Original creator: James Taylor | man freut sich! (Besonders) | my Sister Ebba
About This Video italian version : http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=WES47ih... Kanske är den bästa versionen den som jag la på dag.htm ?
Det ser ut som ockupation av ett land. Det är en militär ockupation!
A new memo leaked to the British media last week asserts that George Bush and Tony Blair agreed in January 2003 to go to war in Iraq--not March 2003, as they insist. It also suggests that the leaders knew there was no legitimate case for war, and that Blair told Bush that he was "solidly" behind US plans to invade Iraq before he sought advice about the invasion's legality. Most shocking, it reveals that Bush was so desperate to provoke a war that he proposed painting US planes to look like UN aircrafts and flying them low over Iraq in hopes of inciting an Iraqi attack. (Bush to Blair: "The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach.")
[...] Which gets us back to the question: What's the endgame of the surge-and-negotiate strategy?
Already there is plenty of negotiating behind the scenes. Karzai has an ongoing dialogue with the Taliban, with former Taliban allies in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan mediating, and there are reports of talks involving Hekmatyar, too. But Obama's advisers are split on whether those top-down negotiations will work: Some suspect that there can be no deal as long as the Taliban think they're winning.
An alternative approach gaining favor inside the beltway is bottom-up negotiations to mirror the Taliban's village-by-village strategy. "This is a country that historically has had very little central government," General David McKiernan, the US commander, said last November. "But it's a government with a history of local autonomy and local tribal authority systems." Jones, of Rand, says the key is winning the loyalty of rural Afghans. If it's done right—if America maintains a light footprint, if tribal leaders see improvements in security (as well as cold, hard cash), and if Afghanistan's meddling neighbors can be persuaded to help stabilize the country—then the loyalties of the Pashtun tribes may turn. If that happens, Jones says hopefully, "They can tip pretty quickly." Of course, if the surge causes more civilian deaths and further inflames anger at the United States, they could just as easily tip the other way. Therein lies the great risk of Obama's gamble.Robert Dreyfuss has written for The Nation, Washington Monthly, and Rolling Stone, and is the author of Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam.
Vor der Kaserne Vor dem großen Tor Stand eine Laterne Und steht sie noch davor So woll'n wir uns da wieder seh'n Bei der Laterne wollen wir steh'n Wie einst Lili Marleen. (bis) Unsere beide Schatten Sah'n wie einer aus Daß wir so lieb uns hatten Das sah man gleich daraus Und alle Leute soll'n es seh'n Wenn wir bei der Laterne steh'n Wie einst Lili Marleen. (bis) Deine Schritte kennt sie, Deinen zieren Gang Alle Abend brennt sie Doch mich vergaß sie lang Und sollte mir ein Leids gescheh'n Wer wird bei der Laterne stehen Mit dir Lili Marleen? (bis) Aus dem stillen Raume, Aus der Erde Grund Hebt mich wie im Traume Dein verliebter Mund Wenn sich die späten Nebel dreh'n Werd' ich bei der Laterne steh'n Mit dir Lili Marleen. (bis)
A major new scientific study has confirmed growing conviction that the world's most widely used chemical herbicide,
Monsanto Corporation's Roundup is toxic and a danger to human as well as animal organisms.
The latest scientific research carried out by a multinational scientific team headed by Professor Andrés Carrasco, head of the Laboratory of Molecular Embryology at the University of Buenos Aires Medical School and member of Argentina's National Council of Scientific and Technical Research, presents alarming demonstration that Monsanto and the GMO agribusiness industry have systematically lied about the safety of their Roundup.
Roundup in far lower concentrations than used in agriculture is linked to birth defects.
The health implications are huge. All major GMO crops on the market today are genetically manipulated to "tolerate" the herbicide Roundup.
Glyphosate was patented by Monsanto in the 1970's well before GMO was commercialized, as a so-called broad-spectrum weed killer. It is typically sprayed and absorbed through the leaves, or used as a forestry herbicide. It was initially patented and sold by Monsanto under the trade name Roundup, which also contains non-disclosed added chemicals the company refuses to divulge for "trade secret" reasons. As of 2005, 87% of all US soybean fields were planted with glyphosate-resistant varieties of GMO soybeans and sprayed with Roundup.
Because the seeds of Monsanto Roundup Ready GMO soybeans or other crops have been manipulated solely to be "resistant" to Roundup herbicide, while all other plant life in the field is killed by Roundup, farmers using Roundup Ready seeds must also purchase Roundup herbicide, making a captive market for both seed and chemicals.
The problem with this cozy arrangement, aside from the fact that Roundup-resistant "super-weeds" are emerging as a new biological catastrophe, is that Glyphosate has now been demonstrated to be linked to birth defects as one of the most highly toxic substances in agriculture . . .
Källa: F. William Engdahl [sept 2010]
| Afghanistan |
| Kabul |
| Durandlinjen |
Long experience has taught me that "told you so" is by
far the most infuriating thing one can say. While the
public can forgive commentators who are proven wrong,
it will never forgive those who are shown to have been
right.
So let's avoid that phrase. Let's just hint that some
of the things I said before the war have been proven to
be not so very wrong.
Two of these deserve consideration at this time.
First: That the real aim of the war on Iraq was to station a permanent American garrison in that country, supported by a local Quisling regime, in order to secure direct control of the vast oil resources of Iraq itself and indirectly of the oil reserves of the region - Saudi Arabia, the other Gulf states and the Caspian basin. No "Mass Destruction Weapons", no "Removal of a blood-thirsty Tyrant", no "Spreading Democracy", no "Axis of Evil".
Second: That the main result of the war will be the breakup of the country into three mutually hostile components - Sunni Arabs, Shiites and Kurds. Whether this breakup of the Iraqi state is disguised as a "loose federation" or in some other way is immaterial. The important point is whether control over the oil resources is vested in the central or the local authorities.
It was clear that the Kurds would settle for nothing less then de facto independence, keeping their oil revenues for themselves. It was also clear that this would arouse the most profound fears in Turkey, Iran and Syria, all of which have an oppressed Kurdish population which dreams of the eventual establishment of a great, united Kurdistan.
Om Irak och den demokratiska frågan så anser jag att författaren ovan - an Israeli author and activist who is the head of the Israeli peace movement, "Gush Shalom" - har rätt när han jämför med Quisling och en regering insatt av en militär ockupationsmakt.