Qur'an – Bible.

* Religion * Politics * News Networks * Mainstream Media Biased Reporting * Independent Analysis

Archive for the ‘Middle East’ Category

World Crisis

Posted by QB on April 20, 2011

There was hope that world be be better peaceful place with Barak Obama in White House but the truth is the world has more unrest than under Bush regime. US and its European allies are interferring in Libya, Syria with UN Security Council Resollution. The UN Security Council is under US, UK, France, China and Russia dictatorship where these countries will get whatever they want. These countries will try to implement the UN Resolution by force in Muslim countries ignoring all UN Security Council resolution against Isreal which is protected by US and its European allies.

US, France, UK are once again bombing Libya killing innocent civilians instead of providing protection. There are once again lies on mainstream media CNN, BBC promoting propaganda. RT is reporting the news which not many people watch. CNN reported that Gaddafi forces are now using cluster bombs on civilians which are banned. The cluster bombs and chemical weapons were used by US and Isreal on civilians in Fallujah.

Lebanon, 1978, 1982 and 2006Extensively used by Israel during the 1978 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the 1982-2000 occupation of Lebanon and in the 2006 Lebanon War.During the Israeli-Lebanese conflict in 1982, Israel used cluster munitions, many of them American-made, on targets in southern Lebanon. Israel also used cluster bombs in the 2006 Lebanon War.[10][11][12]Two types of cluster munitions were transferred to Israel from the U.S. The first was the CBU-58 which uses the BLU-63 bomblet. This cluster bomb is no longer in production. The second was the MK-20 Rockeye, produced by Honeywell Incorporated in Minneapolis. The CBU-58 was used by Israel in Lebanon in both 1978 and 1982.[10] The Israeli Defense company Israel Military Industries also manufactures the more up-to-date M-85 cluster bomb.Hezbollah fired Chinese-manufactured cluster munitions into Israel using 122-mm rocket launchers during the 2006 war, hitting Kiryat Motzkin, Nahariya, Karmiel, Maghar, and Safsufa. A total of 113 rockets and 4,407 submunitions were fired into Israel during the war. The rockets killed one person and injured twelve.[13]The United Nations and human rights groups have accused Israel of dropping as many as 4 million cluster bomblets onto targets in Lebanon during the 2006 Lebanon war.[14][15]”Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Dan Halutz plans to appoint a major general to investigate the use of cluster bombs — some of which were fired against his order — during the Lebanon war. Halutz ordered the IDF to use cluster bombs with extreme caution and not to fire them into populated areas. Nonetheless, it did so anyway, primarily using artillery batteries and the Multiple Launch System (MRLS). IDF artillery, MLRS and aircraft are thought to have delivered thousands of cluster bombs, containing a total of some 4 million bomblets during the war.”[15][16]Human Rights Watch said there was evidence that Israel had used cluster bombs very close to civilian areas and described them as “unacceptably inaccurate and unreliable weapons when used around civilians” and that “they should never be used in populated areas.”[17] Human Rights Watch has accused Israel of using cluster munitions in an attack on Bilda, a Lebanese village, on 19 July[18] which killed 1 civilian and injured 12, including seven children. The Israeli “army defended … the use of cluster munitions in its offensive with Lebanon, saying that using such munitions was ‘legal under international law’ and the army employed them ‘in accordance with international standards.'”[19] Foreign Ministry Spokesman Mark Regev added, “[I]f NATO countries stock these weapons and have used them in recent conflicts — in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq — the world has no reason to point a finger at Israel.”[20] FAizal…
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bomb
Siege, April 2004In response to the killing of the four US citizens, and intense political pressure, the US Marines commenced Operation Vigilant Resolve. They surrounded the city and attempted to capture the individuals responsible as well as others in the region who might have been involved in terrorist activities. One out of every two mosques in Fallujah were used to hide terrorists or weapons.[12] The Iraqi National Guard was supposed to work alongside with the US Marines in the operation, but on the dawn of the invasion they discarded their uniforms and deserted.[13] Under pressure from the Iraqi Governing Council, the US aborted its attempt to regain control of Fallujah. The US Marines suffered 40 deaths in the siege. Estimates of the number of Iraqi deaths (both terrorists and civilians) in the attack range from 271 (according to Iraqi Ministry of Health officials[14][15]) to 731 (according to Rafie al-Issawi, the head of the local hospital[16]).

The occupying force on April 9 allowed more than 70,000 women, children and elderly residents to leave the besieged city. On April 10, the US military declared a unilateral truce to allow for humanitarian supplies to enter Fallujah. US troops pulled back to the outskirts of the city. An Iraqi mediation team entered the city in an attempt to set up negotiations between US forces and local leaders, but as of April 12 had not been successful. Weapons were found hidden in some humanitarian supply trucks that were attempting to enter the city.[17] At least one US battalion had orders to shoot any male of military age on the streets after dark, armed or not.[18] Some press reports contained anecdotal accounts from Iraqi residents of US snipers allegedly firing on unarmed civilians.[19][20] In violation of the Geneva Convention, the city’s main hospital was closed by Marines, negating its use, and a US sniper was placed on top of the hospital’s water tower.[21]

There were also reports of the use of cluster bombs by US forces in Fallujah during this time, including reports from Al Jazeera on April 9 and 15, which US State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher later described as “totally false.”[22] Similar reports came from several other sources, including Associated Press, who reported on 26 April 2004: “A spokesman for an Iraqi delegation from the violence-gripped city of Fallujah on Monday accused U.S. troops of using internationally banned cluster bombs against the city and said they had asked the United Nations to mediate the conflict. Mohammed Tareq, a spokesman for the governing council of Fallujah and a member of the four-person delegation, said U.S. military snipers were also responsible for the deaths of many children, women and elderly people.” And the Economic Press Review reported on 17 April 2004: “American F-16 warplanes are blitzing the Al-Julan residential area in Al Fallujah 50 kilometers west from Baghdad with cluster bombs.”

The ceasefire followed a wave of insurgency activity across southern Iraq, which included the capture of two US soldiers, seven employees of US military contractor Kellogg, Brown and Root, and more than 50 other workers in Iraq. Several of the prisoners were released within days of their capture, while the majority were executed.

The US forces ostensibly sought to negotiate a settlement but promised to restart its offensive to retake the city if one was not reached. Military commanders said their goal in the siege was to capture those responsible for the numerous deaths of US and Iraqi security personnel. As the siege continued, insurgents conducted hit-and-run attacks on US Marine positions. The Marines had announced a unilateral ceasefire.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah_during_the_Iraq_War

UK now are sending Military personnels to Bin Ghazi and this will escalate the war making Libya another Iraq and will give US another opportunity to invade and occupy Libya.

Barak Obama is the biggest disappointment since he become President. The US economy is in big trouble, US dollar is losing against all major currencies, the big deficit and he is raising the military budget. Osama Bin Laden looks like winning the war by making US financially bankrupt.

This is interesting that US is providing support to Al Qaeda in Libya.

Source : Telegraph UK

I am not fan of Gadaffi but if he lost the power than Libya will be in hands of fundamentalists like Iraq’s Shia government. Saddam Hussein was better than the currect Iraq Shia regime.

There are also reports that US is providing support to Syrians to over throw Bashar Assad.

Bahrain is another story where US is supporting the government because they believe that the uprising there will benefit Iran. US also don’t want to lose support of Saudis who does not want Shias uprising to succeed.

What will be the end result? More wars more occupation, more killings of civilians. The financial crisis will make US just like another third world country.

All this democracy and librarting countries are US propaganda which will destabilze Libya, Syria, Bahrain and Yemen.

The UN needs reforms by eleminating UN Security council dictatorship who has the power to veto any resolution which is against their interests. The world affairs must be decided by UN General Council vote where all the countries have the same previliges not the dictatorship of US, UK, France, China, Russia.

Posted in EU/Europe, Libya, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | Leave a Comment »

Change has come to America!

Posted by QB on December 20, 2008

Barack Obama used this phrase on election night after winning the election. I too believed that that the change has really come into American politics until  Barack Obama announced his cabinet which does not give me any hope of change with his administration. Hillary Clinton does not believe in diplomacy is the Secretary of State. She strongly believe that there should be no negotiations with Iran, she believes that Iran must be obliterated, she supports trade embargo on Cuba, she supports are Israel aggression unconditionally, she voted for Iraq invasion. How she could be Secretary of State for change?

Robert Gates still Secretary of Defence. Barack Obama election promise was to end Iraq war immediately is now saying that he will listen to the advice of Generals on Iraq, this is the same policy from last eight years adopted by Bush regime. This is not the change Americans voted for.

Barack Obama also promised to bring social reforms for poor and middle class which he can’t do before inauguration, so that still is some hope for change in America.

Posted in Barack Obama, Barak Obama, George W. Bush, Iran, Iraq, Middle East, Politics, US Politics | 19 Comments »

Who do you want to win US Presidential election?

Posted by QB on September 25, 2008

The US presidential election effect the whole world. The wrong candidate has already bring down the world economy and started unending wars. McCain if get elected the world will be worst place to live. Obama has the plan to change the foreign policy and do something about the economy.McCain, God forbid in White House, the world will see worst situation than Bush regime has already brought by fighting “war on terror”, spending trillion of dollars on wars leaving the poor people suffering in his own country.

Give your opinion.

Posted in Afghanistan, Asia, Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Iran, Iraq, Middle East, Pakistan, Politics, Russia, Venezuela | 3 Comments »

US Security Agreement Not So Popular.

Posted by QB on June 13, 2008

The Bush regime is trying to sign long term security agreement with Iraqi government to provide legal cover to their occupation as the UN authorization will expire by the end of this year. The US government is facing tough resistance from Iraqi law makers to sign any such deal.

BAGHDAD, Iraq — New U.S. proposals have failed to overcome Iraqi opposition to a proposed security pact, two Iraqi lawmakers said Thursday, casting doubt that an agreement can be reached before this fall’s U.S. presidential election.

The security agreement would provide a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the U.N. mandate expires at the end of this year. U.S. negotiators offered new proposals this week after Iraqi lawmakers expressed outrage over the direction of the negotiations, claiming that accepting the U.S. position would cement American military, political and economic domination of this country.

Iman al-Asadi, a Shiite member of the parliamentary committee on legal affairs, said the latest U.S. version “wasn’t satisfactory, to say the least.” Asadi said her committee had recommended to Iraq’s negotiators that they reject the latest draft, the fourth since the talks began in March.

Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman confirmed Asadi’s comments, adding that “we will not sign” the current proposed agreement.

This is clear indication that Iraqis don’t want US military presence in their country, Bush regime and John McCain are the only ones who wanted to stay in Iraq for 100 years. Iraqi puppet Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki also met with Ahmadinejad last week who oppose US military presence in Iraq as they see threat to their own national security.

Barak Obama plan to withdraw troops within 16 months will be accepted by Iraqi government. Bush went into Iraq killed million Iraqi innocent civilian, destroyed their cities, towns, villages is facing tough resistance from the same people who he liberated. Iraqis want all the occupation troops out of their country.

US if try to force an agreement that will result in the tough resistance from Shias and maybe from Sunnis who are now on US military payroll.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Bush, Iran, Iraq, John McCain, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | 3 Comments »

Bush War Promotion European Tour.

Posted by QB on June 11, 2008

Bush is on his farewell European tour promoting another war this time with Iran. Bush issued warning to Iran to resolve the nuclear issue with diplomacy adding the threat that all the options are on the table. It look like that he might bomb few Iranian sites before the elections evaluate Iranian military strength. Bush know that this will benefit John McCain who does not have any chances of getting elected in November. Bush also know that Democrats does not have the courage to speak against his air strike on Iran because they don’t wanted to be called soft on national security. He will justify his air strikes to eliminate non existent Iranian nuclear weapons which are threat to Israel security and danger for US national security. Ehud Olmert visited White House recently and his Deputy Prime Minister wanted to attack Iran because they believe Iran nuclear program is real threat for Israel safety.

The majority of the US politicians will support his air strikes on Iranian sites getting strong support from Israel. Iranians must be very alert safe guarding their nuclear sites because the chances of getting destroyed by Bush madness.

Barak Obama can’t condemn Bush attack because of the coming elections.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Bush, Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, Presidential Race 2008, US Politics | 2 Comments »

Ehud Olmert dangerous intentions to save his political career.

Posted by QB on June 6, 2008

The Deputy Prime Minister is threatening Iran will be attack if they did not stop their nuclear program. Ehud Olmert also wanted to stop nuclear program by all means possible. This would be another mistake by this corrupt politician to save his political career like his decision to attack Lebanon. The Lebanon invasion, which could have been easily avoided was complete disaster for Israel. Ehud Olmert visited White House yesterday trying to get Bush blessing on Iran attack.

There are more disadvantages than any advantages looking at the present Middle East situation. Israel is engaged in peace talks with Syria with Turkey assistance will be stopped, Hezbollah start firing missiles across Israeli border, Syria will support Iran, Iraq situation will become more violent, Al Qaeda will get fresh reason to create hatred against Israel and USA.

Ehud Olmert is not in a position to comment any other mistake. He might survive the corruption charges but it will be impossible to hold on to power after another fail war.

Source : Israeli minister threatens Iran BBC News

Posted in Bush, Iran, Iran Nuclear Program, Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | Leave a Comment »

John McCain – Barak Obama foreign policy.

Posted by QB on May 20, 2008

This is what John McCain foreign policy adviser said on Situation Room talking to Wolf Blitzer. The interview was so confusing that it was hard for me to determine what he is saying. Lehman lies very well stick with majority of Americans who will believe his lies just like CNN BBC propaganda that Ahmadinejad wanted to destroy Israel. Wolf Blitzer is on Zionist mission to promote lies for ground work for Iran invasion. The same propaganda campaign which lead to Iraq invasion, lies lies lies. The truth is that Al Qaeda and Iran can’t be allies because of their sectarian differences. Lehman lies will spread among the ignorant voters as truth voting for this old man John McCain, who is not a straight talking maverick but a liar crocked politician.

John McCain and Barack Obama are clearly going after each other with increasing vigor when it comes to foreign policy, specifically policy towards Iran. Let’s talk about that and more. John Lehman is joining us. He’s one of the foreign policy advisers to John McCain, a former secretary of the navy, 9/11 commissioner.

JOHN LEHMAN, MCCAIN FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER: Thanks very much for coming in, Mr. Secretary.

Pleasure to be here.

BLITZER: All right. Here’s a clip of what Obama is saying about McCain and we’ll talk about it. Listen to this.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The reason Iran is so much more powerful now than it was a few years ago is because of the Bush/McCain policy of fighting an endless war in Iraq and refusing to pursue direct diplomacy with Iran. They’re the ones who have not dealt with Iran wisely.

BLITZER: All right. Pretty serious accusation from Barack Obama. You want to respond?

LEHMAN: Well, you know, I think he doesn’t understand what the nature of summitry is all about. You don’t go and meet with the head of state until you have something very clear to say. You’ve either got to have a carrot or a stick. We know what Iran’s intentions are. We know they’ve killed a lot of Americans in Beirut and Saudi Arabia and now in Iraq. They trained some of the 9/11 conspirators. They gave them free passage to al Qaeda. What are you going to say if you go to a summit with them? Are you going to say either you stop killing Americans and supporting jihad around the world or we’re going to do something to you? Or do you say, we’ll give you this concession if you please stop being mean to us? That’s a very naive point of view.

BLITZER: Let me ask you, when McCain says that his policies, Obama’s policies meeting with an Iranian leader without preconditions seriously deficient, deficient a strong word, what does he mean by that?

LEHMAN: I think he means that we’ve seen what happens when new presidents go without an agenda to meet with — with adversaries. Senator Obama used the example of President Kennedy meeting with Khrushchev. That was a catastrophe. All historians now see that was a huge mistake to go without an agenda, a clear agenda.

BLITZER: What Senator Obama says, excuse me for interrupting, he says there would be no preconditions at the actual summit meeting but there would be a lot of advance work, a lot of preparations going into the meeting. What’s wrong with that? Why not have the lower level preparations to make sure everybody knows what’s going on but then when you go in, there’s no commitment in advance for preconditions?

LEHMAN: Well, obviously there has got to be preparations. But the point is what deal are you going to make? Are you going to — are you going to just sit down and say, OK, I’m prepared, I know all the bad things you’ve done and can’t we just be friends?

BLITZER: The U.S. meets — the Bush administration has had several meetings with Iran going back to right after 9/11.

LEHMAN: Sure. And we would continue to have discussions and — and very intense communication. But to bring the president in to give the dignity of the presidential office to a meeting with an extremist like Ahmadinejad without a clear deal being pre-negotiated would be a huge mistake.

BLITZER: Would John McCain as president, Secretary Lehman, do anything differently toward Iran or, for that matter, the war in Iraq right now than what President Bush is doing?

LEHMAN: I think very definitely.

BLITZER: Give us a few examples. First of all, how would he deal differently with Iran than the way President Bush is dealing?

LEHMAN: First of all, you have to look at the history of this. We’ve been sitting by and watching Hezbollah supported by the government of Iran blow up our marines in Beirut.

BLITZER: That was back in ’83.

LEHMAN: Right. Then a few years later blow up our Air Force people in Saudi Arabia and then to give training to al Qaeda prior to 9/11 and now to be providing these weapons to kill Americans with these shape charges, providing them to enemies both Shiite and Sunni.

BLITZER: What would he be doing differently towards Iran if he were president as opposed to President Bush?

LEHMAN: Well, I think what you’d see is a much more comprehensive overview of how everything fits together. And not treat everything as episodic. He would certainly not allow Iran to get off Scott free. That doesn’t mean —

BLITZER: He would have a more robust military strategy against Iran than President Bush? Is that what you’re suggesting?

LEHMAN: He would have a fully integrated strategy in which the military options like blockade and other options short of an invasion or a bombing attack would be integrated with the diplomacy in a larger picture?

BLITZER: Isn’t that going to scare a lot of voters out there who think John McCain might be getting ready for another military confrontation with Iran right now?

LEHMAN: No. Because he’s made it clear he’s not advocating an attack on Iran. He’s advocating treating them with the full range of an integrated policy that takes into view exactly what the whole picture in the Middle East is. And not allow them to kill Americans without paying a price. That doesn’t necessarily mean a military attack at all. We have plenty of levers beyond that. And it would be a return to fully integrated foreign policy and national security policy, which we haven’t seen for 15 years.

BLITZER: All right. Secretary Lehman, thanks very much for coming in. Let’s continue this conversation down the road.
Source : CNN Situation Room

Lehman, McCain foreign policy adviser, tried to link Iran to Al Qaeda, linked Iran to 9/11 which are new baseless allegations. There is no proof of Iran was anyway involved in 9/11 attacks like Iraq had nothing to do with that attack. Iran is not training Al Qaeda. Lehman get away easily because Wolf Blitzer did accepted all his allegations without correcting him. Wolf Blitzer Lou Dobbs Aaron Brown Paula Zahn all promoted the Iraq invasion and it look like they want US to attack Iran. These SOBs wants the US troops out of Iraq which proved to be disaster don’t know that it will be the worst disaster for US military and economy if they open another war front.
The following is Barak Obama adviser transcript.

Joining us now to discuss this and more, Obama’s senior foreign policy adviser, the former Assistant Secretary of State, National Security Council official Dr. Susan Rice.

Thanks for coming in, Susan.

SUSAN RICE, OBAMA SENIOR FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER: Good to be with you, Wolf.

BLITZER: All right. I will play you a little clip of what McCain said today. And then we will discuss. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MCCAIN: Senator Obama has declared and repeatedly reaffirmed his intention to meet the president of Iran without any preconditions, likening it to meetings between former American presidents and the leaders of the Soviet Union. Such a statement betrays the depth of Senator Obama’s inexperience and reckless judgment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right.

I want you to respond, but remember, when — when Senator Obama made that suggestion at one of the debates, even Hillary Clinton said it was naive, not a good idea. Joe Biden disagreed. John Edwards did.

How does Senator Obama defend that decision to meet without preconditions with a leader like Ahmadinejad?

RICE: Well, first of all, he said he would meet with the appropriate Iranian leaders. He hasn’t named who that leader will be. It may in fact be that, by the middle next of year, Ahmadinejad is long gone. There will be elections in Iran.

BLITZER: So, let’s say there is a new leader.

(CROSSTALK)

RICE: But he said Iranian leaders.

BLITZER: But the words “without preconditions…”

RICE: Yes. Let’s talk about that.

The Bush administration and John McCain have for eight years taken the view that we should not deal directly with the Iranians unless and until they meet all of our conditions, meaning suspending their nuclear program. So, in effect, we want them to do everything that we would aim to achieve in negotiations…

BLITZER: But the precondition they put was for the direct dialogue over nuclear issues, they have to stop enriching uranium.

RICE: Right.

BLITZER: That’s the condition they put.

RICE: Before we will talk to them about their nuclear problem, they have to suspend their nuclear problem. That counterproductive precondition…

BLITZER: And, so, what would you do differently?

RICE: Is to talk to the Iranians.

BLITZER: At the highest level, president to president?

RICE: Can I…

BLITZER: Please.

RICE: Please. Thank you.

What Barack Obama has said is, with due preparation, after appropriate diplomatic contacts at lower levels, when it is appropriate time that serves our interests, he is willing to meet with Iranian leaders. He is not prepared to put preconditions on those meetings, like the Bush administration has, demanding that the Iranians do exactly what we seek to compel them to do before we even sit down.

That is naive. John McCain has backed a policy, Wolf, by the Bush administration that has made us less safe. It is Iran that is stronger today as a result of our invasion of Iraq and our failure to…

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Because I believe the question at that debate is, would you be willing to meet during your first year of your presidency without preconditions with leaders in Iran, or North Korea, or Venezuela, Syria, something along those lines.

RICE: He said he would be willing. It doesn’t mean that he will meet all of those leaders. It doesn’t mean he will meet them all in the first year. What he will do, Wolf, is end the foolish and dangerous Bush policy of assuming that by dealing with our adversaries, we’re giving them some gift. Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon all understood, with respect to the Soviet Union and communist China, that we can advance our interests through principled strong negotiations. It’s only in the Bush administration that…

BLITZER: So, let’s be precise, because what they criticize Barack Obama, not only John McCain, but others, for suggesting that he would meet without preconditions with Ahmadinejad, who only last week on Israel’s 60th anniversary called Israel a stinking corpse. The question that they ask is, what is Barack Obama going to talk with him about?

(CROSSTALK)

RICE: Well, first of all, as I said, it will be the appropriate Iranian leadership at the appropriate time, not necessarily Ahmadinejad.

Secondly, we will talk to them about the issues that we’re most concerned about, their nuclear program, their support for terrorism, the threat they pose to Israel, their nefarious actions in the region, including in Iraq.

The point is to use a combination of serious pressure and sanctions and engagement to see if we can move them to a better place. The Bush administration’s approach is to refuse to negotiate. And what has that left us with, Wolf? An Iran whose nuclear program is steaming full speed ahead, Iran who is supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, who are stronger in the region, Iran who is more influential in Iraq than it’s ever been.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Here’s the other criticism that they level at — this kind of summit meeting between a president of the United States and a leader of Iran would only add to the prestige of a tyrant like this and making it easier for him to go and do his dirty deeds.

RICE: Well, first of all, you don’t go straight to a high-level presidential meeting. You do the preparation that’s necessary.

It’s not about prestige, Wolf. It’s about, what does the United States need to advance our national security interests and that of our ally Israel? The policy of the Bush administration backed by John McCain was to invade Iraq. That has left us less safe. It’s made Israel more vulnerable. It’s made Hamas and Hezbollah more powerful. It’s made Iran more powerful while it pursues its nuclear program.

That is a very dangerous, failed policy. The alternative is to withdraw responsibly from Iraq and deal with Iran from a position of strength. The alternative is they continue full steam ahead on their nuclear program. And that doesn’t serve our interest.

(CROSSTALK) BLITZER: And just to clear up, there’s no hard and fast commitment he would in fact if he were president meet in that first year with any of these leaders?

RICE: He said he’s willing to meet with these leaders, obviously, after preparation and at the appropriate time and when and as it serves our interests.

These are distortions, Wolf, that John McCain has found convenient because he knows that, if the American people are allowed to focus on his failed policies and that of George Bush, they won’t have a chance in this election. It’s all politics. And they continue to distort Barack Obama’s words and his intentions.

BLITZER: Secretary Rice, thanks for coming in.

Source : CNN Situation Room

Susan Rice was very rudely interrupted by Wolf whenever she try to explain Barak Obama foreign policy. Barak Obama foreign policy is very much understandable than the confused John McCain policy.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Bush, Iran, Iran Nuclear Program, Iraq, John McCain, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | 10 Comments »

Bush speech. McCain 2013 predictions.

Posted by QB on May 16, 2008

Bush delivered speech in Israel Parliament saying that who want to negotiate with terrorists and radicals as Nazis terrorists appeasement, clearly taking shot at Barak Obama who wants to get involve with diplomatic negotiations with Iran.

John McCain same day announce his predictions for his first term in office. He said that Iraq war will be won, troops will come home, Iran will give up its nuclear program, Osama Bin Laden will be killed or captured, Taleban will lose their strength and these countries will have the democracy.

These are the most stupid speeches delivered by the President of US and GOP Presidential candidate. How McCain is going to achieve all this when he don’t believe in having any kind of negotiations with Iran? John McCain must be planning attack on Iran. John McCain is old man loosing his bearings who sing “bomb bomb Iran” does not believe in diplomatic talks.

The war in Iraq is already lost, it is now the matter of time when US troops will withdraw. The situation in Iraq look stable because US is paying lots of money to Sunni resistance and it now look like they have cut the same deal with Mehdi Army which will bring down the violence. This does not mean that Iraqis had started to like the US occupation military.

The CIA don’t have any knowledge about Osama Bin Laden whereabouts, how he will get killed or captured? Taleban will not give up their resistance until all the foreign troops withdraw their military from Afghanistan.

These stupid speeches will play important part in US elections because very large group of ill informed voters will vote for John McCain without actually analyzing the facts.

John McCain will not be different than Bush and Osama Bin Laden wants someone like him in White House so they keep the fight alive. I will not be surprise if Osama Bin Laden video release before US election endorsing Barak Obama just like 2004 elections. I am not sure where these Osama Bin Laden tapes are made but these tapes always surface whenever Republicans are in trouble politically.

Osama Bin Laden message, infact hit the air in time, giving John McCain and George W. Bush enough material to scare US citizens for the coming election in November.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Asia, Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Bush, John McCain, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern Politics, Osama Bin Laden, Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, Politics, Taleban, Taliban, USA | 6 Comments »

Jimmy Carter meeting Hamas.

Posted by QB on April 22, 2008

Jimmy Cater is criticized harshly by Democrats and Republicans for meeting with Hamas leaders to get understanding of their point of view. Bush regime and Israel government did not like Carter meeting with Hamas who consider them as terrorist group.Carter, the most honest person, is right that there will be no peace if Hamas and Syria is left out of peace talks. Carter also told in news conference that Hamas will accept the right to exist if they pull back to 1967 positions.

The peace is possible with open minded open hearted people like Carter to bring the Israel and Palestinian on the negotiation table.

Posted in Bush, Hamas, Israel, JImmy Carter, Middle East, Middle East War, Palestine, Politics | Leave a Comment »

Barak Obama – US Politics and Iraq war.

Posted by QB on March 20, 2008

Barak Obama Pastor’s speech which he give in his Church get the CNN and all other news too much air time as usual. These networks reported the story as that somehow Barak Obama is responsible for his Pastor’s speech. Barak Obama criticize the speech which, did not stopped the news network to drop this story, to end this Barak Obama gave a very good speech on race in USA. There are still people like idiot racist Lou Dobbs who believe that Barak Obama should have cut his relationship with his Pastor which, to me is the most stupid demands from these people.

Barak Obama is not responsible what the other people say and he should not get the blame or responsibilities of others.

Bush delivered speech on the fifth anniversary of Iraq invasion and occupation calling it the “Noble Cause” to kill over one million Iraqis destroying their country with lies. Michael Ware reported from Baghdad that this war is not over for US and it will continue for decades.

BLITZER: Joining us now from the northern part of Baghdad, a small U.S. combat outpost, our own Michael Ware. He’s embedded with the 101st airborne right now on the scene.

Michael, five years. Who would have thought U.S. troops, 140,000, 150,000 would still be deployed in Iraq five years later? We got an assessment from the president of the United States today, a rather upbeat assessment. Things were definitely, he says, moving in the right direction.

You have been there since day one. Give us your five year bottom line assessment.

MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well Wolf, first and foremost, I have to tell you that given the situation on the ground, even though there’s a downturn in violence, even though the surge so-called has been a success, and I’m not talking about 30,000 troops sent to reinforce the capital.

I’m talking about America doing deals with its enemies, about America running its own militias and putting them on the U.S. payroll, I’m talking about a political surge trying to batter this Iranian linked Iraqi government. All these things have produced some success.

Certainly less people are dying each and every month. But just last month, more than 600 Iraqi civilians still died. That’s not good by anyone’s measure.

Despite these successes, what I can tell you Wolf is that even entering the sixth year of this grinding seemingly never-ending war, there’s no way America can leave any time soon, not if it wants to retain any shred of its international standing, nor if it wants to do anything to help the Iraqi people, Wolf.

BLITZER: So when they talk about a pause in the withdrawal this summer, it’s going to go down to 140,000, 145,000, then they are going to keep it at that level for awhile, what I hear you saying is they will have to keep it at roughly that level for some time to come.

WARE: Oh, absolutely. You talk to any officer here in Iraq, you even talk to the sergeants, you can even talk to the specialists, the every day soldier. Now as embittered as they may be, though the morale remains high, their commitment to being a professional soldier, to protecting their brother, continues, all of them know that this problem is far from fixed, and there’s no long-term solutions.

Indeed, I have had countless conversations with soldiers and officers over the past month here in Iraq where we talk endlessly about America’s opponents, be it al Qaeda, be it Iran, be it others, playing a long game, a generational game, whereas the men in uniform can’t help but feel frustrated by the fact that America is fighting this war election to election.

So this country is broken. America broke it. Whether you were for or against the war, in the beginning, is moot. Whether there was WMD is irrelevant. You had the situation you have now. America simply can’t walk away, not any time soon — Wolf.

BLITZER: What would happen if the U.S. started withdrawing troops in major numbers, a brigade or two a month, over the next year and brought it down to 20,000 or 30,000 troops? What would be the immediate impact?

WARE: Well, what we would see is once U.S. forces reach a certain level where they’re unable to flex real combat muscle, where they can no longer intimidate the myriad of groups and international players like Iran here in this country, and I have to say, Iran is not intimidated right now with 160,000 troops. But once American forces get to the point where all they can do is basically defend themselves as they withdraw, watch out.

I mean lot of people point to the southern Iraq. Now while relatively peaceful, you see a whole rainbow alliance of Iranian backed militias in battles for power. Imagine that across the country, throwing in not just rival Shiite on Shiite as Iran plays its hand, making sure no one group becomes powerful enough. Add to that Shiite versus Sunni, Arab versus Kurd, Turkey and Iran pressing their claims in the Kurdish north.

You will see that if America pulls out or if America stops paying the 70,000 plus former insurgents who are now U.S. backed militias, then other people will step in; Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, even American rival Syria will step in. You will see proxy wars, something that will be far worse than Lebanon in the 1980s — Wolf.

BLITZER: Michael Ware, be careful over there. Good luck. Thanks for joining us.

WARE: Thank you, Wolf.

The other interesting situation is that after elections there are too many differences who would be the next Prime Minister after PPP and Nawaz Sharif join hands to form the coalition government. The PPP get the more seats because of Benazir Bhutto murder. It is so disgusting that now the two most corrupted people Asif Zardari and Nawaz Sharif has become the powerful politicians to control the government.

John McCain believe that Iran is training Al Qaida and he is the one who is presently running ahead of Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton to be the next President of USA. John McCain will be the continuation of Bush failed policies. The situation will be the same with continuation of Iraq and Afghanistan war and the common poor people in US and the world will suffer.

Posted in Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Bush, Iran, Iraq, Lou Dobbs, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern Politics, Pakistan, Politics, US Politics, War on Terror | Leave a Comment »

US Navy and Iranian Revolutionary Guards Incident. By Farhan Adib.

Posted by QB on January 19, 2008

Few days ago, Pentagon announced that five small Iranian millitary boats threatened three advanced US warships!! at Hormose region of Persian Gulf.
I have seen the films published by Iran and US governments .I do not want to judge about any of them in advance .As a person ,the following questions have raised in my mind. We may be able to make a clear Judgment when reading those questions and the following article which has been written on the Tonkin Gulf incident.
1- Five small and light boats threaten three advanced US military warships. The US commander in charge of the warships was threatened through a radio message that those ships will be exploded by the boats in few minutes!!
2- Why Iran government did not threatened the warships for missile attacks. We all know that many Iranian mobile missile sites are positioned in the region. Why giving the chance to US navy for preparing some evidences through making films from the boats? Wasn’t it more effective to just warn the warships through a radio message? Who could prove the message coming from an Iranian military source? Were Iranian military commanders so stupid to arrange such a scenario?
3- This incident happened when Mr. George Bush was starting his trip to the Arab countries in the region. He had announced his purposes for this trip clearly. One of them was warning those countries about the danger of Iran.
4- Considering item 3 of this report, were the Iranian leaders so careless to present such a beautiful gift to Mr. Bush to prove what he wanted to be proved?
I have read about the Tonkin Gulf incident. That incident started the terrifying Vietnam War in the decade of 1960.

Please read the following article written on this issue. It has been copied from the following address:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/011108a.html written by Ray McGovern
on January 12, 2008 under the title CIA, Iran & the Gulf of Tonkin.
Let’s read it together:
When the Tonkin Gulf incident took place in early August 1964, I was a journeyman CIA analyst in what Condoleezza Rice refers to as “the bowels of the agency.”
As a current intelligence analyst responsible for Russian policy toward Southeast Asia and China, I worked very closely with those responsible for analysis of Vietnam and China.
Out of that experience I must say that, as much as one might be tempted to laugh at the bizarre theatrical accounts of Sunday’s incident involving small Iranian boats and U.S. naval ships in the Strait of Hormuz, this is—as my old Russian professor used to insist—nothing to laugh.
The situation is so reminiscent of what happened—and didn’t happen—from Aug. 2-4, 1964, in the Gulf of Tonkin and in Washington, it is in no way funny.
At the time, the U.S. had about 16,000 troops in South Vietnam. The war that was “justified” by the Tonkin Gulf resolution of Aug. 7, 1964, led to a buildup of 535,000 U.S. troops in the late Sixties, 58,000 of whom were killed—not to mention the estimated two million Vietnamese who lost their lives by then and in the ensuing 10 years.
Ten years. How can our president speak so glibly about 10 more years of a U.S. armed presence in Iraq? He must not remember Vietnam.
Lessons from Vietnam and Iraq
What follows is written primarily for honest intelligence analysts and managers still on “active duty.”
The issuance of the recent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran was particularly welcome to those of us who had been hoping there were enough of you left who had not been thoroughly corrupted by former CIA Director George Tenet and his malleable managers.
We are not so much surprised at the integrity of Tom Fingar, who is in charge of national intelligence analysis. He showed his mettle in manfully resisting forgeries and fairy tales about Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction.”
What is, frankly, a happy surprise is the fact that he and other non-ideologues and non-careerist professionals have been able to prevail and speak truth to power on such dicey issues as the Iranian nuclear program, the upsurge in terrorism caused by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the year-old NIE saying Iraq is headed for hell in a hand basket (with no hint that a “surge” could make a difference).
But those are the NIEs. They share the status of “supreme genre” of analytic product with the President’s Daily Brief and other vehicles for current intelligence, the field in which I labored, first in the analytic trenches and then as a briefer at the White House, for most of my 27-year career.
True, the NIE “Iraq’s Continuing Program for Weapons of Mass Destruction” of Oct. 1, 2002, (wrong on every major count) greased the skids for the attack on Iraq on March 19, 2003. But it is more often current intelligence that is fixed upon to get the country into war.
The Tonkin Gulf events are perhaps the best case in point. We retired professionals who worked through the Tonkin Gulf incident are hopeful that Fingar can ensure integrity in the current intelligence process as well.
Salivating for a Wider War
Given the confusion last Sunday in the Persian Gulf, you need to remember that a “known” in the form of a non-event has already been used to sell a major war—Vietnam. It is not only in retrospect that we know that no attack occurred that night.
Those of us in intelligence, not to mention President Lyndon Johnson, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara and National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy all knew full well that the evidence of any armed attack on the evening of Aug. 4, 1964, the so-called “second” Tonkin Gulf incident, was highly dubious.
But it fit the president’s purposes, so they lent a hand to facilitate escalation of the war.
During the summer of 1964, President Johnson and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were eager to widen the war in Vietnam. They stepped up sabotage and hit-and-run attacks on the coast of North Vietnam.
Defense Secretary Robert McNamara later admitted that he and other senior leaders had concluded that the seaborne attacks “amounted to little more than pinpricks” and “were essentially worthless,” but they continued.
Concurrently, the National Security Agency was ordered to collect signals intelligence from the North Vietnamese coast on the Gulf of Tonkin, and the surprise coastal attacks were seen as a helpful way to get the North Vietnamese to turn on their coastal radars.
The destroyer USS Maddox, carrying electronic spying gear, was authorized to approach as close as eight miles from the coast and four miles from offshore islands, some of which already had been subjected to intense shelling by clandestine attack boats.
As James Bamford describes it in “Body of Secrets:”
“The twin missions of the Maddox were in a sense symbiotic. The vessel’s primary purpose was to act as a seagoing provocateur—to poke its sharp gray bow and the American flag as close to the belly of North Vietnam as possible, in effect shoving its 5-inch cannons up the nose of the Communist navy. In turn, this provocation would give the shore batteries an excuse to turn on as many coastal defense radars, fire control systems, and communications channels as possible, which could then be captured by the men…at the radar screens. The more provocation, the more signals…
“The Maddox’ mission was made even more provocative by being timed to coincide with commando raids, creating the impression that the Maddox was directing those missions and possibly even lobbing firepower in their support….
“North Vietnam also claimed at least a twelve-mile limit and viewed the Maddox as a trespassing ship deep within its territorial waters.”
(pp 295-296)
On Aug. 2, 1964, an intercepted message ordered North Vietnamese torpedo boats to attack the Maddox. The destroyer was alerted and raced out to sea beyond reach of the torpedoes, three of which were fired in vain at the destroyer’s stern.
The Maddox’s captain suggested that the rest of his mission be called off, but the Pentagon refused. And still more commando raids were launched on Aug. 3, shelling for the first time targets on the mainland, not just the offshore islands.
Early on Aug. 4, the Maddox captain cabled his superiors that the North Vietnamese believed his patrol to be directly involved with the commando raids and shelling. That evening at 7:15 (Vietnam time) the Pentagon alerted the Maddox to intercepted messages indicating that another attack by patrol boats was imminent.
What followed was panic and confusion. There was a score of reports of torpedo and other hostile attacks, but no damage and growing uncertainty as to whether any attack actually took place. McNamara was told that “freak radar echoes” were misinterpreted by “young fellows” manning the sonar, who were “apt to say any noise is a torpedo.”
This did not prevent McNamara from testifying to Congress two days later that there was “unequivocal proof” of a new attack. And based largely on that, Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf resolution bringing 10 more years of war.
Meanwhile, in the Trenches
By the afternoon of Aug. 4, the CIA’s expert analyst on North Vietnam (let’s call him “Tom”) had concluded that probably no one had fired on the U.S. ships. He included a paragraph to that effect in the item he wrote for the Current Intelligence Bulletin, which would be wired to the White House and other key agencies and appear in print the next morning.
And then something unique happened. The Director of the Office of Current Intelligence, a very senior officer whom Tom had never before seen, descended into the bowels of the agency to order the paragraph deleted. He explained:
“We’re not going to tell LBJ that now. He has already decided to bomb North Vietnam. We have to keep our lines open to the White House.”
“Tom” later bemoaned—quite rightly: “What do we need open lines for, if we’re not going to use them, and use them to tell the truth?”
Two years ago, I would have been tempted to comment sarcastically, “How quaint; how obsolete.” But the good news is that the analysts writing the NIEs have now reverted to the ethos in which “Tom” and I were proud to work.
Now the analysts/reporters of current intelligence need to follow suit, and we hope Tom Fingar can hold their feet to the fire. For if they don’t measure up, the consequences are sure to be disastrous.
This should be obvious in the wake of the Tonkin Gulf reporting experience, not to mention more recent performance of senior officials before the attack on Iraq in 2003.
The late Ray S. Cline, who was the current intelligence director’s boss at the time of the Tonkin Gulf incident, said he was “very sure” that no attack took place on Aug. 4. He suggested that McNamara had shown the president unevaluated signals intelligence which referred to the (real) earlier attack on Aug. 2 rather than the non-event on the 4th.
There was no sign of remorse on Cline’s part that he didn’t step in and make sure the president was told the truth.
We in the bowels knew there was no attack; and so did the Director of Current Intelligence as well as Cline, the Deputy Director for Intelligence. But all knew, as did McNamara, that President Johnson was lusting for a pretext to strike the North and escalate the war. And, like B’rer Rabbit, they didn’t say nothin’.
Commenting on the interface of intelligence and policy on Vietnam, a senior CIA officer has written about:
“… the dilemma CIA directors and senior intelligence professionals face in cases when they know that unvarnished intelligence judgments will not be welcomed by the President, his policy managers, and his political advisers…[They] must decide whether to tell it like it is (and so risk losing their place at the President’s advisory table), or to go with the flow of existing policy by accentuating the positive (thus preserving their access and potential influence). In these episodes from the Vietnam era, we have seen that senior CIA officers more often than not tended toward the latter approach.”
“CIA and the Vietnam Policymakers: Three Episodes, 1962-1968,” Harold P. Ford
Back to Iran. This time, we all know what the president and vice president are lusting after—an excuse to attack Iran. But there is a big difference from the situation in the summer of 1964, when President Johnson had intimidated all his senior subordinates into using deceit to escalate the war.
Bamford comments on the disingenuousness of Robert McNamara when he testified in 1968 that it was “inconceivable” that senior officials, including the president, deliberately used the Tonkin Gulf events to generate congressional support for a wider Vietnam War.
In Bamford’s words, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had become “a sewer of deceit,” with Operation Northwoods and other unconscionable escapades to their credit. Then-Under Secretary of State George Ball commented, “There was a feeling that if the destroyer got into some trouble, that this would provide the provocation we needed.”
Good News: It’s Different Now
It is my view that the only thing that has prevented Bush and Cheney from attacking Iran so far has been the strong opposition of the uniformed military, including the Joint Chiefs.
As the misadventure last Sunday in the Strait of Hormuz shows, our senior military officers need all the help they can get from intelligence officers more concerned with the truth than with “keeping lines open to the White House” and doing its bidding.
In addition, the intelligence oversight committees in Congress seem to be waking from their Rip Van Winkle-like slumber. It was Congress, after all, that ordered the controversial NIE on Iran/nuclear (and insisted it be publicized).
And the flow of substantive intelligence to Congress is much larger than it was in 1964 when, remember, there were no intelligence committees as such.
So, you inheritors of the honorable profession of current intelligence – I’m thinking of you, Rochelle, and you, Rick – don’t let them grind you down.
If you’re working in the bowels of the CIA and you find that your leaders are cooking the intelligence once again into a recipe for casus belli, think long and hard about your oath to protect the Constitution. Should that oath not transcend any secrecy promise you had to accept as a condition of employment?
By sticking your neck out, you might be able to prevent 10 years of unnecessary war.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in Washington, DC. He was an Army infantry/intelligence officer, then a current intelligence analyst at CIA, and is now on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Bush, Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics | 1 Comment »

World did not change in one week.

Posted by QB on December 8, 2007

There is no change during my one week absence, I was able to watch some news at my hotel room and Hugo Chavez Constitutional Amendment Referendum defeat was big surprise and I was wrong predicting that Hugo Chavez will win the “Yes” vote. The people who voted “No” don’t want him to run for President for the third time will the losers by electing typical politician who will stop Hugo Chavez social reforms, will work to protect the interest of elite class.

Putin party did win the Parliamentary election with huge majority, don’t know the numbers and have no time to find that out by reading one week news archives. I have only today and tomorrow which is Sunday morning again will be leaving.

The most interesting news what US NIE on Iran nuclear program. The reaction from Bush regime is disgraceful who still insists that Iran is the biggest threat to world peace. John Bolton the former UN Ambassador believe that the intelligence agencies has under estimated  Iran nuclear program to compensate their report on Iraq WMD. Bush still believe that Iran is dangerous with the knowledge of building developing nuclear weapons. This is really the most stupid statement made by the only super power of the world. What is the Bush and Dick plan for Iran? Do they wanted to brainwash all the Iranian scientists who had the knowledge to build nuclear weapons?

The NIE confirmed what ElBardei said that they don’t have proof of Iran’s secret nuclear program which become problem for the Republican Presidential candidate who wanted to be tougher than Bush on Iran including Democrat Hilary Clinton, she wanted to use limited Nuclear Weapons on Iranian Nuclear facilities to stop the development of nuclear weapons which which they are not building. Saddam Hussein told the world that Iraq does not any Chemical or Nuclear Weapons and he too was telling the truth like Ahmadinejad.

The US if really wanted peace stability in the world than the American politicians have to learn to trust the other governments, stop interfering in their internal affairs, stop the policy of regime change.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Asia, Bush, Iran, Latin America, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, Putin, Russia, South America, Venezuela, Vladimir Putin | 2 Comments »

Bush must be send to mental hospital . Hugo Chavez.

Posted by QB on October 26, 2007

Hugo Chavez latest criticism said that it is US policies which are rising the price of Oil and Bush must be admitted into mental hospital. Hugo Chavez said Oil prices are rising because of US foreign policies with threatening oil producing countries, he predicted that Oil prices will rise to USD 100 barrel if US keep threatening oil producing countries. Hugo Chavez warned US not to invade Iran because the result will be worst than Iraq, he blamed Bush for leading world towards nuclear WWIII. He want Bush immediately admitted into mental hospital.

Hugo Chavez is the new breed of Head Of State who doesn’t care much about diplomacy. But what he said is true.

Posted in Bush, George W. Bush, Iran, Latin America, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics, Venezuela | 2 Comments »

Bush regime drop sanctions WMD on Iran. Iran response update.

Posted by QB on October 25, 2007

The Bush regime finally dropped “Sanctions” destructive WMD unilaterally on Iran, these sanctions are the hardest since 1979. The US sanctions are the most cruel punishment for the common people of that country, sanctions only hurt the poor people not the ruler class and elite class. The US sanctions has make the lives miserable for Cubans from last 50 years, the North Koreans are suffering from these sanctions, Iraqis suffer 14 years with US imposing sanctions, without producing any positive results except hatred towards US by the people whose lives become miserable.

The US State Department was lecturing Turkey not to take any unilateral action against Kurdish terrorists is now imposing unilateral sanctions on Iran. Hypocrisy. The purpose of this sanction is to isolate Iran and destroy their economy financially which will not work because China, Russia, Pakistan and India has huge interest doing business with Iran which is needed for their growing economies.

The US Presidential candidates for 2008 are saying what their voters wanted to hear. Mitt Romney want to take military action with some bombardment to prevent Iran getting nuclear weapons. Barak Obama believe that sanctions are necessary. John Edwards is criticizing Hilary Clinton vote on declaring Iranian Revolutionary Guards as terrorists organization blaming her giving way for Bush regime to start military offensive against Iran just like he did in Iraq.

These morons are completely ignoring the facts that Iran is not doing high grade uranium enrichment which can be used in nuclear weapons. They are also ignoring the facts that Iran is in very initial stage of its nuclear program and will will take atleast decade to build nuclear weapon, if they want one, which Iranian deny, also there is no evidence from the IAEA inspections that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. These corrupt politicians again are trying to scare common American voters to get into power.

“Why worsen the situation and bring it to a dead end by threatening sanctions or military action,” Putin said in a veiled reference to the U.S. push for harsher international sanctions against Tehran.“Running around like a madman with a razor blade, waving it around, is not the best way to resolve the situation,” the Russian leader said.

Putin is showing his support for Iran and he is advising Bush to adopt diplomacy. Right approach great leadership.

Bush regime closest allies Britain applauded the US sanctions, France and Germany back these sanctions. They are stupid, this is my prediction that this new sanction will backfire, Iran will take be more determined than ever to keep its nuclear program alive. Iran economy will not collapse because of China, Russia, Pakistan and India and also the Latin American countries Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Cuba.

“Other countries support and praise us regarding Iran’s cooperation with the agency,” Larijani said in comments carried by Iran’s ISNA news agency after his return from talks with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana in Rome.“But America’s behaviour shows that it doesn’t make any difference whether Iran cooperates with the agency or not. Well, if that is the case, you should expect something else from Iran,” he said, adding that European states had urged Iran not to respond to the “bullying behaviour of (some) countries”.

Larijani was replaced as chief nuclear negotiator on Saturday but remains on the Supreme National Security Council, which helps make policy. He attended the Rome talks in that capacity with the new chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili.

“With this behaviour, the Americans are only isolating themselves,” Jalili said of the sanctions, according to the official IRNA news agency. New U.S. sanctions could push Tehran to rethink its cooperation with the United Nations atomic watchdog, Iran’s former chief nuclear negotiator said on Friday.

Ali Larijani was speaking a day after Washington branded Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and imposed new sanctions on the country, which it accuses of trying to develop atomic weapons.

Iran denies the charge and has agreed to clear up long-standing suspicions about its nuclear goals with the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency. But it has refused to halt sensitive atomic work as demanded by the U.N. Security Council.

This is what happened before the Iraq war, the lies, the UN dramatic presentation by creep Collin Powell, main stream media broadcasting Bush regime propaganda to scare Americans, main stream media is reporting lies that Ahmadinejad wants to destroy Israel by completely ignoring what he actually said. The Israel allegation was also used against Saddam Hussein that he is the main sponsor of terrorism by awarding suicide bombers money. We already watched this movie. Bring something new and intelligent.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Bush, George W. Bush, Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | 7 Comments »

Bush – Afghanistan and Iraq War Cost.

Posted by QB on October 24, 2007

WASHINGTON — The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade.

This is the USA today news story. These wars could have been avoided with intelligent approach which of-course can’t be expected from Bush and Dick. This is the great news for Osama Bin Laden who wanted to destroy US financially. Osama Bin Laden, Mullah Omar, Al Qaida and Taliban will be very pleased that they are actually achieving their goal of destroying US financially. This also mean that Osama Bin Laden is more brain than Bush and Dick and he is winning the “war on terror”. The cost of payouts to Pakistan and other US allies of greed, am sure is not included in this budget projected forecast, so lets adjust the projected cost of “war on terror” by adding few hundred billion dollars and make it 3 trillion.

Posted in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, Al Qaida, Bush, George W. Bush, Iraq, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Mullah Omar, Osama Bin Laden, Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, Politics, US Politics, War on Terror | 1 Comment »

US – European Countries want Turkey not to attack Nothern Iraq.

Posted by QB on October 22, 2007

Really don’t have time but US State Department make to write few lines about the hypocrisy of US and its European allies. The US State Department is asking Turkey not to invade Iraq going after Kurd terrorists.

In Washington, the State Department said the United States has opened a diplomatic “full court press” to urge Turkey not to invade northern Iraq.“In our view, there are better ways to deal with this issue,” spokesman Sean McCormack said, stressing that the United States regards the the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known by its Kurdish acronym PKK, as a terrorist organization.

There are better ways to deal with terrorism, Really, than why US and its European allies invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. The US and European politicians wants to invade Iran, the Presidential candidate Hilary Clinton even wanted to use limited nuclear weapons in Iran attack, US politicians want to invade Pakistan, Obama promised that he will send US troops into NWFP. Why don’t they try the better ways themselves to solve the issues with Iran.

F*king SOBs. This is all few minutes I can spare right now.

Posted in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, Al Qaida, Bush, George W. Bush, Iran, Iraq, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Pakistan, Pope, Taleban, Taliban, US Politics, War on Terror | 2 Comments »

Iran – Bush next target.

Posted by QB on October 19, 2007

The Bush crazy, insane, psychopathic, and brain damaged is focused on Iran nuclear weapon which does not exist at all and if Iranian decided to build Nuclear Bomb it will take ten years to build. US European allies wanted to impose tough sanctions on Iran outside UN Security Council, Ehud Olmert rushed to Russia to talk to Putin. The Bush corrupt regime used all sorts of fear tactics before the invasion of Iraq, they used sounds bites like “mushroom cloud”, “danger for Israel Security”, “helping suicide bomber in Palestine” for Saddam Hussein to achieve their goal of invading Iraq. Bush believe that Iran nuclear program will lead to WWIII which is the most stupid assumption, there were plenty of journalists in that press conference who did not tell him that Iran is no threat to world peace, it will be US European and Israel who will start the WWIII, if these governments take military action against Iran.

The best course to take on Iranian Nuclear Program to let the IAEA do their work. There is no proof of any wrong doing by IAEA on Iran Nuclear Program, its the paranoid leaders of US Germany France UK trying to make it a big issue.

There is no way US or its European allies with Israel can get away with military action on Iran Nuclear facilities without facing the fierce response from Iran, the stupid military action will lead to WWIII. The whole Middle East will be the battle ground with Iran attacking its military bases in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq and Hizbollah Syria and Hamas will join the fight by attacking Israel. Death and destruction will be the result with no clear victory for any country. The US has to nuke the whole Iran for complete victory.

This is interesting that Bush regime was blaming Iran for supplying weapons to Talibans, Afghanistan puppet government deny these charges by saying that they don’t have the proof that Iran is supplying these weapons. The Foreign Minister also said that Iran is Afghanistan’s neighbor friend who has major role in reconstruction of his country.

Changed the first line with Ric suggested words for Bush (Grumpy Lion) who will be taking time off from blogging and concentrate on his writing. Ric when finish and publish his novel will be best seller, I am sure,

Posted in Ahmadinejad, George W. Bush, Iran, Iran Nuclear Program, Iraq, Israel, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | 10 Comments »

Bush – Iran Nuclear Weapon lead to WWIII.

Posted by QB on October 18, 2007

Bush suppose to talk to the reporter on domestic issue on Wednesday instead he talked about Iran Nuclear Weapons. The moron said that Iran Nuclear Weapon could “leads to WWIII”,

“I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing” the Iranians from gaining the means to make nuclear weapons, he said.

Who are these people? I believe are the American people, who have become paranoid by Bush regime fear mongering that they will immediately believe what he is saying because they are brain washed by government and mainstream media propaganda. The recent poll taken recently show that majority of Americans want military action against Iran without realizing the consequences of such attack. Bush statement is complete lie again, it is the US government and its European allies, who will be lead to WWIII. Putin is right advising direct talks to solve the issues with Iran. Bush again is hiding the truth by not telling the people that Iran is ten years away from developing nuclear bomb, if they are wanted to develop nuclear weapon, Iran insists that their nuclear program is for peaceful energy purposes. IAEA blasted US Intelligence report. Bush repeated the biggest propaganda lie that Ahmadinejad wanted to destroy Israel. The fact is that media has overplayed this “Wipe off the map” propaganda ignoring Ahmadinejad actual sentence which was “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time”, the Imam in this sentence was Khomeini. CNN Fox News and the European print media spread rumors instead of actual news with biased to achieve the goals of Zionist. The majority of Americans and European believe that Ahmadinejad wanted to “Wipe Israel off the map” is excellent example of twisting the facts. Ahmadinejad called for regime change in Israel not the destruction of people and country. Putin support Iran peaceful nuclear program.

The US and its European allies stupid polices will lead to WWIII. This is what Fidel Castro said couple of days back, Fidel Castro is right that Bush policies the world to disaster. It is great to know that Fidel Castro think like me which is an honor from oldest revolutionary leader alive.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Bush, Fidel Castro, George W. Bush, Iran, Iran Nuclear Program, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, US Politics | 7 Comments »

Putin – Iran assassination plot a bid to ‘wreck’ visit.

Posted by QB on October 18, 2007

Vladimir Putin on his assassination plot in Iran were to “wreck” his landmark visit to Iran. The chances are that CIA and Mossad release this news to stop Putin trip to Iran, or maybe it was Bush and Ehud Olmert the main minds behind this “suicide killing” news. Putin is intelligent enough not to cancel his visit to Iran.

“It was nothing other than an attempt to wreck the visit,” Putin said Thursday during a televised question-and-answer session, referring to a report ahead of his visit to Tehran on Tuesday that suicide bombers were planning to assassinate him there.“It’s harmful for international relations because direct dialogue with states where there are problems are always more productive and a quicker path to success than the path of threats, sanctions or even force,” Putin said.Putin’s comment echoed the reaction of Iran’s foreign ministry, which dismissed the report of the plot as an attempt by “enemies” to break up relations between Russia and Iran.“The reports in some media are completely without foundation and part of a psychological war waged by enemies to disrupt relations between Iran and Russia,” foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told AFP.

Bush must learn diplomacy from Putin. The majority of Democrats and Republicans also need to learn the foreign relations and diplomacy, all they have to do is borrow some common sense as none of them have his ability. The Presidential candidates have no common sense, common sense is missing in the Congress, Bush cabinet doesn’t have any common sense. All they how to talk tough threatening the whole world. USA has become the menace of the world. This is because the majority of Americans elect the corrupt charismatic lairs for the highest level of their government.

Putin bluntly commented that US wanted to seized the Iraqi Oil.

President Vladimir Putin, in his latest jab at Washington, suggested Thursday that the U.S. military campaign in Iraq was a “pointless” battle against the Iraqi people, aimed in part at seizing the country’s oil reserves.

Posted in Ahmadinejad, Bush, George W. Bush, Iran, Iran Nuclear Program, Israel, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, Russia, US Politics, Vladimir Putin | 6 Comments »

Bush warn Turkey not to take Military Action. Turkish Parliament Approved Military Action in Northern Iraq.

Posted by QB on October 17, 2007

Turkish parliament majority approved cross border offensive against Kurdish terrorist with 507-19 votes in favor of taking action. Bush regime with puppet Iraqi government are urging Turkey to solve the crisis with negotiations instead of taking military action. Bush who invaded Afghanistan and Iraq rejecting all diplomatic negotiations is now want the negotiations. The Turkish government now have the approval of their parliament to go after Kurdish terrorists but the chances are they will use it as the last option on the table by crossing Iraq border. They will increase their air strikes into mountains where these Kurds terrorists are hiding. Kurds if responded with counter attacks in Turkey than there is a possibility of Turkish military will move into Northern Iraq.Turkish Prime Minister indicated this many times in last few day that after getting parliament approval does not mean that they will move into Iraq immediately, Prime Minster also insists that his country has the right to defend itself and its citizens against terrorism. Kurdish are the big problem for Turkey, Syria and Iran and Syrian President Bashar Al Assad support Turkey decision to take military action.

US President George W. Bush strongly urged Turkey on Wednesday not to carry out cross-border strikes on Kurdish separatist fighters based in nearby Iraq.“We are making it very clear to Turkey that we don’t think it is in their interests to send troops into Iraq,” he said at a White House press conference.
“There’s a better way to deal with the issue than having the Turks send massive troops into the country — massive additional troops into the country,” the president said.

Bush you mass murderer this is what the whole world was advising you “not to invade Iraq” but you were barking like mad dog and did not listen to any intelligent advice. Kurdish terrorists gained courage and become more aggressive when Bush senior impose no fly zone with Kurds autonomous government in the North, in other words the Kurdish terrorists are the creation of Dad Bush. Iraqi Kurds government that Turkish vote to seek authorization for incursion in Northern Iraq will be illegal. The following statement by Iraq Kurd government is really funny.

“If the Turkish parliament gives the authorisation to the army to enter another country, we consider this illegal and a violation of international law and the United Nations’ charter,” Abdullah told AFP.

Abdullah is hypocrite SOB like majority of people in power, what about 180,000 foreign troops who invaded your country with the approval of their Congress, was that legal. not violation of international law and United Nations charter. Abdullah, Iraq is still under illegal criminal occupation, these double standards make me sick. The Kurds after getting autonomous status in Iraq now working to create independent Kurdish state which include Syria, Iran, Turkey Kurds populated regions.

Posted in Bush, George W. Bush, Iraq, Kurdish Terrorists, Middle East, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Middle Eastern Politics, Politics, Turkey | Leave a Comment »