman (as our regimental insignia identified us) were issued skis, and even though Alaska was not yet a state, I believe I speak with authority when I say that at least in those years, Governor Sarah Palin's much-mocked claim that Alaska's proximity to Russia gives one a leg up on matters of national security was, in effect, official U.S. policy.

Consider Operation Moosehorn. It was the winter of 1956 when the whistle blew and we dutifully packed our rucksacks and moved from the heated comfort of our Fort Richardson barracks to the snows of Big Delta, a few hundred miles to the north, where we set up our tents in temperatures, believe it or not, as low as minus 70 degrees, Fahrenheit.

The reason for our maneuvers? As our commander explained it: When the Russians invade the United States they will cross over from the Soviet island of Big Diomede to the Alaskan island of Little Diomede ("You can literally see Russia from Little Diomede," he told us - I kid you not), and then they will invade the Lower 48 by way of Alaska through Canada. "You," he assured us, "are our first line of defense." As the editor of "The Moose Hornblower," the mimeographed paper officially charged with covering these maneuvers, I can attest that these were his very words. (I can also attest that our headline on the final day was "Moosehorn Blows at Midnight.")

Such an invasion never took place, but that, I like to think, may have been precisely because the specter of taking on us Arctic Frontiersmen was too frightening for the Soviets to contemplate. Be that as it may, Palin can take solace in knowing that she is not the first to identify Alaska as foremost to U.S. national security.

Palin also may find a lesson in a civilian event I was lucky enough to witness during my Alaskan tour of duty. It began on Nov. 8, 1955, when 55 elected delegates from across Alaska (a number chosen to match the 55 in attendance at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787) descended on the University of Alaska in Fairbanks for their constitutional convention. It lasted for 76 days, long enough for me to take a furlough and hitch a ride to Fairbanks. The idea was to adopt a constitution, elect a Washington delegation (two senators, one representative) and then knock on the door of Congress, applying for admission, which happened on Jan. 3, 1959.

At the time, I thought the high point of the convention came after testimony from representatives of the National Municipal League and the American Political Science Association advising that constitutions should be short and general, and deal with fundamental principles; whereupon a fisherman-delegate from Ketchikan, which then billed itself as "The Salmon Capital of the World," rose to make a motion that the constitution include a provision banning fish traps.

When another delegate explained that while that might be a proper subject for legislation, a constitution should deal only with matters of principle, life-and-death matters as it were, the man from Ketchikan responded, "In Ketchikan, fish traps are a life-and-death matter."

The result was a document half the size of most state constitutions - and that included a provision for a ballot measure outlawing the use of fish traps in commercial salmon fishing, to be voted upon along with the constitution itself. (And as soon as the constitution was ratified, the ordinance abolishing salmon fish traps was passed.)

I was later to discover that the issue had special significance for Alaska, where fish traps were usually operated and owned by people from "the Outside," as Alaskans say, and seen by the fleets of Alaska's independent fishermen as a symbol of exploitation by absentee commercial interests. Where Washington was long unwilling to ban "Public Enemy No. 1," as the fish traps were known back then, the drafters stepped in - perhaps, Governor Palin, tough government regulation hasn't always been such a terrible thing for Alaska.

By the way, fishermen weren't the only ones whose rights were secured. Written at the tail end of the McCarthy period, the constitution even protects political smear victims, a timely reminder at a moment when our own national presidential campaign threatens to take a dirty turn.

Although I spent only a brief time in Alaska, and too many of my non-military hours were devoted to consuming more than my share of mooseburgers and whooping it up with the boys at Anchorage's latter-day Malamute saloon, which stayed open until the sun set, and in summer the sun never seemed to set, as you can see, Alaska made a deep impression on me.

Odd as it may sound, what I miss most (other than the multicolored northern lights zinging around the firmament) is the weather, mainly because of the way in which the fierce Alaskan winters functioned to unite the populace against it. Parka-clad Sourdoughs and Cheechakos, rich and poor, would huddle and joke and complain together; there's nothing like an Alaskan ice storm to get democratic camaraderie going.

One freezing night, William A. Egan of Valdez, the convention president (who like me had hitched a ride on a truck to get to Fairbanks), interrupted a contentious floor debate to announce that "the temperature is now about 40 below and if the delegates have their cars out there, they probably should start them in order that they will start."

I'm not sure that this story holds any moral for the Republican candidate for vice president of the United States, who has her own views on the limits of what we can do about climate change, but she should know that by the time the delegates returned, tempers had cooled, and the spirit of compromise that enabled this convention of, yes, mavericks to agree on what many political scientists now regard as a model document, prevailed.

Now that I think about it, Palin could do worse than take a refresher course in her own extraordinary state's extraordinary constitution. The document is, after all, a short one.

Victor S. Navasky, the chairman of The Columbia Journalism Review and publisher emeritus of The Nation, is the co-author of "Mission Accomplished! Or How We Won the War in Iraq: The Experts Speak."

Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Sanctions can do nothing to Iranian nation: Ahmadinejad

8 October 2008

Tehran-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday in the northeastern city of Bojnourd that the Western governments should know that imposition of sanctions can do nothing to Iranian nation.

Addressing a large group of people of North Khorassan province, he said the advocates of liberalism and democracy think that the Iranian nation would retreat from its inalienable rights.

They have always been harbingers of war and conflicts throughout the globe, he said, adding that they have waged over one hundred wars in the world on the pretext of support for freedom and human rights.

He added that even the eight-year Iraqi imposed war on Iran was waged by these so-called advocates of democracy.

As to financial crisis in the US, Ahmadinejad said the American authorities have become distressed and have lost their self-confidence.

Most of world population suffer from threats, war, insecurity and instability created by the bullying powers, he said, adding that the big powers try to transfer their problems to other world countries.

President Ahmadinejad, along with cabinet members, arrived in Bojnourd this morning on the second round of his provincial tours started in the current Iranian year to follow up implementation of the projects that had been approved during the first round of his provincial visits.

He made the initiative to visit different provinces since he took office in 2005 in order to bring closer the government to ordinary people.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Pressuring the New Economy Bill Vote

2 October 2008

A little something was brought to my attention in regards to the new voting on this second US economy bailout bill that is up for vote and that some people are being pressured to vote in a certain direction namely for this particular revision of the bill.

As to my knowledge, it is not only against the US definition of democracy, but also unconstitutional and who ever is putting pressure on said people to vote in a particular direction is committing a high crime or what I think the legal system calls in the US, as a Felony.

Nevertheless, one can put a host of different wording to try to sidestep this crime, but it will always mean the same thing, a crime and this further goes with the November elections.

This almost makes one think back in US history, of people buying votes or getting them off of tombstones with an effort to win; while I say this is history; because I do not know if it is still occurring.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, July 31, 2008

U.S. Aid Foreign Policy

Helping those in need?

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

U.S. Democracy in Burma

“…joint resolution that will continue some sanctions, propose new sanctions, and extend the import restrictions." U.S. President George W. Bush (29 July 2008)

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 16, 2008

Bush illegally in UK against Queen’s Wishes

U.S. President George W. Bush holds talks with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown at No. 10 Downing Street.


It was reported, that Bush is still in the UK against HRM Elizabeth II wishes, for she requested him to leave the country, yesterday.

Queen Elizabeth II did not approve of Bush’s foreign policy towards Palestine and his continuous insults towards Queen Deborah of Palestine.

In the Press conference below, one will not find any reference to Bush’s ideals against the country of Palestine nor the monarchy, which is the legal representative of Palestinian government.

U.S. President Bush Participates in Joint Press Availability with United Kingdom Prime Minister Brown

Office of the Press Secretary
June 16, 2008
Foreign & Commonwealth Office Building -- Lacarno Treaty Room
London, England

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: I'm delighted to welcome President Bush and the First Lady back to London. And his visit today is an opportunity to celebrate the historic partnership of shared purpose that unites the United Kingdom and the United States of America. We both share a great love of history and about how we have forged the ideas of democracy and liberty over centuries. And the special partnership that President Bush and I both agree today is a partnership not just of governments but of peoples is driven forward not simply by mutual interests, but by our shared values: both countries founded upon liberty, our histories forged through democracy, our shared values expressed by a commitment to opportunity for all, putting into practice what Churchill called the "joint inheritance of the English speaking world."

So let me thank President Bush for being a true friend of Britain and for the importance he attaches to enhancing our transatlantic partnership, from the work we do in Afghanistan and Iraq to every part of the world. And let me thank him for the steadfastness and the resolution that he has shown in rooting out terrorism in all parts of the world; in working for a Middle East peace settlement; in bringing hope to Africa; in working for a free trade world, where in spite of today's difficulties with oil and food prices, there is and should be a wider and deeper prosperity in the future for all.

Now in our substantive and wide-ranging talks last night and this morning, the President and I have discussed a number of central issues. We have discussed Iran's nuclear ambitions. We have discussed Iraq and Afghanistan, where our forces are working side by side. We have discussed the criminal cabal that now threatens to make a mockery of free and fair elections in Zimbabwe. We have discussed what we can do about democracy in Burma.

We have resolved, first of all, as we did some years ago, that it is in the British national interest to confront the Taliban in Afghanistan or Afghanistan would come to us. And so today Britain will announce additional troops for Afghanistan, bringing our numbers in Afghanistan to the highest level. And let me thank our troops, and the troops of America and 42 other countries who are in Afghanistan, as I thank our forces in Iraq for their courage and for their professionalism. And let me acknowledge the bravery of the five members of the 2nd paratroop regiment, British men who have in the last few days sacrificed their lives for freedom. Eighteen months ago, the Taliban boasted that they and their paid foreign fighters would drive our forces out of southern Helmand. Now most agree that security is on the way to being transformed. Last week in Paris a total of 80 countries pledged $20 billions, with nearly a billion from the United Kingdom to support the Afghan National Development Strategy.

Our aim is to generate progress, where the fourth poorest country in the world, laid low by decades of conflict, can as a democracy enjoy peaceful social and economic development, with our forces, over time, moving from a direct combat role to train and support Afghanistan's own army and police.

In Iraq, there is still work to be done, and Britain is playing and will continue to play its part. Where we have over 4,000 troops in Basra, we will continue the shared policy of Iraqis taking more control over their own affairs, moving from combat to overwatching Basra. Our policy is showing success as we continue the task we have set ourselves: strong and well-trained Iraqi forces capable of securing the peace, firm commitments to new local government elections soon, and speeding up the social and economic development of Iraq so that people have a stake in the future.

Our message today to the Iranian people is that you do not have to choose the path of confrontation. The latest rounds of talks with the Iranians took place over the weekend. Once again, we put our enhanced offer on the table, including political and economic partnership, and help with nuclear technology for civilian use. We await the Iranian response and we'll do everything possible to maintain the dialogue. But we are also clear that if Iran continues to ignore united resolutions, to ignore our offers of partnership, we have no choice but to intensify sanctions. And so today Britain will urge Europe and Europe will agree to take further sanctions against Iran.

First of all, we will take action today that will freeze the overseas assets of the biggest bank in Iran, the bank Melli.

And second, action will start today for a new phase of sanctions on oil and gas. And I will repeat that we will take any necessary actions so that Iran is aware of the choice it has to make: to start to play its part as a full and respected member of the international community or face further isolation.

We discussed the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe. In recent weeks, under Robert Mugabe's increasingly desperate and criminal regime, Zimbabwe has seen 53 killings, 2,000 beatings, the displacement of 30,000 people, the arrest and detention of opposition leaders, including Morgan Tsvangirai, and this is wholly unacceptable. Mugabe must not be allowed to steal the election that is now less than two weeks away. And that is why we call for Zimbabwe to accept a United Nations human rights envoy to visit Zimbabwe now, and to accept the international monitors from all parts of the world who are available to ensure that this is a free and fair election.

We agreed that at the G8 in Japan, the United Kingdom and the U.S.A. would propose a plan to recruit and train health workers for the poorest countries. To save the lives of mothers who needlessly die in childbirth, we are developing proposals to tackle the diseases that bring needless death and suffering, including malaria, AIDS, and neglected tropical diseases. And we agreed also to work together to ensure G8 commitment to scale up funding on education and get the remaining 72 million children who do not go to school today into school.

The world oil prices trebled in recent months. In the right of this, I welcome Saudi Arabia's initiative to host a producer-consumer summit in Jeddah on the 22nd of June. And we will all work together to ensure an enhanced dialogue between oil producers and consumers.

And the President and I also agreed that over the next few weeks we need to press hard to achieve a world trade deal. Both of us are ensured that this could unlock new opportunities for the world economy. It would also help reduce high global food prices.

Finally, we go from here to Northern Ireland. The United States has played an essential role in securing peace in Northern Ireland and helping the people of Northern Ireland move away from conflict to potentially a new prosperity. And I want to thank President Bush for his personal efforts to speed up the Northern Ireland peace process, and to make sure that there is investment in Northern Ireland, not just from the rest of the United Kingdom, but from America.

And I thank him for his work to ensure that the recent investment conference in Northern Ireland was a huge success, and there will be further announcements of jobs in Northern Ireland today. America has played a huge role in this peace process, and President Bush is to be thanked by all the people of the United Kingdom for what he has done.

So, Mr. President, I thank you again for your friendship, for your leadership, for your commitment to us continuing to work together to solve the challenges facing the world. I'm pleased you're here. I value the gains we've made together, and I look forward to our continued friendship.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. And I thank you very much for your friendship, thank you for your hospitality. This is -- this has been a good trip. By the way, some are speculating this is my last trip. Let them speculate. Who knows? (Laughter.) But it's been a -- we had a great dinner last night. I want to thank you and Sarah. And thanks for calling together the historians. It's a -- you know, Great Britain has produced great historians. And I am -- I love reading a lot of their works, and it was so kind of you to have them over. And the food was good, too. (Laughter.)

And also we had a great visit yesterday. Laura and I went to see Her Majesty, the Queen. I thank her for her hospitality. And then yesterday at the embassy, thanks to our Ambassador, I had the opportunity to speak to some of your soldiers. And I was -- listened to their stories of courage and bravery and sacrifice, and it was so -- really touching. And I really appreciate the British people supporting the people who wear the uniform. And I am looking forward to going to Northern Ireland this evening. You've taken the lead. We're just pleased to help. And hopefully this visit will help keep the process moving.

First thing about Gordon Brown, he's tough on terror, and I appreciate it -- and so should the people of Great Britain and the world. He fully understands that while some want to say that the terrorist threat is gone or there's nothing to worry about, it is something to worry about. And he was -- you were tested early in your Prime Ministership. You dealt with the challenge. And I appreciate your continued focus and your understanding that we've got to work together to protect our people, and your understanding that freedom is transformative, and the ultimate way to succeed against these extremists who use murder as a way to achieve their political objectives is to marginalize them through the advance of liberty.

And that's what we're doing in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. And it is tough work. It's hard to take a society that had been ravished [sic] by brutality and convince people to take the risk necessary to work for civil society and freedom for women and to educate their children. But I believe it's necessary work, for the sake of peace and for our security. And I believe it's in the moral interests of comfortable nations to help others realize the blessings of liberty. Oh, for some that sounds like hopeless idealism; for those of us involved with making public policy necessary to protect our people, it is the only realistic way to guarantee the peace for our people.

And so you've been strong on Afghanistan and Iraq, and I appreciate it. But more importantly, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq appreciate it. The march to democracy is never smooth. We've had our own history. America is viewed as a great democracy; just remember, many of our citizens were enslaved for a long period of time before we finally got it right.

But it's in our interests to help these folks. It's in our interests little girls go to school in Afghanistan. It's in our interests that there be free elections in Iraq. And it's in our interests that we help these governments survive. And it's taken sacrifice from our people, I understand that. The fundamental question of history is going to look back on it, is did we understand the duty that we've been called to do, to protect ourselves and hope others? And this Prime Minister has understood the duty.

No, I know there's a lot of discussion here in the British press about, well, you know, is there going to be enough troops, or not enough troops, and all that business; is he trying to distance this, that and the other -- it's just typical. But I just want to remind you that he has left more troops in Iraq than initially anticipated. And like me, we'll be making our decisions based upon the conditions on the ground, the recommendation of our commanders, without an artificial timetable set by politics.

I thank you for your troop announcement today in Afghanistan, as well. Then you issued a strong statement on Iran. It was a clear statement, and it was a strong statement, and it was a necessary statement, because the free world has an obligation to work together in concert to prevent the Iranians from having the know-how to develop a nuclear weapon. And now is the time to work together to get it done, and I appreciate your statement. Hopefully the Iranian leadership will take a different position then the one they've taken in the past, which is basically, who cares what the free world says, we're going to -- we'll go our own way. And now has faced -- they face serious isolation, and the people who are suffering are the Iranian people. We have no qualms with the Iranian people. As a matter of fact, we want the Iranian people to thrive. It's in our interests that there be a hopeful society. It's their government who has denied them their rightful place in the world.

And so I want to thank you very much for working hard to, you know, to help keep this coalition together to provide pressure necessary so we can solve the problem diplomatically. That's my first choice. Iranians must understand all options are on the table, however.

Thank you for your strong words on Zimbabwe. And I -- you know, you obviously are emotional on the subject and I don't blame you, because the people of Zimbabwe have suffered under Mugabe leadership, and we will work with you to ensure these good folks have free and fair elections to the extent -- best extent possible, which obviously Mr. Mugabe does not want to have.

We talked about Darfur. We talked about Burma. I strongly support your health care worker initiative. I'm looking forward to going to the G8 to articulate that. And we expect the people of the G8 -- the leaders of the G8 countries to fulfill their obligations, because last year we met and we had a -- we discussed a lot of issues, including HIV/AIDS and malaria on the continent of Africa, and they all came forth and said, we'll match the United States -- except most nations haven't matched the United States to date except for Great Britain, and they haven't done their part in matching the United States.

And so my message at the G8 is: Looking forward to working with you; thanks for coming to the meeting -- just remember, there are people needlessly dying on the continent of Africa today, and we expect you to be more than pledge-makers. We expect you to be check-writers for humanitarian reasons.

We did talk about energy and Doha. I'm concerned about Doha. I'm concerned that while we're making some progress on the agricultural side, that nations such as Brazil and India and China are not making corresponding openings on manufacturing and service -- and the service sector on their part. And in order to have a successful round, which I believe is essential -- and so does Gordon -- to fight off protectionism and help poor nations develop, that now is the time to get a Doha Round completed. And in order to do so, there has to be more movement on the manufacturing and service sector so there can be a fair and equitable deal.

Finally, we talked about global climate change and briefed Gordon on our strategy for the major economies meeting to hopefully reach an international goal for 2050 that will have intermediate strategies that are binding on each nation within the U.N. framework. And the reason why I believe this is the right approach to take, that unless China and India are a part of a binding international agreement -- and the United States -- then we will not have effective policy in dealing with climate change. It might make us all feel good, but the results won't be satisfactory. And so hopefully in Seoul, South Korea coming up there will be a major economy meeting agreement on a long-term goal with binding commitments.

Mr. Prime Minister, all in all, it's been a great meeting. Thank you for the conversation and thank you for your friendship.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Thank you.

Q Nick Robinson, BBC News.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Who? (Inaudible.) (Laughter.)

Q Good to have you here.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Missed the hat. (Laughter.)

Q Prime Minister, isn't it time to withdraw British troops from Iraq in order to send them where the military really needs them, to Afghanistan, or are you too worried about his reaction if you do?

PRESIDENT BUSH: We miss you, Nick, we miss you, buddy.

Q Are you prepared to see British troop withdrawn from Iraq while you're still in office, or are you concerned about the symbolic significance of that?

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Can I just say that in Iraq there is a job to be done and we will continue to do the job, and there's going to be no artificial timetable. And the reason is that we are making progress -- making progress in the Iraqis themselves being trained up to run the (inaudible) forces, and of course to be the police men and women in their areas. And we're making progress also because we hope local government elections will happen later this year. We hope to return the airport that we are responsible for in Basra to civilian use, as well. And most of all, in the next stage, we want to see the economic and social development of Basra and the southern part of Iraq proceed, so that people have a stake in the future.

So, yes, we are moving from what we call "combat" to "overwatch", and that's been announced many months ago -- yes, as a result of what happened in Basra a few months ago we have kept higher the level of troops that are necessary, but yes, also, we have a job that's still to be done. And that job is to train up the forces, that job is to speed up economic and social development, and that job is to have local government elections so that Iraqis can take control of their own democracy. And I'm determined that we continue to do that job.

And that will happen not at the cost of lesser troops for Afghanistan, but with more troops going to Afghanistan. The Defense Secretary will announce later this afternoon that we will send more troops to Afghanistan. The reason is that we want to help the Afghans train up their own army and their own police forces, and the reason is we want to have better equipment in Iraq -- in Afghanistan in future; and therefore there's going to be a reconfiguration of our troops, with some coming out and some more going in, and that an overall increase in the numbers so that we will have the highest level of troops in Afghanistan. You cannot trade numbers between the two countries.

There is a job to do in Iraq, and I've described it. And there is a job to do in Afghanistan, and we will continue to do it. And the fact that 43 countries are helping us in Afghanistan and 80 countries are supporting the economic and social development of Afghanistan shows how in this country, which is one of the poorest in the world, we are trying to make progress more quickly. So the announcement will come later today from the Defense Secretary.

PRESIDENT BUSH: We're withdrawing troops. We anticipate the 30,000 surge troops will be coming home by July -- more or less, 30,000. And so the plan is, bring them home based upon success. That's what we expect the British Prime Minister to do. That's what I'm doing -- that as the Iraqis are trained up, as they're taking more responsibility, as the security situations decline, as the economy is improved, as political reconciliation is taking place, we can bring more troops home. That's the whole purpose of the strategy. And so, give the Iraqis more responsibility. Let them take more -- be in more charge of their own security and their own government, and that's what's happening.

And so, you know, I mean -- look, the key thing for me is that I have -- you know, is that Gordon shares with me his plans. He listens to -- he talks to his commanders and he picks up the phone and says, here's what we're thinking. So there's no surprises. And as I said yesterday on TV here, I have no problem with how Gordon Brown is dealing with Iraq. He's been a good partner and -- but, as I told you, we're bringing ours home, too.

Q Mr. President, I'd like to ask you about recent events along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Do you back President Karzai when he says he may send his troops into Pakistan to take care of some of the militants who are launching attacks on his territory? And do you think that the agreements that the new government of Pakistan is pursuing with some of the militant tribes in that area amount to the sort of appeasement that you talked about in your speech last month?

And Mr. Prime Minister, I'd like to ask you about the meeting, upcoming meeting, in Saudi Arabia. What do you expect to come out of that meeting? And do you think it would be helpful if your friend there standing there, Mr. Bush, were to see you in Jeddah at that meeting?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Our strategy is to deny safe haven to extremists who would do harm to innocent people. And that's the strategy of Afghanistan; it needs to be the strategy of Pakistan. It's in all our interests to prevent those who murder innocent people to achieve political objectives to gain safe haven.

And so we'd look forward to working -- I mean, one thing that can happen is there can be, you know, more dialogue between the Pak government and the Afghan government. There was -- in the past they had a jirga amongst tribal leaders in the region on both -- from both sides of the border that made a difference. And I think that would be a good idea to restart the jirga process.

I know there needs to be dialogue between the intel services between the respective countries. And I know there needs to be better cooperation, and there needs to be trilateral cooperation on the border; trilateral being Pak, Afghan and coalition border patrols to prevent people from coming back and forth to cross the border.

And there's a lot of common ground. I repeat, it is no one's interest that extremists have a safe haven from which to operate. And I'm, you know -- and obviously it's a testy situation there. And if I'm the President of a country and people are coming from one country to another -- allegedly coming from one country to another -- to kill innocent civilians on my side, I'd be concerned about it. But we can help. We can help calm the situation down and develop a strategy that will prevent these extremists from, you know, from developing safe haven and having freedom of movement.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Can I say, I'm traveling to Jeddah next Sunday at the invitation of the King of Saudi Arabia. And I want a long-term dialogue, and this is part of a process, not an event, between oil producers and oil consumers. I think there is a view developing that the price of oil is increasingly dependent not just on today's demand and supply factors but on what people perceive as demand outstripping supply next year, in the medium term, and in the long term.

And I want to tell the King of Saudi Arabia and others who are there that the world will build more nuclear power. And I have suggested that on present trends it would be about a thousand nuclear power stations over the next 30 years. The world will increase its use of renewables. The world will increase its use of coal. It will lessen its dependence on oil, and that the world is determined to make a more efficient use of oil.

And I think this dialogue between producers and consumers is absolutely essential. President Bush has just been in Saudi Arabia. I have not been there recently. I want to go and talk to the King and talk to others there about what I believe should be a process whereby we understand what are the pressures on demand in future years, as well as we understand the pressures on supply. And I believe that that long-term debate about the future can have an effect on today's markets.

Now, that's what the debate is about, and that is part of a process that I hope will continue, if necessary, with a meeting in London later, and with further meetings so that there is a genuine dialogue between producers and consumers about what is the most worrying situation in the world at the moment, and that is the trebling of the price of oil.

Q Mr. President, in his last major speech, Tony Blair said on Iraq, "Hand on heart, I did what I thought was right. But if I got it wrong, I'm sorry." Is it possible you got it wrong? Would you share at this point those slightly more reflective sentiments? And in particular, should you, in retrospect, perhaps have concentrated a little more on Afghanistan?

And could I ask the Prime Minister, is the Lisbon Treaty dead in the water now? And if so, what happens next for Europe?

PRESIDENT BUSH: History will judge the tactics. History will judge whether or not, you know, more troops were needed earlier, troops could have been positioned here better or not. Removing Saddam Hussein was not wrong. It was the right thing to do. Right thing to do for our security, right thing to do for peace, and the right thing to do for 25 million Iraqis. And now the fundamental question is will we have the willpower and the patience to help the Iraqis develop a democracy in the heart of the Middle East. It's a democracy that's not going to look like America, it's not going to look like Great Britain, but it's a democracy that will have government responsive to the people. People say, was that worth it, is it necessary. Absolutely it's necessary if you believe we're in an ideological war being -- the theaters of which right now, the most notable theaters are Afghanistan and Iraq.

The strategic implications of a free Iraq are significant for our future. For example, a free Iraq will make it easier to deal with the Iranian issue. A free Iraq will send a clear signal to reformers and dissidents, would-be journalists throughout the Middle East that a free society is available for you, as well. And the question facing the Western world is, will we fall prey to the argument that stability is more important than forms of government; that what appears to be stable and peaceful -- is that more important than how people live their lives, what kind of government? You just heard the Prime Minister speak eloquently about Zimbabwe. The lesson there is, forms of government matter.

Freedom has had a transformative effect in Europe, in the Far East. And the fundamental question is, will we work to see it have a transformative effect in the Middle East? Now, there are many doubters. I understand that, because there is some who say that perhaps freedom is not universal. Maybe it's only Western people that can self-govern. Maybe it's only, you know, white-guy Methodists who are capable of self government. I reject that notion. I think that's the ultimate form of political elitism, and I believe an accurate reading of history says that freedom can bring peace we want. And it'll bring peace to the Middle East, unless of course we become isolationist; unless of course we lose our confidence; unless of course we quit. And, so, yes, I'm sure there's people will say, they could have done things better here and there. But I'm absolutely confident that the decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: And can I just emphasize, the passion for freedom I think is a universal value, and I believe that Iraq is a democracy today because of the action that we have taken. And our next task is to make sure that all Iraqis feel that they have an economic stake as well as a democratic stake in the future of the country. And that's why the work continues.

On Europe, I'll meet Brian Cowen, the Taoiseach of Ireland, when I'm in Belfast later today. The legal position on the European treaty is very clear, that all 27 members must sign and therefore ratify the treaty before it comes into force. It is for each member to decide its own process for doing so, and we will continue our process of debating this in the House of Lords, and then royal assent during the course of this week.

I think a short period of reflection is necessary for the Irish to put forward their proposals about how they will deal with this, and we look forward to the Irish coming to the European Council on Thursday with a view of what should be done. I believe that when David Miliband makes a statement to the House this afternoon following a meeting of the European foreign ministers, he will be able to say that all the European Union members believe that Ireland should be given this time to reflect on what they need to do, and then make their proposals about how the situation can be resolved.

Q Good morning, Mr. President, Prime Minister. I'd like to ask you both about Iran. President Bush, you've talked about it at every stop. A similar process, it seems, that is deterring North Korea from its nuclear ambitions has basically allowed North Korea [sic] to make progress toward nuclear weapons. At what point are you willing to draw a line here with Iran, and isn't Iran seemingly learning a lesson from the North Korea experience?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Ed, I just strongly disagree with your premise that the six-party talks has encouraged Iran to develop nuclear weapons. I don't know why you have even come to that conclusion, because the facts are the six-party talks is the only way to send a message to the North Koreans that the world isn't going to tolerate them having a weapon.

I mean, in other words, they are -- we'll see what they disclose, but we hopefully are in the process of disabling and dismantling their plutonium manufacturing. We're hopefully in the process of getting them to disclose what they have manufactured and eventually turning it over. We're hopefully in the process of disclosing their proliferation activities, and it's a six-party process. I mean, the only way, in my judgment, to diplomatically solve these kinds of problems with nations like Iran and North Korea, non-transparent nations, is through a multilateral process, where there's more than one nation sending the same message to the leaders of these respective countries.

And so I disagree with your premise. As a matter of fact, the Iranians must understand that when we come together and speak with one voice, we're serious. That's why the Prime Minister's statement was so powerful, and that's the lesson that the North Koreans are hearing. And so it's -- I said the other day that, you know, one of the things that I will leave behind is a multilateralism to deal with tyrants, so problems can be solved diplomatically.

And the difficulty, of course, is that sometimes economics and money trumps national security interests. So you go around asking nations -- by the way, it's not a problem for Great Britain -- so you say to your partners, don't sell goods; you know, let's send a focused message all aiming to create the conditions so that somebody rational shows up. In other words, people hopefully are sick of isolation in their respective countries, and they show up and say, we're tired of this; there's a better way forward.

And in order for that to be effective, Ed, there has to be more than one voice. So if I were the North Koreans and I were looking at Iran, or the Iranians looking at North Korea, I'd say, uh-oh, there are coalitions coming together that are bound tightly -- more tightly than ever in order to send us a focused message.

And, you know, let me just say one thing about the Iranian demand for civilian nuclear power. It's a justifiable demand. You just heard the Prime Minister talk about the spread of civilian nuclear power, which I support -- starting in my own country, by the way; we need to be building civilian nuclear power plants.

And so when the Iranians say, we have a sovereign right to have one, the answer is, you bet, you have a sovereign right, absolutely. But you don't have the trust of those of us who have watched you carefully when it comes to enriching uranium, because you have declared that you want to destroy democracies in the neighborhood, for example. Therefore -- and this is the Russian proposal, by the way -- therefore we'll provide fuel for you, and we'll collect the fuel after you've used it so you can have your nuclear -- civilian nuclear power, which undermines what the Iranians are saying, and that is, we must enrich in order to have civilian nuclear power. You don't need to enrich to have civilian nuclear power. The Russian proposal is what we support. This proposal wouldn't have happened had there not been a multilateral process.

And so what these nations need to see is we're serious about solving these problems. And the United States spends a lot of time working with our partners to get them solved.

Thank you very much.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Thank you all very much.

END

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, June 15, 2008

President Bush Participates in Joint Press Conference with President Sarkozy of France

U.S. President George W. Bush and French President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, shake hands following their joint press Conference, 14 June 2008, in Paris.
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 14, 2008

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: (As translated.) Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for coming to work with us on this Saturday morning. I wanted to thank President Bush for his visit to Paris on his European tour. I see how much importance it has to Franco-American relations and the transatlantic relation. And I think everyone should firmly bear in mind the importance of this transatlantic relation between the United States and Europe, especially as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Marshall Plan. This is an opportunity for me to extend the same sort of hospitality, warm hospitality that was extended to me last November when I went to Washington and to Mount Vernon.

It's also an opportunity to continue to pursue this confident, trusting regular dialogue between France and the United States on all issues that we have in common -- and there are so many of them. We had an extended discussion on the international situation on the Middle East, but also on economic and trade matters. We checked that -- once again saw that there were many areas of convergence, although perhaps slight differences, and that's only right and normal. Friendship should not prevent France or the United States from expressing independent views. But if there are differences, we can discuss them calmly, in a level headed manner. And this is once again an opportunity for me to say to the American people the deep gratitude of the French people and our friendship.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yesterday I reminded the world, really, Nicolas, that America's first friend was France. And frankly, we wouldn't be where we are today with the French support early in our revolution. You are not only our first friend, you've been a consistent friend, and the meetings here have reconfirmed and strengthened our friendship between our countries and our personal friendship.

I really enjoy being with President Sarkozy. He's an interesting guy. (Laughter.) He is full of energy. He's full of wisdom. He tells me what's on his mind. And we've had -- every time I've met with him we've had very meaningful discussions. We discussed Afghanistan -- and thank you very much for supporting the Paris support conference; it made a big difference for that young democracy. And I do thank the people of France for supporting the women and children and the young democrats in Afghanistan. And thank you, too, Nicolas.

We talked about Lebanon, of course. Talked to him about the Holy Land, about our deep desire for there to be two states living side by side in peace; two democracies, a Palestinian democracy and Israel; having a -- resolving this conflict which creates so much difficulty for not only the Palestinians and the Israelis, but for much of the Middle East.

We talked about Darfur, and I want to thank you very much for having your troops there in Chad. We talked about Iran -- spent a lot of time talking about Iran. And I will tell you that we both have a mutual desire to prevent the Iranians from gaining the knowledge so that they could build a weapon. And we do that for the sake of peace and security of the world.

We talked about Doha, the importance of the Doha Round. And frankly -- and then we spent some time on climate change. We had a meaningful, good discussion. And I thank you very much for the dinner last night. And it was a great pleasure to have been able to meet your wife. She's a really smart, capable woman, and I can see why you married her. (Laughter.) And I can see why she married you, too. (Laughter.)

Anyway, thanks. It's been a good visit. We'll be glad to take some questions.
The media's shadow drops across the courtyard of the Elysée Palace in Paris 14 June 2008, as the honor cordon and color guard prepare for the arrival of U.S. President George W. Bush, who spent the morning with France's President Nicolas Sarkozy.

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Thank you, George. Perhaps a first question from the French press.

Q (As translated.) To both of you, what specific, concrete requests do you wish to make or send to the Syrian President, Bashar Assad, so that he normalize his relations with the West, and of course to achieve stability in Lebanon and in the rest of --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, my message would be, stop fooling around with the Iranians and stop harboring terrorists; serve as a constructive force in the Middle East to help the advance of a Palestinian state; make it clear to Hamas that terror should stop for the sake of peace; and make it clear to their Iranian allies that the West is serious when we talk about stopping them from learning how to enrich, which would be the first -- a major step for developing a bomb; and to make it clear to their Iranian allies that Hezbollah is a destabilizing force for not only Lebanon but elsewhere.

That would be my message. I'd make it clear to him that there is a better way forward for Syria. And Nicolas and I talked about this subject today.

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, George and I totally agree on the need to guarantee Lebanon's independence. Lebanon is entitled, like any other country anywhere in the world, to its independence and to remain independent. And this is one of the preconditions that I have laid down -- the election of a new President for Lebanon. That is exactly what happened. It was done with the election of General Suleiman.

Second point, we will go through with the process, the procedure of the international tribunal to track down those who assassinated Mr. Rafik Hariri. But once I have said to Bashar Assad, let the presidential process run its course, we would get back into contact with them, and that is exactly what we've done. We have to let Lebanon stand free.

I also share the view of the United States of America on the fact that the Iranian question, and the fact that they might get their hands on a nuclear weapon is of the essence; it is a major issue. Syria has to peal off, as much as possible, from Iran in its desire to lay its hands on a nuclear weapon. Once that has happened, then the process will continue.

Lastly, I told the President of the United States that we have taken the initiative of convening a summit for the Mediterranean, and to my knowledge, Syria is part of the Mediterranean region, is a Mediterranean country. Now if we should go around the Mediterranean region and start picking and choosing, and simply inviting those who correspond to exactly our criteria, then we'll probably have a meeting with very few people attending it.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I want to call on Bill Plante from CBS, but before I do, I want to say something about one of your colleagues.

America lost a really fine citizen yesterday when Tim Russert passed away. I've had the privilege of being interviewed by Tim Russert. I found him to be a hardworking, thorough, decent man. And Tim Russert loved his country, he loved his family, and he loved his job a lot. And we're going to miss him all, and we send our deepest sympathies to Maureen, his wife, and Luke, his son. I know they're hurting right now, and hopefully the prayers of a lot of Tim's friends and a lot of Americans will help them during this time of difficulty.

Plante.

Q Mr. President, Iran's government spokesman, shortly after the package had been presented by the Europeans, dismissed it out of hand, saying that if it does not -- if it includes suspension of enrichment, it absolutely will not fly. Can you convince the rest of your allies and partners to enforce the sanctions which are envisioned in that package? It seems that many of them are reluctant.

PRESIDENT BUSH: That's probably a question you ought to ask the President of France. Let me just give you my impressions of the situation. We have worked hard -- "we" being our allies -- have worked hard to say to the Iranian people: There is a better way forward for you; you've got a government that has isolated you; you've got a government that is creating the conditions so that you can't live a full and hopeful life, and the reason why that's happening is because your government has defied the demands, the just demands of the free world. In other words, they refuse to abandon their desires to develop the know-how which could lead to a nuclear weapon.

Now, they say, well, we want civilian nuclear power. And as I explained to Nicolas today, I agree, they should have the right to have civilian nuclear power. As a matter of fact, Vladimir Putin delivered that very message to the Iranian regime. He also delivered this message: that because you have been untrustworthy, because you haven't fully disclosed your programs to the IAEA in the past, that we can't trust you to enrich. And therefore Russia will provide the fuel necessary for the civilian nuclear reactor. And therefore you don't need to [en]rich.

So our demands are just and fair. And Bill, we have been implementing the sanctions through the United Nations. And we're working with our friends and allies. As a matter of fact, much of my discussions on this trip have been dominated by this subject because our allies understand that a nuclear-armed Iran is incredibly destabilizing, and they understand that it would be a major blow to world peace.

So I'm disappointed that the leaders rejected this generous offer out of hand. It's an indication to the Iranian people that their leadership is willing to isolate them further. And our view is we want the Iranian people to flourish and to benefit. We want their economy to be strong so people can grow up in peace and hope; and they've got a -- this Ahmadinejad is obviously -- takes a different position from that. So his policies are what's creating the depravation inside Iran.

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, I think France's position is well known. If Iran gets a nuclear bomb, that is totally unacceptable. That's very clear. It is an unacceptable threat to world stability, especially when you think of the repeated statements made by the President of Iran right now. Anyone is entitled -- including Iran -- to access to civilian nuclear energy. We will help them to do so if they act in good faith. If the Iranian authorities are in good faith then they should let inspections run their course. If they nothing to hide, then they have nothing to hide -- let's show it.

And meanwhile the only solution in order to persuade the Iranians of this is a faultless, seamless sanction system, you see. The door is wide open to access to civilian nuclear technology -- straightaway, now. But as far as military nuclear access is concerned, this is "no" on the part of the international community. And as the President just said, Vladimir Putin has with us sung from the same hymn sheet and our position will not change. The Iranian people -- who are great people and a major civilization -- they need economic progress, they need growth, they deserve better than the impasse, the dead-end into which some of their leaders are leading them.

Q President, to you, Mr. Sarkozy. It would appear that the building and shaping of Europe has been seriously shaken yesterday by the Irish "no." In fact, some have called for the ratification procedure to be suspended. Can this not be the case? And secondly, do you want your presidency, the French presidency to be one which, as you called for, continues to push Europe forward? And do you not think that the Irish "no" is going to hinder this?

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, it's going to make things more difficult, but when you're a head of state and when the bubble -- you take over the presidency of the union, if you like easy jobs then you should step down straightaway.

Now, the Irish "no" is a political reality. It's a fact. It's happened. But the issue is not whether we like or not; it's a fact, we have to live with it. The Irish people said what they had to say, and we have to accept that. Now, having said that, we, with Angela Merkel, believe that we have to continue with the ratification process, because at this stage 18 European states have ratified the treaty. We have to continue doing so and that is Gordon Brown's intention, as he explained to me yesterday over the telephone, so that this Irish hiccup not become a major crisis.

So despite that, let's continue to ratify. But at the same time, we have to put our heads together, all of us. It is no coincidence, it is no surprise to a certain extent -- in fact I spoke yesterday with the Irish Taoiseach, the Irish Prime Minister. A lot of Europeans do not understand how we are shaping Europe right now and building Europe, and we have to take account of that. And we have to do so very fast. We have to change our way of building Europe.

The idea of a European construct -- it was one of the most wonderful ideas that the founding fathers had some half a century ago. We cannot allow -- we shouldn't sabotage it. But perhaps we should do it differently. Europe was set up to protect, and yet it worries so many Europeans. We can't not take account of this. We have to do so, and we have to do so now. So I have every intention of taking initiatives. I'm thinking, for instance, of a European immigration policy. I'm thinking of a European response to this endless increase in oil prices. It seems to me that we have a duty to be more effective and look at what the daily lives of our fellow citizens look like. And I take the Irish "no" as a call for us to do things differently and do things better.

Now, of course it's not going to simplify the work and the task of the French President, Presidents of the European Union, but --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Olivier. Tossing a bone to somebody who has got a French name. (Laughter.) Might want to use the mic, Olivier.

Q Yes, I will. Thank you, Mr. President. Merci, Monsieur Président. First --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Speaks the language, too. (Laughter.)

Q Just wait. (Laughter.) I'd like to ask you each a question --

PRESIDENT BUSH: In the great tradition of David Gregory.

Q Who?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes -- just trying to work him in the news here.

Q I'd like to ask you a question first, Mr. President. (As translated.) And then a question to the President of France. (Speaking English.) President Bush, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki says that talks on a status of forces agreement are at an impasse, or a dead end -- not dead, but in trouble. How do you break this impasse, and are the conditions that the United States have set forward in support so far non-negotiable?

(As translated.) And to you, President, is the Franco-American relationship the privilege, the priority number one relationship in the transatlantic context?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Olivier, if I were a betting man, we'll reach an agreement with the Iraqis. You know, of course we're there at their invitation; this is a sovereign nation. And therefore, we're working hard with the elected government of Iraq about, you know, U.S. presence and coalition presence, in a way that the elected government is comfortable.

And it's interesting to be working with a democracy where, you know, people are trying to prepare the ground to get something passed in the parliament, for example, or the free press is vibrant. But we're going to work hard to accommodate their desires. It's their country.

And at the same time, we believe that a strategic relationship with Iraq is important. It's important for Iraq. It's important for the United States. It's important for the region. And I repeat to you that whatever we agreed to, it will not commit future Presidents to troop levels, nor will it establish permanent bases.

Anyway, we'll see how it goes. And thanks for the question -- in English. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, the Americans and the French have had a privileged relationship for two centuries now. I mean, when the United States of America was born, France made a choice. It was not a European choice, because we chose to side with the Americans of the United States of America, as opposed to Britain at the time. And in two world wars we've been together. We share the same values.

So yes, it is a privileged relationship, but it's not privileged since I came to be elected; it's been privileged for two centuries now. You can't neglect that. Now, through this -- throughout that, we have had ups and downs -- hiccups -- because two peoples -- I'm talking about the French and the American peoples -- that actually resemble one another. We express our feelings. The American people can be heard, and likewise for the French people. We have to be careful about this. We have to be mindful of this when we talk to one another in our relations.

I have always seen American leaders -- and thank you to President Bush -- for accepting European originality and independence; and of course French originality and independence. And I've always noted that we can talk very frankly when we had points of disagreement. But we have to do so as allies and as friends, and be mindful of not hurting one another. We can agree on an issue, on the substance of issue, but we don't have to say so in an unpleasant manner. It so happens that today we have a lot of areas of convergence. But yes, maybe on such and such an issue, we don't totally agree, but it doesn't in any way undermine the basis of what I have to say, which is that the Americans are our friends and our allies. They know they can count on us.

Might I add that it seems to me that the more you trust somebody, the more trust there is on both sides of the Atlantic, the more leeway we have. We don't ask the United States to apologize to us because they have their own vision of their strategic interests, and they don't ask us to apologize for the fact that we are defending our own strategic interests, precisely because the relationship is a strong one, it is a calm one, and when a relationship is that strong, you accept one's divergences or differences. And that is my whole point -- you've got to understand if you're in a strong relationship, then you have more room for freedom, more room for maneuver. That's what this is all about.

Perhaps one last question?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Oh. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: (Speaking English.) One more, last.

Q You have set the target before leaving the White House that by the end of this year you will hopefully achieve an historical peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. However, in light of what's happening to the fragile position of Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and the continuous process of building illegal settlements in eastern Jerusalem and certain parts of the occupied territories, do you think that peace is far away right now in light of those obstacles?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you. First of all, I view the concept of a Palestinian state and the idea of a Palestinian state for Israeli security, as well as Palestinian security and hope, as bigger than the political process. And I fully recognize there's a lot of uncertainty in the Israeli political scene now.

On the other hand, what is not uncertain is that most people or many people in Israel understand that for their own security there has to be a Palestinian state, with clearly defined borders, a state that doesn't look like Swiss cheese, a resolution of the refugee issue and the security issue, and of course issues surrounding Jerusalem.

Most Palestinians want to coexist in peace with Israel. And that peace must be in a state that is clearly visible, well defined, and in actuality is a state. And so in other words, the concept -- and by the way, this is newly arrived; I'm actually the first President ever to have articulated a two-state solution, two democracies living side by side with peace -- in peace. And during my time as President I've seen a notable shift amongst folks in the Middle East that recognize the importance of having that state.

So my point to you is, is that, you know, it's been a -- there's always difficulties in democracies, but the notion of getting this work done is important. And therefore our diplomacy is to remind all the parties involved that they have now an opportunity to get a state negotiated. And I think it can be done by the end of the year. Condi is very much involved with it on a, you know, a nearly weekly, it seems like, basis. And of course I'm in touch with the leaders. The Palestinians are discouraged by the settlement activity -- all the more reason to get the borders clearly defined as quickly as possible.

I want to thank Nicolas and the EU, for example, for helping build civil society in the Palestinian Territory, as well as helping Prime Minister Fayyad with security measures.

I'll also remind you that it's essential that we get a state defined as quickly as possible so that leaders such as President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad can say to their people, here's an alternative vision to what's taking place in Gaza. You support us and you're going to get a state. You support Hamas, and you're going to get Gaza. Take your pick.

And therefore, it is imperative that we, you know, convince the parties to get this done. Now, I know some say, all America has got to do is say, do it. No -- the way it works is the parties have got to come to this agreement. Our job, along with the EU through the Quartet, is to keep the process moving.

And so I'm optimistic. I understand how difficult it is, but difficultly should not cause people to do the right thing. If you believe in your soul something is right, then you have an obligation to work. And in this case, I firmly believe that the establishment of a Palestinian state will bring hope and peace to the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Thank you.

END

Commentary:
It is being more found that Bush’s speeches and remarks are such repeaters, that they are predictable, before the yawn; which is common with an alcoholic.

As for answering media questions, he appears to be having increasing problems doing so, showing his mental degeneration.

Furthermore, it is becoming an increasing idea, if Bush may have had a minor alcoholic induced stroke; along with a more pronounced slurring speech.

As for a remark, towards working with the leaders in Palestine, Bush has numerous times refused to do so and would rather blanket the media with propaganda, which is contrary to the truth and his known associations with global terrorists; such as Mahmoud Abbas's terrorist organization who has no leadership capacity in Palestine.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,