BAWUMIA: Our Pollings Went On Jamboree

Mahamoud Bawumia, NPP Vice Presidential Candidate

The Supreme Court lighted up yesterday when the principal witness of the New Patriotic Party admitted that their polling agents at the 2012 December Elections did not go to the polling stations to do what was expected of them under the electoral regulations. 

 

Under cross examination from Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata, lead Counsel for the NDC, Dr. Bawumia  repeated his earlier claim that the NPP polling agents were mere “exalted observers” who were only there to witness that there had been voting at the polling station.

This brought Mr. Tsikata to his feet who asked Dr. Bawumia to read the relevant sections of the C.I. 75 on the role of polling agents  The relevant sections stated that an essential role of the party agent  at the polling station was to  detect  “impersonation and multiple voting and certify that the poll was conducted in accordance with the laws and regulations governing the conduct of elections”.

Dr. Bawumia however maintained that those were not what the NPP polling agents  were supposed to do. According to Dr. Bawumia, they were only supposed to see that voting had taken place. This meant, in effect, that  if an NPP polling agent signed a pink sheet, it only showed that the agent was present. It did not mean that he/she agreed with the voting process that had gone on. On election day, therefore, the NPP expected its polling agents to be on a mere walkabout around the polling stations.

Dr. Mahamadou Bawumia is representing Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, the New Patriotic Party's (NPP) 2012 Presidential Candidate and the Party's National Chairman Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey who are challenging the results of the 2012 presidential elections announced by the Electoral Commissioner in December 2012. 

Tsatsu Tsikata leaves court

Initially Nana Akufo Addo and the NPP had claimed that the Electoral Commission had connived with the NDC to steal the Presidential vote for John Dramani Mahama. After several press conference in which they insisted that there had been widespread fraud, what they actually sent to court was not about fraud and stealing of votes, but about what they now call statutory violations and irregularities. 

Before Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata began his cross-examination, Counsel for the petitioners had tried to prevent him from the cross-examination. Dr. Bawumia's lawyers had stated that because the President (1st. Respondent) and the NDC (3rd. Respondent) share a common purpose and had presented one affidavit, Mr. Tsikata should not be given a chance to cross-examine Dr. Bawumia. However the court over-ruled the objection . Soon after that, Counsel for the petitioners began to interrupt Mr. Tsikata whenever he raised his voice to ask a question.

At some stage, Mr. Tsikata had to ask the judges to ask Dr. Bawumia's Counsel whether he wanted to join Dr. Bawumia in the witness box. This was a response to the way in which Mr. Addison (Counsel) was interjecting.

The case continue today.  

Editorial

OUR RIGHTS NOT PRIVILEGES

The Ghana Police Service is claiming that it has banned demonstrations until further notice, to enable it provide stand-by personnel for the Supreme Court hearings regarding the NPP election petition.

We wonder why the Police think that it is within their right to grant or ban demonstrations in this country. They have no such right and citizens of Ghana have the right to treat such a claim with the contempt it deserves. 

It is only the President, acting on the advice of the Council State who can declare a state of emergency and suspend certain rights and freedoms.  Do they know that the Public Order Act covers processions as well, including those by churches and other floats? 

Someone in the Police service wants to use the events at the Supreme Court to deny certain targeted groups of their human rights. They should admit this and stop ridiculing themselves by hiding under the cloak of Supreme Court hearings. This is shameful. Are they banning demonstrations in Takoradi, Kumasi and Ho although the Supreme Court is not sitting there?

It is when certain people want to court favour from the Government that they engage in such antics. DCOP Akrofi Asiedu did the same when, he took delight in “chaaaarging” on CJA demonstrations. Today, where is he?

Those in the Police Administration who think they should play such pranks must be ashamed of themselves. They must know that we are not in a military regime.  The President must call them to order before officers hoping to court his attention, do things that would, in the end, tarnish his own reputation. 

As for those who are hailing the police today for their decision, we hope they would continue to praise the police, If they go into opposition one day and the police ban their demonstrations even without going to court.

African political parties meet in Sudan

 

Political parties meet in Africa

Representatives of 35 African political parties have met in the Sudanese capital Khartoum to establish a joint forum meant to increase unity among the African nations.

"I suggest this meeting will be one of the basic steps to complete the unity of Africa," Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir said on Saturday during his opening speech to the first conference of the Council of the African Political Parties

Bashir stated that despite the African continent's rich history and its population of over one billion it does not have proportionate representation at international forums.

"This meeting wants to unite the African political parties. We want to create a political body for all the parties," said Nafie Ali Nafie, a Sudanese government official.

He said that only those parties, which have representatives in their parliaments, were invited to the conference.

A Zambian delegate said the two-day conference was organized and planned by Sudan's ruling National Congress Party.

African Union Commissioner for Political Affairs Aisha Abdullahi attended the opening session.

Africa: Is Africa About to Lose the Right to Her Seeds?

Map of Africa

By Glenn Ashton

In Africa around 80% of seed comes from local and community saved seed resources. This seed is adapted to local conditions. It forms an integral part of community food security and agricultural integrity. This entire traditional system is now under threat.

A broad front of commercial interests, aided and abetted by the World Bank, the American Seed Association and government agencies, along with front groups, academics and so-called philanthropists, are endeavouring to alienate this crucial resource.

The international seed industry, owned by massive multinational pesticide companies involved in promoting hybrid and genetically modified (GM) seed, is both a primary beneficiary and protagonist of this thrust. While the motivation is ostensibly to assist the development of African agriculture, the impacts will be widespread and dire.

Simply put, the proposal is to create a harmonised system of control around the presently fragmented African seed trade regime and create a system based on what is projected as modern best practice.

This includes uniform adherence to the strict 1991 Act of the International Union for the Protection of Plant Varieties (UPOV), across the board, for Africa. Because of the stringency of UPOV, the real impact of this will be the loss of control of the seed supply by indigenous small farmers. The consequences for food production and social cohesion across the continent will be dire.

Once locally adapted seed varieties are lost, dependence on outside seed suppliers will rapidly become unaffordable. The implications will reverberate far beyond food production.
Indebted farmers are at direct risk of losing land tenure. On the one hand this causes accelerating urbanisation and social dislocation. On the other, good agricultural land is appropriated by large conglomerates. There is already a massive thrust by nations and corporations to gain land tenure in fertile tropical African agricultural zones.
The impetus behind this change in the seed regime has been building for some time. Consolidation within the powerful South African seed industry - the biggest in Africa - was recently finalised.

The South African competition appeal court permitted the sale of the last remaining large South African seed company, Pannar, to the US multinational Pioneer, a subsidiary of DuPont. Pannar has well established African networks.

This merger firmly shifts control of South Africa's extremely valuable seed industry into the hands of the world's two largest, US owned seed companies, now ideally placed to use South Africa as a bridgehead into Africa.

More ominously, it effectively removes the ready possibility of further evolution of competition in the industry. This has serious implications for indigenous seed trading and seed saving networks.

The rationale of the seed industry is apparently simple: if there is not a sufficiently robust mechanism to protect their intellectual property, their primary income stream is at risk.
On the other hand development organisations like the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) swear that new seed being developed for Africa will be freely shared for the benefit of smallholder farmers. There is clearly a serious disjuncture between what is said and what is happening.

These massive seed corporations bring the lessons learned in South America to Africa. There, the growth of the soya industry, initially in Argentina and more recently in Brazil, occurred with no attempt to control the spread of GM seed by the owners of the intellectual property.

 In South America this was herbicide-resistant GM soya, patented by Monsanto. In fact its spread was covertly encouraged. This non-hybrid seed was therefore saved, re-used and traded amongst growers in the region, first in Argentina, later into Brazil and Paraguay - so called 'Maradonna' seed.

Yet once the soy industry became established, Monsanto reacted aggressively and claimed royalties on all the soy grown throughout the region, claiming right to its patented intellectual property.

It used various means, such as appropriating percentage of sales on delivery or demanding that overseas purchasers pay a direct royalty, even though its patents were not recognised in Argentina.

Similar attempts in Brazil were overturned in the courts with Monsanto instructed to return billions of dollars to farmers. It is presently attempting to circumvent the ruling by entering individual agreements with farmers. Yet the South American standoff between powerful farmers unions and the seed giants continues.

The seed industry does not wish a similar situation to develop in Africa. Hence the insistence that African seed laws are upgraded to the most restrictive, first world legislation, supported by the World Bank, World Trade Organisation and the International Intellectual Property Office, WIPO. What is occurring is a de facto case of neo-liberal enclosure of the foundation of agricultural productivity in Africa.

African farmers have long recognised this threat. Back in 1997 the Organisation of African Unity initiated a proposal to develop a "Model Legislation on the Protection of the Rights of Local Communities, Farmers and Breeders and for the Regulation of Access to Biological Resources," known as the African model law. This was endorsed by the African Union in 2000.

While the African model law recognises plant breeders' rights, these rights are limited and patents on seeds, such as are allowed on GM seeds under UPOV and WIPO regimes, are excluded. This approach is recognised and permitted under WTO exceptions under the sui generis rule. This principle has been adopted into Indian seed laws, where similar concerns exist.

A substantial number of broad indigenous farmers networks throughout Africa have condemned the draft protocol to accept the ratification of UPOV. Most SADC nations have already agreed in principle to accept the provisions of International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources on Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA), which enables far more flexibility and participation in seed transactions than the restrictive proposals of UPOV, yet this agreement too is threatened.

This matter appears to be coming to a head. Several quasi-'indigenous' seed organisations such as the African Seed Trade Association (AFSTA) and Commodity Trade in Eastern and Southern Africa (ACTESA), funded by USAID, have, without due consultation with representative farmers groups in these areas, pushed for the ratification of UPOV 1991. On the other hand properly mandated farmers' networks demand that national consultations be held to discuss and analyse these proposals.

What is at play here is a direct conflict between peasant farmers networks and the neo-colonial attempt to subvert African agriculture by restrictive, first world regulation. The Southern African model is being repeated in East and West Africa, through similar comprador networks.

What will happen should UPOV be broadly adopted? As soon as indigenous seed becomes contaminated by patent protected seed varieties, all rights to share and trade that seed will be lost, forever.

The irony of this is profound, as the very germplasm, which Monsanto and Pioneer rely on is the result of thousands of years of peasant breeding that remains categorically unrecognised. What is good for the goose is clearly not good for the gander. The end result will only see one winner, which will certainly not be indigenous African farmers.

If there was ever a time for the vocal proponents for African unity and values to step forward, it is now. Should they fail, African leadership will be harshly judged for enabling the next phase of neo-colonialism to unfold unopposed.

Venezuela’s Capriles fails to prove fraud

Venezuela opposition candidate Henrique Capriles

Venezuela’s National Electoral Council says opposition leader Henrique Capriles has failed to present compelling proof that there were irregularities during the country’s presidential election of April 14.

In a televised national broadcast on Saturday, Tibisay Lucena, the president of the National Electoral Council dismissed the opposition’s various allegations of voting irregularities.

“We have always insisted that Capriles had the right to challenge the process,” Lucena stated, adding, “But it is also his obligation to present proof.”

Since Nicolas Maduro was announced the winner of the presidential election, the council has stressed that an “expanded” audit would not change the results.

“It has been manipulated to generate false expectations about the process, including making it look like the consequence of the wider audit could affect the election results,” Lucena said.

Capriles has said he will challenge the election results. However, he has admitted that the legal challenge would face a difficult path through the country’s courts.

Also on Saturday, the federal prosecutor’s office formally charged Timothy Tracy, an American, with paying political opponents in Venezuela to attend violent post-election protests, which left nine people dead and over 60 others injured.

Prosecutors also arrested retired Venezuelan Brigadier General Antonio Rivero, who is now a senior official with an opposition party, after a recording was found in one of Tracy’s bags, which allegedly shows him advising rioters during clashes with police in the capital of Caracas a day after the election.

Maduro won the presidential election with 50.7 percent of the vote against 49.1 percent for Capriles, with a difference of 235,000 ballots.

On March 8, Maduro became Venezuela’s acting president, following the death of late President Hugo Chavez, who lost a two-year-long battle with cancer on March 5. Maduro has promised to continue the socialist policies of the former leader. 

CIA Film maker arrested in Venezuela

John Panneta, Hagel, Brennan and Hussein Obama

John Brennan, CIA Boss

US says it is not making any effort to destabilize the Venezuelan government after Caracas arrested an American filmmaker accused of fomenting post-election violence in the South American nation on behalf of the US government. 

According to US State Department spokesman, Patrick Ventrell, on Friday, “The US continues to categorically reject any allegations of US government efforts to destabilize the Venezuelan government or to harm anyone in Venezuela.”

On April 25, Venezuela arrested the 35-year-old US filmmaker identified as Timothy Tracy.

Following the arrest, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro issued a statement saying, “I have personally ordered Timothy Tracy's arrest on suspicion of creating violence in the cities of this country.”

Referring to the arrest of the US citizen in Venezuela, Ventrell said, “We are aware of the arrest of a US citizen in Caracas.... Because of privacy considerations, we are unable to comment on the specific case further at this time.”

This is while, the Venezuelan Interior Ministry says the American filmmaker works for US intelligence.

Venezuela's Interior and Justice Minister Miguel Rodriguez has said in a statement that Timothy Tracy “belongs to some intelligence organization,” since “he is trained and he knows how to infiltrate, and how to handle sources and security information.”

Tracy is accused of paying political opponents in Venezuela to attend in violent street protests which have left at least seven people dead and over 60 others injured after Maduro's election win.

Maduro was declared the winner of Venezuela’s presidential election on April 14. He won 50.7 percent of the vote against 49.1 percent for the opposition candidate, Henrique Capriles, with a difference of 235,000 ballots.

On March 8, Maduro became Venezuela’s acting president, following the death of late President Hugo Chavez, who lost a two-year-long battle with cancer on March 5. Maduro has promised to continue the socialist policies of the former leader. 

Russia and Cuba together forever

Cuban President Raul Castro

 By Anastasia Garina

Russia and Cuba are preparing a joint energy project. Russia will provide a loan of 1.2 billion euros and help Cuba modernize four units of thermal power plants. Despite significant investments, Russia hopes to ultimately benefit from the project. The need to maintain the equipment will help to strengthen the long-term relations between the two countries.

The preliminary agreement was reached during a February visit to Cuba of Prime Minister of Russia Dmitry Medvedev. It was then decided to place in Cuba four units with a total capacity of 800 MW, according to Izvestia. 

The likely implementer of the project is "Inter RAO" - a Russian energy company with a wide range of activities. "Inter RAO" separated from RAO "UES of Russia" some time ago, and is engaged in the production and marketing of energy, international energy trading, engineering, design and construction of power facilities. In addition, the company controls a number of hydro and thermal power plants and energy companies abroad.

"Inter RAO" will install four combined power generating units with the capacity of 200 MW each in the cities of Mariel and Santa Cruz del Norte, but in fact it is a simple upgrade of the existing thermal power plants in Cuba. The company will not be building anything from scratch. Due to the scale and high cost of the project it will still be discussed over the next 18 months. 

Signing of the contract is scheduled for late 2014 - early 2015. The planned commencement of construction has not been reported. Representatives of "Inter RAO" confirm that the company is determined to implement the project. However, given that "Inter RAO" will not be investing its own funds, its determination in the absence of a feasibility study is easy to explain.

The power units installed by "Inter RAO" will run on Cuban and Qatari liquefied petroleum gas. This will be a novelty for Cuba because so far the country has been using only its own fuel to serve its thermal power plants.

The energy will be sold by a joint Russian-Cuban company. This will be an additional guarantee for the Russian side. However, in addition to a financial interest the Russian Federation also has a political interest, because at the moment Russia is interested in maintaining the existing and restoring lost connections that have been developed during the Soviet period.

"I have not seen the contractual part and do not know on what terms we are lending to Cuba, but I think that it is unlikely to be a gift," chairman of the State Duma Committee on Energy Ivan Grachev told Pravda.Ru. "Most likely, this is a credit decision. Can it be effective and provide a pay back? In my opinion - yes, because the named price (0.8 MW $1.2 billion) is a very good price. On average Russian power units are built at twice this price. This means this is a good project, and construction will likely be without much trouble, without much theft. 

Consequently, there are good chances of a good return on it." 

Ivan Grachev also noted that from a strategic point of view, in any case, Russia is and will be in the future a major supplier of electricity, and under a good scenario, of power equipment for the world. He assured that he is convinced that not only oil and gas but also electricity should be exported. "For example, we will deliver it across Asia, this market will expand," said Grachev. 

"It is clear that it would be better if it is produced at Russian facilities. Accordingly, if this order assumes (and I think it does) that the equipment is made by Russian plants, it is a strategically correct decision. Of course, I would support it. "

To date, Russia has been mainly supporting nuclear energy projects overseas. This support is successful, and the country is one of the world leaders in the field of nuclear energy. Russia has virtually no major energy projects abroad in the field of thermal or hydroelectric power.

By Sergei Vasilenkov

USA: Diplomacy without missiles worthless

A US Missile Defence System

Rumors about a possible U.S. attack on Iran have been circulating for a long time. Now it looks like they are starting to become reality. The United States is arming its allies in the Middle East, giving a clear message to the Iranian authorities about the impending confrontation. Will there be a war? What are its true causes? Who benefits from it and what are the possible consequences? Today these questions are relevant for the entire world.

The Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel called the expected arming of the U.S. allies in the Middle East a "very clear" signal to Iran demonstrating the possibility of using military force to eliminate the nuclear threat. Before Hagel's Middle East tour, media reported on contracts worth $10 billion providing for sale to Israel of refueling aircraft KC-135, military convertiplanes V-22 Osprey, as well as missiles and radar equipment installed on the aircraft. The United Arab Emirates will be supplied with F-16 fighters and missiles to them. The U.S. is to sell same rocket to Saudi Arabia that previously procured the American fighters.

"This is a very clear message to Iran," said Hagel in Israel on the first leg of his trip to the Middle East region. He added that the use of military force should be the last resort to contain Iran in its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, and now it is time for economic sanctions and diplomacy. The expected future arms contracts, according to Hagel, should, first of all, enhance the military might of Israel. He added that the United States recognized Israel's right to choose which way to protect themselves from Iran. Israeli authorities have repeatedly stated the ineffectiveness of international diplomacy, urging negotiations to add a threat of force. Also, they do not rule out that they may self-initiate military action against Iran.

Earlier, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution stating that Washington would fully support Israel in the event that the country decides to attack Iran itself, or is subjected to aggression. According to the resolution, the U.S. government will provide Israel with diplomatic, military and economic aid. A co-author of the document, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, said that the U.S. did not want another military conflict in the world, but at the same time was not going to put up with Iran's nuclear status.

The United States is not only arming its allies, but is improving its own weapons. Recently, it was reported that the United States intended to install a new laser weapon on its warships that can burn targets like a blowtorch. They want to intimidate Iran and other "aggressive" countries. Next year the first combat solid-state laser will be installed on an American warship in the Persian Gulf. It was originally planned for 2016, but thanks to the advances in weapons, scientists have a real opportunity to do it earlier.

We are talking about real combat use of directed energy weapons. The new combat laser can perform a variety of tasks from "blinding" the enemy's sensor devices and impacting people to destructing drones and attacking boats. At this time these weapons are not capable of striking supersonic fighters and missiles, but the development continues, and it is only a matter of time. The main advantages of the new laser include a nearly endless "warhead" (the gun is running as long as the ship produces energy) and low price (one shot will cost about one dollar). Such equipment may cause serious damage to the Iranian army if it comes to a military operation.

According to Barack Obama, in theory Iran may complete the development of nuclear weapons in a year, but Washington is not going to let it happen. The President does not rule out the probability of a military operation. Obama made these statements before his visit to Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long called for a preemptive strike on Iran. Mr. Netanyahu is convinced that only an American military strike would stop further development of Iran's nuclear program. Yet, Washington is not in a hurry to attack.

 Washington thinks that military action against Iran would come at too high of a price. The West is waiting for the results of the summer presidential elections in Tehran to clearly understand who they would have to deal with in the coming years. However, no Iranian leader is going to make concessions to the "six" negotiators, as the issue of the nuclear program in Iran has developed a complete consensus.

The main reason for the United States to attack Iran is Iran's nuclear program. However, analysts are well aware that the development of nuclear weapons is just an excuse. The U.S. can come up with other reasons such as the Kurdish issue or the violation of human rights. The latter excuse has become universal for the United States. But the main purpose of the U.S. authorities in Iran is not a nuclear program. 

The United States wants to build a new Greater Middle East in the context of the policy of controlled chaos. The geo-economic ambitions of Washington are also important. The main partners of the Americans in the region, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, want to block Iran's oil vein. This would force Europe to purchase energy just from them. In addition, there are ideological and religious issues such as Shia Iran and the Sunni Arab world, the ideology of pan-Arabism and pan-Iranism.

Throughout the U.S. history, a war has been a major sobering factor for its economy. But what would be the consequences of a war against Iran for the Americans? Iran is not Syria, Libya, or Iraq. The Islamic Republic of Iran is a country with a fundamental ideology that unites the entire nation. Tehran has one of the most powerful and developed armies in the world that can not only repel enemy attacks, but inflict some blows whose outcome is difficult to predict. In addition, Iran controls Hezbollah and Hamas that, if necessary, can take the war to the United States and Europe. If a war breaks out, the entire Muslim world will see a sharp increase in anti-American sentiment. New attacks on the Americans will be inevitable.

As for key allies of Iran, everyone understands that protecting Iran, China and Russia will defend their own interests. Russia would face the issue of geopolitical security. A large-scale war could destabilize the situation in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Large number of Iranian refugees would primarily flow to Russia, which can cause internal destabilization.

For China, the issue of energy security is of primary importance. Beijing is a major exporter of oil and gas from Iran. Members of the upper echelons of the government and high-ranking military have repeatedly claimed that China was not going to remain neutral in the event of a military aggression against Iran.

The U.S. is clearly aware of such consequences. For example, 30 American generals, diplomats and intelligence officers have compiled a report stating that a large-scale military operation would weaken the position of the local Iranian government, but would not cause a change of government. Given the size of Iran, a high level of nationalism and size of its population, such an operation would require significant resources (over $4 trillion). This is more than the sum spent in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last ten years. It is obvious that there are many sensible reasons to save albeit shaky, but peace in the region. Time will tell whether the desire of the U.S. to establish total control over the Middle East would outweigh common sense.

Shame on Western deception!

David Cameron, UK Prime Minister

By Jim W. Dean'

I read with astonishment  how the British government has debased itself in front of the whole world by refusing to allow Shell Oil Company to settle its USD 2 billion in accounts payable to Iran. The last I heard, Britain was not at war with Iran, nor has Iran attacked British interests anywhere.

The story continues on into the stratosphere of craziness when Shell tried to pay the debt in medical supplies which again, the British regime blocked. Shell then tried to arrange food shipments through Cargill, obviously intended to benefit the Iranian people who are not supposed to be under sanctions, and that too was blocked.

That a Western country would prevent medical and food supplies entering a country it is not at war with, as payment for an agreed account, I never imagined I would see the day. Shame on the British government,and all those involved in staining their national honor. I can hear Tony Blair saying now, 'I told you I wasn't so bad.’

The EU sanctions are going down in history as a perverse misuse of what was originally deemed to be targeted on anything that could be supportive of Iranian nuclear weapons development. This was done despite our joint intelligence report and the IAEA never finding evidence of any. We have Western countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons choosing to punish those who do not, on the grounds that they might have one... 'Someday.' That folks is a hustle.

What we have instead is sanctions fraud on steroids. Even Hillary Clinton said that goal was not to target the Iranian people, but she was lying through her teeth. Regime change has always been one of the key goals, the West's thinking that hard times in Iran would spur its people to overthrow their government. That fantasy has gone down in flames.

Now the Iranian people are being punished for supporting their government via Western economic warfare. As the Brits hunker down with major budget cuts and the growing unhappiness that is expected, they see Iran rebounding from the sanctions via its Manhattan Project style domestic production and infrastructure development, a Phoenix rising from the sanction ashes.

The last thing British elites want in return for bringing their country to a state of despair is to have to pay for their wicked deed.

Rank and file Brits can look east to Iran to see rank and file Iranians suffering also, but at the hands of the same Western elites. And when they see how Iran is reinventing itself the Brits might want to entertain some regime change themselves, the housecleaning kind, including all the Friends of Israel harlots.

Unbridled British fraud was in the news today with James McCormick bring found guilty of selling his fake bomb detector equipment to war torn countries like Iraq where countless victims died due to bombers cruising through the made in England phony machines. He is only facing an unjust eight year sentence. He should be executed for this horrendous crime.

But the British government, and the EU itself, is guilty of a larger fraud than Mr. McCormick. They backed a sanctions campaign for one stated purpose when they really had another in mind. This has been clearly revealed by their subsequent conduct of definition creep of the stated intentions.

Corporate media is also hiding the ulterior motives for the West's economic war against Iran and the region itself. As Iran emerges as a development catalyst for its surrounding countries, helping to bring millions out of poverty and hasten their development, that may be the nuclear bomb the West is most concerned about.

Those countries under their military and economic control, or vice versa, like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Qatar are openly engaged not only in repressing their people but terrorism in surrounding states, not only physical but economic terrorism.

If western banks were holding huge debts on Iranian infrastructure development, and if Iran was buying Western sovereign debt while neglecting its own people, then the West might be praising Iran as a wonderful model of Mid East development.

While the above countries have accomplished their development generally through foreign labor and expertise, Iran is doing it with domestic talent. This is a major reason why Iran has been targeted with the phony nuclear threat claims. If Iran had agreed to be a US proxy with American bases all over the country to use toward getting control of the Caucus oil and gas regions, Western elites would be singing praises of Iran to the high heavens and the Rothschild’s would have a summer palace there.

The terrorism against Iran has failed in its goal to incite Iran to retaliate, for example, by killing Israeli or Western nuclear scientists. But Iran's leaders knew that was exactly what the Western terrorists wanted to justify an attack upon them. They wanted to treat Iran like it was a large Gaza, but Iran did not fall for it, and I don't think they will.

All the Western threats of war, de-escalation and then beating the war drums again has created a Christmas all year long situation where they team up with the war crowd to rob Americans out of huge sums of critically needed recovery stimulation funding.

During the last gasoline price run-up of fifty cents a gallon, over ninety day period that took an extra one trillion dollars out of the US consumer economy and into the oil company pockets. They certainly want the war hyping to go on endlessly as it provides an easy way to help themselves to American pocket books.

Our in house oil experts tell us that in a world awash in oil and gas reserves with all the new discoveries that oil would be below USD 50 a barrel with no threat of war in the Mid East. That would make a lot of Big Oil people unhappy and they intend to see that never happens, including if some big terror attacks might be needed to stir things up.

But as time goes by the various publics are learning more about the historical causes and effects of international terrorism, that most of it has been run by Western governments. Gordon Duff at Veterans Today published a gem this week, an old Brzezinski interview in French from 1998, now scrubbed by Google, who we learn has been running its own intelligence operations.

Brzezinski drops the bomb that the Mujahedin was cranked up in Afghanistan six months before the Soviets went in, as an enticement to do so. It worked. Here are Ziggy's own words:

“Yes. According to the official version, the CIA’s support for the Mujahidin began in 1980, i.e. after the Soviet army’s invasion of Afghanistan on 24 December 1979. But the reality, which was kept secret until today, is completely different:
Actually it was on 3 July 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for the secret support of the opposition against the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And on the same day I wrote a note, in which I explained to the president that this support would in my opinion lead to a military intervention by the Soviets.”

During the Cold War judgments and actions like this were taken by all sides with little concern for collateral damage. But we can easily see the same dark forces at work during the post Cold War era where the major powers have stepped back from the nuclear brink.

Their peoples were much easier to control and fleece under the threat of an outside danger and they went looking quickly for a replacement for those good old days. A new kind of warfare had to be invented and deployed whose primary goals were the usual global financial ones...domination.

China filled in as the bogeyman for a while, and then terrorism got a second look as a dual tool. It could be a never ending threat, and then also grease the skids for restricting privacy and freedoms toward the police state that we know they intend for us all.

Muslim banking is another nuclear bomb that Western banking fears, and likewise big bartering operations which cut the banks out of the process and the need to hold lots of US dollar reserves to conduct business.

What we are seeing going on here folks is not the threat of a pre-emptive strike against a military threat, but an emerging economic one not in servitude to Western financial elites. And these folks are a more dangerous crowd now as they have their own armies and terror squads, all trained by the taxpayers' pocketbooks.

The Global elites don't want the sheepeople to have another option, and they plan to kill it before they do. We hope they will be unsuccessful. American Homeland Security knows the public will resist when the crunch comes. That is what the billion hollow point bullets and state of the 2700 state of the art armored vehicles are for here...to use against Americans, when that time comes.

American military intelligence has gone public with their belief that some of our major terror attacks were organized and carried out by our own politico-criminal elites here. This includes what happened in Boston when two bombs that could easily have been spotted by detection equipment in use for 20years were allowed to pass through.

They are very very angry...and so are we. As I have been telling people for almost ten years now, the War on Terror is a two front war. They...are here. And they, are us.