'Go America Go'

A Pakistani Muslim wear two slogans saying 'Go Taliban Go' and 'Go America Go' during a pro-Taliban and anti-US protest rally in Islamabad on 4 May 2009. Tensions are soaring between the Pakistani government, which is under US pressure to extend an offensive to crush the Taliban.A Pakistani Muslim wears a cap bearing the slogan 'Go Taliban Go' during a Pro-Taliban and anti-US protest rally in Islamabad on 4 May 2009.

While the above picture of just 'Go Taliban Go' appeared splashed all over the US media propaganda as an anti-Taliban rally was not so, but to the contrary; what has became much more prominent in Pakistan and across the globe is the ever increasing feeling of anti-US or just plain anti-America due to most people having had enough of oppressive mistreatment and outright cruelty by the US government.

Even now, after the US lied to the American public and assured across the globe with their media propaganda on this situation it stands to define of how far the US will go in their barbaric pressure and heavy hammer upon the whole of the world; that nothing is below of what they will proceed to do against the feelings of the countries they continue to attack.

Neither country, home nor family is safe globally; from the American arrogance, to even go so far as to destroy the US itself in every facet possible, with ill-regard or full destruction of their own country including the welfare of all American citizens to do so.

Further goes to show, even with the recent US attack and continued genocide of Iraqi civilians which occurred very recently; which is being once again high condemned, by the Iraqi government or the US bombing that just occurred as of yesterday evening, that has murdered upward to 120 Afghan civilians.

Which with the very recent US media propaganda that the US is on a mission from "God" to commit murder, especially with the recent attack in Afghanistan; it should be understood that Allah (Hashem, God) does not condone homicidal murder of other's, for any reason or has the US forgotten where Allah (Hashem, God) specified saying, "You shall not kill (Exodus 20:13)."

As a response, " (US) Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says the Obama administration "deeply, deeply" regrets the loss of innocent life apparently as the result of a U.S. bombing in Afghanistan and will undertake a full review of the incident;" the sentiment while it is not believed, it will not bring back the over whelming amount of Jewish and Muslim martyrs the US has created in the last hundred and nine years or even yesterday caused by their hands alone.

As the US media propaganda dictates their view’s in the media, one can always be assured that it is better not to listen or read; but look towards the real truth of the matter.-HRM Deborah

100 Days a Grim Reminder

Obama's 100 days of legacy a grim reminder of the past.

US's Various Shades of the Great Depression Poverty

US President Barack Obama is being compared to former US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was a known Nazi financier who not only bankrupted the US in his day to do so; but was a perpetrator with Adolf Hitler that created the Holocaust in Europe with one of the most notorious, barbaric horrendous cases of genocide to ever have occurred in history.

While Americans suffered the most severe poverty, during what was known as the Great Depression; where Roosevelt may have been a great orator towards a New Deal, in reality he cared less for the American welfare. But Nevertheless, Roosevelt bathed in what he considered the luxury persona of the White House; not unlike what the Nazi regime did when they confiscated the finest homes in Europe.

US President Obama looks at a portrait of former assassinated US President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas at 12:30 p.m.(CST), on 22 November 1963; which has been considered by many Americans, as the greatest US governmental (internal) conspiracy in American history.

In 1991, director and producer Oliver Stone made a movie called, "JFK;"apparently with this conspiracy premise, in mind.

Around 600 troops attended the US President's address in Baghdad, Iraq; as the Iraqi genocide within the country continues.
US President Obama greets California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (who's family where Austrian Nazi's during WW2) and his wife Maria Shriver before the Governor's Dinner.

Obama Toots His Own Horn

Let’s not forget so soon, of Obama’s over zealousness towards tooting his own horn as far as every facet of the media goes and his public persona; his brashness is most unbecoming.

A Silhouette in Iridescent Motion

A duck glides in iridescent motion under a bridge in Lazienki park in Warsaw, Poland; on 28 April 2009.

As to that which was, is finding new life in Poland; since the onslaught of that which ocurred from the Holocaust.-HRM Deborah

Bush Wants a Fight

Column

29 August 2007

By Francis Matthew

The United States appears determined to have a serious confrontation with Iran, and on Tuesday this week, President George W. Bush dramatically raised the tension between the two states with an extraordinary speech warning of a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East if Iran gets nuclear weapons. He also, more chillingly, prepared the way for possible military action by announcing that he had "authorised our military commanders in Iraq to confront Tehran's murderous activities".

While it might be that this hardening of Bush's position is part of a larger plan designed to force Iran to back down from confrontation, this seems unlikely. The rhetoric that Bush used indicated how he welcomes the opportunity to enforce his views on Iran. It was horribly reminiscent of the kind of language he used about Saddam Hussain's Iraq before the invasion.

There is no sign of any readiness to compromise with Bush's demands from the Iranian side. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been determined to go his own way for months, and he has the backing of his supporters. Ahmadinejad is a former member of the Revolutionary Guards, and although he is the most prominent former guardsman in politics, there are others in parliament, and in many other spheres including business and government service. They form an informal network of people who are determinedly conservative and ready for confrontation. The present government's weakness is its economic performance and confrontation over a matter of national pride suits the government's policies, as well as acting as a popular distraction from Iran deep economic woes.

However likely a military confrontation might be, it is not likely to last long. The United States would not want to get itself stuck in a long drawn out conflict, on top of its existing commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is far more likely to use only air strikes to hit sites that it thinks contain Iran's nuclear operations. Such strikes might well invite retaliation from Iran, causing continuing incidents. But Iran might well seek to portray itself as the aggrieved party, and ask for the international community's sympathy and support, particularly since the United Nations will not support Bush given the recent breakthrough with the deal the IAEA has planned with Iran, and Bush is not likely to have any substantial allies in his adventure in Iran.

After Iraq it is hard for any country to believe the Bush administration's claims or share its aims in the Middle East.

Nuclear work

Whether any action from Bush's administration stops or delays Iran's nuclear programme, Iran is likely to continue nuclear work in some form or other. Nuclear technology has spread through the world with 31 countries running large nuclear power stations, according to a report in the Economist, and at least 15 others have said that they need nuclear power capability. Not all these states want nuclear weapons but if there is a major reactor, then it is possible to enrich the available material and develop a weapons programme. In Iran's case, what is driving Bush is the knowledge that conventional deterrence will not work well in containing any future Iranian military nuclear capability.

In an interesting paper from the Washington Institute, titled Deterring the Ayatollahs, Michael Eisenstadt argues with other authors that it would be hard to almost impossible to enforce effective deterrence on a nuclear Iran.

While supporting the present idea of sanctions, and hoping that the leadership in Iran wants to avoid isolation, the paper does not really offer much hope of success for a diplomatic solution. But if Iran got nuclear weapons, it does not foresee a very effective deterrence programme, since factional control of weapons would weaken the institutional fear of retaliation which is the heart of any deterrence programme. In addition, the United States would probably not have much international support for long term sanctions, and it is much weakened in the region after its failures in Iraq.

If confrontation will not succeed, and long term deterrence will not work, it is necessary to adopt a different route and work to mutually recognise what any state's legitimate requirements are and agree them.

The US has been happy to do deals and work with several new nuclear nations, including India, Pakistan and North Korea. It should extend the same logic to its relationship with Iran.