Scottish Airport used to traffic Weapons of Mass Destruction

Condoleezza Rice called for an international embargo against the delivery of weapons to any entity but the government of Lebanon. Iran and Syria were accused of supplying Hezbullah with weapons to attack Israel (although no proper evidence had yet been found). Hezbullah had been contacted by al-Qaeda but refused assistance from them.

As Lebanon continues to get pounded by the Israeli air force, the US made promises to provide medical and financial aid to Lebanon for reconstruction, but at the same time was supplying Israel with WMD to continue with the destruction of Lebanon. NICE!

How do we know this? During the weekend two American cargo planes en root to Israel (containing WMD) landed in Prestwick Airport, Scotland for refuelling. Both were refused refuelling at Shannon airport in Ireland by the Irish Government.

Norman Silvester of the Sunday Times wrote an article detailing the events perfectly:

EXCLUSIVE: BOMBSHELL
30 July 2006

SECRET documents today expose America's attempts to conceal deadly flights shipping bombs to the Middle East.

Papers obtained by Sunday Mail investigators reveal how the US tried to sneak at least one deadly cargo through Prestwick as a civilian flight.

But the innocent-looking 707 was carrying 20 lethal 120 Blue- 113 warheads, powerful enough to penetrate 20ft of concrete.

Details of the plane's dodgy flight plans make a mockery of George Bush's apology for using Prestwick.

We can also reveal:

A staggering six flights and 120 bombs will have left Prestwick for the killing fields of Lebanon by tonight.

A US military Hercules aircraft with a secret payload made an emergency landing at Prestwick after engine failure.

Irish aviation bosses refused to let the American flights use their air space.

And last night it was reported that Israel Air Force planes had also been landing at Prestwick.

It was claimed five jets use the airport as a staging post between the US and the Middle East - the most recent landing last Sunday.

It is thought the planes were en route to Israel from the massive Dover Air Base in Delaware.

Yesterday, as the civilian death toll in Lebanon and Israel rose to 623, a US 747 Atlas Air flight carrying weapons from an airbase was being fuelled in Prestwick.

A Civil Aviation Authority spokesman said: "The items they are carrying are understood to be of a dangerous nature."

The flight path documents are the first proof that the planes were carrying bombs to the Israeli army for the devastating attacks that have claimed hundreds of innocent lives.

Airport officials and civil servants on both sides of the Atlantic have refused to confirm details of loads.

But the Sunday Mail found damning evidence of the cover-up in a flight plan for a Kalitta Boeing 707 from a military base in San Antonio, Texas.

There are no clues to the deadly cargo it was carrying because the flight plan bears a civilian call sign instead of a military one.

But a second document for the same plane reveals the truth - it was set for Israel and was carrying 20 laser-guided bombs with fuses.

The document lists the weight of the payload as WT LBS 88620.

The plane landed without diplomatic clearance and neither air traffic controllers nor the fire brigade knew it was carrying bombs.

Our documents show the extent of what the six planes each carried - 20 laser-guided bombs, each weighing 4400lb.





Four landed between Thursday, July 20, and Sunday, July 23, with a further one operated by US airline Atlas Air landing yesterday.

A sixth flight is due to come through Prestwick today.

The Irish Civil Aviation Authority last night confirmed they refused one plane permission use their air space when it set off from Prestwick for Israel after refuelling.

They added: "It is normal practice to use Irish airspace to travel from Prestwick. On this occasion permission was denied. I am not able to say why."

But a source added: "It wasn't a safety concern, it was a moral one."

Four of the shipments were carried on Boeing 747 200s owned by Kalitta, who are based in Michigan.

They set off from Kelly US Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, for Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv.

Their cargo - bombs known as "bunker-busters" - were destined for Israel's assault in southern Lebanon and are the heaviest explosives in the US armoury.

One air traffic controller told the Sunday Mail: "We're also worried that the fire brigade did not know that the plane landing contained such a large amount of explosives.

"If it had gone up in flames in an accident, we'd have been none the wiser. It is a terrifying thought."

We contacted Kalitta at their HQ in Ypsilanti, Michigan, but they refused to comment. The Foreign Office said: "It appears the correct procedures were not followed. We are trying to find out why."

Costing £100,000 per warhead, the bunker-buster bomb was blamed for one of the conflict's worst attacks - a blitz on Beirut on July 20 which killed dozens of civilians and wiped out four nine-storey buildings.

Yesterday, Prestwick Airport said: "The airport is obliged to allow aircraft from any CAA-registered country to land here and we routinely handle passenger, freight and military aircraft.

"We are not necessarily aware of what cargo is being carried on flights in transit nor are we obliged to find out."

Despite outrage, the Government have said US planes carrying missiles to Israel can continue to refuel in Scotland.

On Wednesday, a US airforce Hercules plane was forced into a dramatic emergency landing at Prestwick after an engine failed.

The pilot landed safely but the craft was still grounded yesterday.

The airport refused to comment on whether it was carrying bombs.

Ceasefire - what Ceasefire?

Qana is the legendary village in the Bible where Jesus Christ is said to have performed his first miracle, turning water into wine. The Israelis tried something similar during the weekend and succeeded; but instead of wine they turned it to blood.

Following their air-strike, it was reported that at least 60 people (including 37 children) were dead and many others injured. The Israeli governemnt stated that rockets were launched from the village towards Israel and that they gave warning to local people to leave the area. Considering that most infrastructure leading out of the area had been destroyed by the Israeli Airforce and moving vehicles such as ambulances & buses have been targeted by the Airforce - where were the Lebanese people to go?

After receiveing heavy critisism throughout the world, Israel agreed to a 48 hour ceasefire, not a full ceasefire but an ariel ceasefire. The fighting did not stop Hezbollah and Israel to continue fighting on the ground and as the fighting continued the ariel ceasefire became void.

The bombing in Qana had apparently scarred Condoleezza Rice’s weeklong mission to halt the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, prompting her to scrap a planned meeting with Lebanon's prime minister and hence she arrange to return to Washington for consultation.

The truth is that the Lebanese Prime minister cancelled the meetings as the US did not condemn Israel for the strike nor were they in support for the UN ceasefire. Kofi Annan the UN general secretary said in unusually frank terms that he was "deeply dismayed" his previous calls for a halt were ignored by the US.

War: It's a Childs Game

In Britain and through the world, there have been a lot of discussion on how to stop youngsters becoming attached to terrorist organisations, Everybody assumes that by tackling preachers in the mosques or closing down religious organisations they will be able to get rid/ deter would be terrorists.

Kids don't need any of the above, they just need to watch the news and see what is happening around the world. When people see injustice, no amount of false information betrayed by government media or any other agencies can stop people becoming vigilantes.

In Israel it seems that state encourages their children to hate their fellow neighbours.




We had a chance to stop the war early and reduce casualties; We had a chance to bring peace to the region, we had a chance to let children be children, let them build friendship with their neighbours, instead we have become a silent witness. Blood is on our hands.

If you would like to sign a petition for a ceasefire click on link below:
http://www.ceasefirecampaign.org/

Victory For Families Of Soldiers Sent To Iraq

The families of British soldiers killed in Iraq have won a dramatic legal breakthrough in their attempt to force a full public inquiry into why Britain entered the conflict.

The Court of Appeal has ruled they were entitled to apply for judicial review of the Government's refusal to hold an independent inquiry. The applicants are relatives of four servicemen who died in military action between 2003 and 2005. They say they want the Government "to be held accountable" for a war which "breached international law and was based on a series of lies".

Lawyers for the Prime Minister, the Defence Secretary and the Attorney General had argued it would be an "unwarranted shift of power" for the courts to make pronouncements on the Government's right to go to war.

The family's legal battle looked doomed last December when their application for a judicial review was blocked by Mr Justice Collins in the High Court on the basis that their case was "unarguable". Now the appeal judges have overturned that decision and said it was arguable.

But, instead of following the usual procedure of sending the case back to the High Court for further hearing, the judges said the appeal court would hear the full application, on November 6.
Phil Shiner, the families' solicitor, said later: "This is a stunning victory. "In particular, the Government must finally explain how the 13-page equivocal advice from the Attorney General of March 7 2003 was changed within 10 days to a one-page completely unequivocal advice that an invasion would be legal."

The action was brought by Peter Brierley, the father of Shaun Brierley; Beverley Clarke, the mother of David Clarke; Rose Gentle, the mother of Gordon Gentle, and Susan Smith, the mother of Phillip Hewett.
Source: Sky News

This is excellent news for everyone in the UK. We went to war in Iraq supporting an American agenda. We went to war without any proper debate and the families of our soldiers and Iraqi citizens have suffered heavily.

Saddam Hussein is no angel, but we went to war on the grounds of the WMD. The CIA confirmed in early 2005 that the US had stopped searching for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Where had they gone? Maybe it never existed in the real world? The US helped create a monster in Iraq; they supplied him with weapons to fight Iran and assisted him with developing chemical weapons (sounds familiar?).

The US promised to reconstruct Iraq with billions in aid, the money they promised never materialised, and the little money they gave have since dried up. Iraq is on the brinks of a “civil war”; our boys are still in this region, thanks to people like MrRumsfeld - we are continuing to pay the price.

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.

Low Resolution Video (734 KB)
source of video and picture: http://www.gwu.edu

Israel - The new Chemical Brothers

Lebanon is investigating reports from doctors that Israel has used weapons in its 15-day-old bombardment that have caused wounds they have never seen before. "We are sending off samples tomorrow, but we have no confirmation yet that illegal weapons have been used," Health Minister Mohammed Khalife told Reuters.

The Lebanese dead are charred in a way local doctors, who have lived through years of civil war and Israeli occupation, say they have not seen before.

The Israeli army said it had used only conventional weapons and ammunition in attacks aimed at Hizbollah guerrillas and nothing contravening international law.

It would be interesting to see the results, but would anyone condemn this? This is not the first time alleged chemical weapons have been used by Israel:

Allegations that Israeli forces have used chemical and biological weapons date back to the War of 1948. During that time wells and water supplies were poisoned by Israeli Army to kill Palestinians and drive them out of the area.

The following article is extracted from http://www.vtjp.org

In March 2003, the BBC presented Israel’s Secret Weapon, an investigation of Israel's development of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The BBC reported: “The Israeli army has used new unidentified weapons.

In February 2001 a new gas was used in Gaza. A hundred and eighty patients were admitted to hospitals with severe convulsions…. Israel is outside chemical and biological weapons treaties and still refuses to say what the new gas was.”

This report explores the reported development and deployment of chemical weapons by the government of Israel since 1974, paying particular attention to incidents since 2001 in which unidentified poison gas(es) and other chemicals were used against civilians in the occupied Palestinian territories. The documentation includes photos, videos, interviews, and reports by human rights organizations, the world press and independent researchers. http://www.littleredbutton.com/gas_interviews/interviews.pdf


1974: US General tells Senate Armed Forces Committee that Israel’s chemical weapons program is operational.

July 1, 1982: Soviet TASS carries reports from Beirut that Israel is using chemical weapons including BZ nerve gas.

July 5, 1982: Soviet Union accuses US of providing Israel ‘barbarous’ weapons, including chemical weapons, that Israel uses in invasion of Lebanon.

December 4, 1988: PFLP accuses the Israeli Army of using a new chemical weapon against Palestinians…causing various wounds and “organic complications”, cites doctors treating victims in Tobay and Tamoun.

March – April, 1988: Former mayor of Nablus reports: “Fleets of helicopters fly over Nablus at night dropping a dense, green toxic gas over the city..” Doctors at Ittihad Hospital report several deaths and severe lung injuries from the unidentified asphyxiating chemical, “totally distinct from tear gas..” UNRWA doctors report symptoms not normally connected with tear gas. UNRWA seeks information on contents of the gas...to provide antidote...especially for the most vulnerable groups…pregnant women, the very young and elderly..”

January - February, 1989: Israeli officials including Binyamin Netanyahu partially admit possession of a chemical weapons program.

February 6, 1989: League of Arab States' Committee of Seven condemns use of chemical weapons against Palestinians.

1990: US Defense Intelligence Agency states Israel maintains chemical testing facility possibly in Negev desert.

July, 1990: Israeli Minister of Science: If Iraq uses chemical weapons Israel will retaliate "with the same merchandise."

October 4, 1992: El Al 747 cargo plane en route from New York to Israel crashes into Amsterdam apartment building, carrying three of the four chemicals needed to make sarin nerve gas. Hundreds of Dutch citizens suffer lingering health problems following exposure.

October 30, 1996: Rebels in Papua New Guinea accuse Israel of providing government forces with “chemical bombs” dropped by helicopters, causing skin irritation and burning.
1997: Israeli government decides not to submit 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention to Knesset for ratification.

September 25, 1997: Israeli Mossad agents attempt to poison Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal with fentanyl in Amman, Jordan. Meshaal is administered an antidote in exchange for Jordan’s release of captured Mossad agents.

1998: CBW center in Nes Ziona (Israel Institute for Biological Research, IIBR) drops plans to expand its facilities due to local pressure over environmental and safety hazards associated with the complex.

August, 1998: Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot publishes exposé calling IIBR “metropolitan Tel Aviv's most severe environmental hazard”, raises questions regarding IIBR secrecy.

August 19, 1998: British Foreign Report: In recent years, four IIBR workers killed and 25 injured in accidents, one of which forced evacuation of the surrounding area.

September 23, 1998: Israelis living near IIBR file an appeal to the Israeli Supreme Court to prevent the expansion of the institute.

October 4, 1998: Sunday Times of London: Israeli F-16’s capable of deploying chemical and biological weapons produced at IIBR. The Times quotes a biologist who once held a senior post in Israeli intelligence: "There is hardly a single known or unknown form of chemical or biological weapon...which is not manufactured at the institute [IIBR]."

November 15, 1998: The Sunday Times reports Israel (using South African research) is developing an "ethno bomb": "In developing their "ethno-bomb", Israeli scientists are trying to exploit medical advances by identifying distinctive a gene carried by some Arabs, then create a genetically modified bacterium or virus... The scientists are trying to engineer deadly micro-organisms that attack only those bearing the distinctive genes."

April 2, 1999: United Kingdom partially lifts ban against Israeli nuclear and CBW scientists.
October 29, 2000: Israeli occupation troops shoot gas canisters into schoolyard and classrooms at T'ku, near Bethlehem. Over 24 children suffer from gas inhalation and require hospitalization. Gas “differs from the standard tear-gas used around the world in dispersing demonstrations.” Spokesman for the Palestinian Health Ministry says it is “a semi-poisonous gas that leaves strong after effects, including spasmodic reactions, nervous reactions as well as strong abdominal pains..”

February 12, 2001 - Khan Younis, Gaza Strip: Israel begins a six-week campaign of “novel gas” attacks in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Troops lob gas canisters into streets, courtyards, and houses of Khan Younis city and Gharbi refugee camp.

Fifty people admitted to Al-Nasser Hospital “in an odd state of hysteria and nervous breakdown..fainting and spasms.” Sixteen have to be transferred to the intensive care unit. Doctors “reported the Israeli use of gas that appeared to cause convulsions.”

At the Gharbi refugee camp, thirty-two people “were treated for serious injuries” following exposure to the gas. Dr. Salakh Shami, Al-Amal Hospital reports hospital received “about 130 patients suffering from gas inhalation..”

Bewildered medical personnel had “never seen anything..like the gas at Tufa.” Victims were “jumping up and down, left and right..thrashing limbs around”, suffering “with convulsions..a kind of hysteria. They were all shaking.” Vicitms would fall unconscious, then ‘come to’ hours later to face convulsions, vomiting, disorientation and pain.

February 13, 2001: Over forty new gas victims, “including a number of children..from 1 to 5 years-old”, arrived at Al-Nasser Hospital and the hospital of the Palestine Red Crescent Society.
American filmmaker James Longley arrived in Khan Younis in the middle of a gas attack. That afternoon he began filming the victims. His award-winning film “Gaza Strip” provided the best documentation to date of an Israeli posion gas attack.

AFX News Limited: “Palestinian security services have accused the Israeli army of using nerve gas during a gunbattle yesterday….the army has strongly denied the charges.”

The Voice of Palestine: “Specialists believe that this is an internationally banned nerve gas.” Those who inhaled the gas “suffered a nervous breakdown and vomited blood.”

February 18, 2001: Israeli forces fired several “poison gas” canisters into the Khan Younis refugee camp. Palestinian civilians, mostly children and women, suffered from suffocation and spasms due to inhaling the gas.

238 Palestinians affected by poison gas attacks between February 12 and February 20. Twenty-seven of the victims still hospitalized as of February 22 - Palestinian Centre for Human Rights

The Palestine Ministry of Health reported: “55 children were exposed to toxic gas thrown by the Israeli forces at citizens in Khan Younis” during February 2001.

James Longley: “One boy, who had inhaled a large amount of the gas in question, suffered in the hospital for an entire month with recurrent convulsions.”

March 2, 2001: Israeli forces operating in the West Bank village of Al-Bireh fired “a highly effective black gas similar to the one used in Khan Yunis three weeks ago. Among the wounded were four medical personnel of the Palestinian Medical Relief Committees.”

March 26, 2001: After Israeli forces operating east of Gaza City fired “new” orange gas, with “a nice-smell and delicious taste upon inhalation. Then the inhaler feels tired throughout the body, their muscles loosen, and they suffer from breathing difficulties. The gas also leaves red signs on the skin, causing agitation. Some hours later, the inhaler suffers severe abdominal pains.” Three Palestinian civilians were evacuated to Shifa’ hospital in Gaza City after inhaling the gas.
March 30, 2001: Medical sources in the West Bank city of Nablus reported Israeli occupation forces using “a highly effective gas with unfamiliar symptoms, similar to that used first in Khan Yunis on February 12, 2001.”

April 5, 2001: British journalist Jonathan Cook reported a March gas attack on the schoolyard of Al-Khader village, near Bethlehem. Thirteen year-old Sliman Salah was playing when a gas canister landed next to him. Large doses of anticonvulsants were required to control the boy’s seizures and maintain consciousness. His symptoms “were finally brought under control five days after his exposure to the gas. But Salah’s father says the boy is still suffering from stomach pains, vomiting, dizziness and breathing problems.”

October 9, 2003: American freelance journalists report the story of Mukhles Burgal, a Palestinian prisoner at Israel’s Ashkelon prison. The “guards forced their way into the crowded cell, spraying two canisters of some type of gas. Some of the 14 prisoners passed out…The effects of the gas were severe muscle spasms and an overwhelming sensation of not being able to breathe.”

October 11, 2003: Palestine Monitor: Israeli forces in Rafah, Gaza Strip “firing gas grenades containing a black gas...Medical authorities urged people to avoid the gas at all costs, as it not only causes difficulty in breathing but seriously affects the nervous system.”

October 14, 2003: Eyewitness American Laura Gordon: “The army used some kind of nerve gas for the first time in Rafah, leaving people in convulsions for days.”

June 10, 2004 - Anti-wall demonstrators gassed at Az Zawiyah, West Bank: Report by Gush Shalom, Israel's 'Peace Bloc' - “What the army used here yesterday was not tear gas. We know what tear gas is, what it feels like. That was something totally different…When we were still a long way off..they started shooting things like this one (holding up a dark green metal tube with the inscription “Hand and rifle grenade no.400” - in English). Black smoke came out. Anyone who breathed it lost consciousness immediately, more than a hundred people. They remained unconscious for nearly 24 hours. One is still unconscious..They had high fever and their muscles became rigid. Some needed urgent blood transfusion.”

May 20, 2004: “Israeli forces use chemical-contaminated ammo, which makes the skin of the victim fall once touched,” Dr. Mohamed El-Hashim, Qalqiliya. Israeli soldiers fired one bullet at Mazen Yassin, leader of Qalqilya's Hamas military wing, left him bleeding in the street and prevented civilians and ambulances from approaching. “A white-colored substance appeared on the lips of the deceased, a..thing I've never saw before...The skin was falling out upon touching any part of the body.”

June 22, 2004: Dozens of Palestinians injured by a reportedly new brand of “tear gas” that leaves serious symptoms many hours, even days, after inhalation. According to Bassam Abu Madhi, head of Salfit Health Department, the gases used by the Israeli police against demonstrators caused “serious involuntary convulsions. This shows that the gases have a certain effect on the central nervous system.” Other symptoms caused by the new gases include extended blurred vision, enlarged eye pupil, serious mental confusion and stomach pains.”

June 26, 2004: Al Aqsa Brigades operative describes “the intentional poisoning of the seven operatives” killed in Nablus, June 26. “We prepared our guns to fight, but soldiers hurled dozens of gas and smoke bombs inside the room we sheltered in.” Medical sources in Nablus report that the seven killed inside the hideout died as a result of inhaling an unidentified gas. A few gun shots were found in the hands and legs, but “none could have led to their death.” A woman nearby fainted after inhaling the gases.

Please Ma'am, Can We Kill Some More?

The United States rejected suggestions on Wednesday that talks on Lebanon had failed after a joint declaration stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hizbollah guerrillas.

In a meeting involving the UN and 15 foreign ministers, Condoleezza Rice (who co-chaired the talks), beat off concerted international demands for an immediate ceasefire. Out of all the countries that took park in the meeting only the Arab countries, Italy and the United Nations wanted to seek a declaration for an immediate ceasefire without preconditions.

It is very strange that only a few weeks ago in a G8 meeting (chaired by Russia) the leaders of the world’s top countries agreed for immediate cease-fire yet in a meeting chaired by the Americans in Rome they agreed following long discussions over the wording, instead agreed in their declaration to "work immediately to reach with the utmost urgency" a ceasefire.

Israel says Wednesday's decision by key world powers not to call for a halt to its Lebanon offensive has given it the green light to continue. And so they did. Israeli bombardment of Lebanon has continued throughout the day, with air strikes in many parts of the country, killing innocent people and damaging Lebanese infrastructure.

The US and Saudi Arabia have promised to send millions of pounds in aid to Lebanon. The US also promised to send Israel more weapons. I'm just waiting to hear from the US that they will send US contractors to repair Lebanon - Now that would put the icing on the cake!


Lebanon damage report (from BBC)
Summary of the main Lebanese infrastructure damaged by Israeli bombing in the two weeks since the conflict began on 12 July, according to the Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs.



Airports
Beirut International, Qaleiat domestic, Rayak militaryPorts, Beirut, Tripoli, Jounieh

Other transport
Lighthouse, Beirut, Bridges: 62, Fuel stations: 22, Overpasses: 72, Dams: 3, Roads: 600km

Military
Radar installations: 4, Army barracks: 1

Civilian
Private homes: 5,000

Commercial
Tissue paper factory, Bekaa, Bottle factory, Bekaa, Other businesses: 150

Communications
Hezbollah's al-Manar TV station, Haret Hreik, Beirut, MTC mobile phone antenna, Dahr al-Baidar

Utilities
Jiyeh power plant, Sibline power station, Sewage plant, Dair al-Zahrani

UN Observers Die

Yesterday four unarmed UN observers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland, died after their UN post in the town of Khiam was hit by an Israeli air strike on Tuesday. Five UNIFIL soldiers and one military observer had also been wounded.

A senior Irish soldier working for the UN forces had warned the Israelis six times that their bombardment was endangering the lives of UN staff, Ireland's foreign ministry said. Had Israel responded to the requests, "rather than deliberately ignoring them", the observers would still be alive

Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, said he was shocked at Israel's "apparently deliberate targeting" of a UN post in Lebanon.

Since this incident, many countries that form part of UNIFIL have removed their staff because of the dangers.




It’s not the first time members of the U.N. have come under fire from Israel:

An Israeli tank shell had hit a UNIFIL position in southern Lebanon on Monday, wounding four Ghanaian soldiers. Shrapnel from tank shells fired from the Israeli side seriously wounded an Indian soldier last week.

In 1996, during Israel's Grapes of Wrath campaign in Lebanon, an Israeli jet bombed a UNIFIL compound in the southern village of Qana, killing 106 civilians sheltering inside.

Israel has also attacked UN Ambulances & Red Cross Staff:

Yesterday, Israeli Air Strike blew away a Red Cross ambulance in Lebanon. Apparently the pilots will need to have their eyes tested after they claimed that they could not see the Red Cross sign on top of the ambulance.

April 14, 1996, an Israeli helicopter spotted an ambulance moving up a road near Tyre and hit it with a rocket, killing 3 small children, their mother and 3 other women.

In October 2004, the Israeli military attacked a United Nations Relief and Works Agency ambulance.

Israel alleged that the UN ambulances were used by the Palestinians to move rockets.
They also declared that these ambulances were carrying body parts of fallen Israeli soldiers.

"When challenged to produce the evidence backing up this claim, or to retract the statement and offer an apology, Israeli ministers were not able to provide any response and have remained silent.

Some of our brothers are more equal than others - The UN Security Council Resolutions

Last week, almost every form of media backed the Israeli stance that Hezbullah was illegally occupying Lebanon and was the main cause of the troubles in that region. Most of the media kept repeating the claim that Under the UN Security Council Resolution 1559, Hezbullah should be disarmed.

We know that this will not happen until Israel removes itself from occupied Lebanese lands and returns all lebanese prisoners (people that were abducted when Israel occupied Lebanon).

We also keep hearing about the two captured Israeli Soldiers but never seem to hear about why the Israeli government arrested democrately elected Palestinian ministers and parliamentarians in Israel. They have still not been released.

With the media bombarding the public with UN resolution 1559 , they seem to have forgotten to report the resolutions that Isreal failed to comply. Well i've done thier job and here are the facts:
· The results were, from 1967 to 1988 the Security Council passed 88 resolutions directly against Israel.
· During that span, Israel was condemned 49 times.
· In the General Assembly, 429 anti-Israel resolutions were passed, and Israel was condemned 321 times.
· Israel is the target of at least 65 UN Resolutions and the Palestinians are the target of none" from 1955-1992.

Here is a full list extracted from wikipedia:
· Resolution 106: "... 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"
· Resolution 111: "...'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"
· Resolution 127: "...'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"
· Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"
· Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"
· Resolution 228: "...'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"
· Resolution 237: "...'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"
· Resolution 242: "..."affirms" need for Israel to withdraw from illegally occupied territory
· Resolution 248: "... 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"
· Resolution 250: "... 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"
· Resolution 251: "... 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"
· Resolution 252: "...'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"
· Resolution 256: "... 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation"
· Resolution 259: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"
· Resolution 262: "...'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"
· Resolution 265: "... 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"
· Resolution 267: "...'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"
· Resolution 270: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"
· Resolution 271: "...'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"
· Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"
· Resolution 280: "....'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"
· Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"
· Resolution 298: "...'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"
· Resolution 313: "...'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"
· Resolution 316: "...'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"
· Resolution 317: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"
· Resolution 332: "...'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"
· Resolution 337: "...'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"
· Resolution 347: "...'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"
· Resolution 425: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
· Resolution 427: "...'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon"
· Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"
· Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
· Resolution 450: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"
· Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"
· Resolution 465: "...'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"
· Resolution 467: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"
· Resolution 468: "...'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"
· Resolution 469: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians"
· Resolution 471: "... 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
· Resolution 476: "... 'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void' "
· Resolution 478: "...'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'"
· Resolution 484: "...'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"
· Resolution 487: "...'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"
· Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"
· Resolution 498: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"
· Resolution 501: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"
· Resolution 509: "...'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"
· Resolution 515: "...'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"
· Resolution 517: "...'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
· Resolution 518: "...'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"
· Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"
· Resolution 573: "...'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters
· Resolution 587: "...'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"
· Resolution 592: "...'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"
· Resolution 605: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians
· Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
· Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
· Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
· Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians
· Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
· Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
· Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
· Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
· Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians
· Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.


American Influence:
US has vetoed literally dozens of UN resolutions calling for Israel to exercise restraint. Here is a list by Donald Neff of 39 "Vetoes Cast by the United States to Shield Israel from Criticism by the U.N. Security Council

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/May-June_2005/0505014.html

Today, there is no more of a sign that Hizbollah intends to "disarm" under the terms of UN Security Council resolutions 1559 than Israel is prepared to abide by UN Security Council Resolution 242 and withdraw from Arab territories it occupied in 1967. If resolution 242 was implemented then none of the problems that we have witnessed would have ever happened but someone intends to see that it does not get implemented, I will leave you to guess who.

Israel in Lebanon - Déjà vu?

Israel has entered Lebanon. Israeli troops are battling Hezbollah fighters in Bint Jbeil inside Lebanon. Does this sound familiar?

The answer is yes. Back in 1982 Israel took over southern Lebanon, the result was a resistant group being set up called Hezbollah (or the Party of God). It is alleged that it emerged with financial backing from Iran in the early 1980s and began a struggle to drive Israeli troops from Lebanon. In May 2000 this aim was achieved, thanks largely to the success of the party's military arm, the Islamic Resistance.

Hezbollah won the respect of most Lebanese people. It provided a presence in the Lebanese parliament and has built broad support by providing social services and health care. But it did not demilitarise, despite UN resolution 1559, passed in 2004, which called for the disarming of militias as well as the withdrawal of foreign (i.e about 14,000 Syrian) forces from Lebanon.

Although Israel withdrew from most of Lebanon it still in occupation of an area called Shebaa Farms. Lebanon wants to reclaim this area. Hezbollah is fighting to get this back. Israel claimed that the area did not belong to Lebanon but to Syria. Syria claimed that the land belongs to Lebanon. Whatever the truth of the matter, this piece of land does not belong to Israel and should be returned to Lebanon or to Syria. The UN have told Isreal many times to get of of this area, but Israel never listens to the UN and continous to occupy land belonging to other countries.



During the previous occupation of Lebanon, Israel also took with them many prisoners (some fighters, some normal people who were abducted or kidnapped) many of them were women and children. These people have been locked up in Israel, some for decades. Like the detainees in Guantanamo, they never had access to proper trials. Hezbollah wants to see these people released and returned to Lebanon.

To get some of these prisoners released Hezbollah had adopted the tactic of kidnapping Israeli soldiers and have in the past successfully bargained with Israel to exchange with their troops. This time Israel attacked with aggression and Hezbollah retaliated. We seem to forget that Israel attacked first.

To date about 17 Israelis have been killed and over 360 Lebanese (half of them children) have been killed. As Israel destroys Lebanese infrastructure, thousands of people have fled their homes becoming instant refugees. You can be assured that many will never forget what has happened and many will not let Israel and the west forget either. Lets not create a new Hezbollah.



Lets hope Dr Condoleezza Rice has a successful visit in the Middle East. My advice to her is simple. Get Israeli troops out of Lebanon, give back the Shebaa Farms region to the Lebanese and return all the Lebanese prisoners held in Isreal. The result will lead to a complete end to the military side of Hezbollah.

Iraq - The Forgotten War

On Sunday, former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had been taken to hospital as a consequence of his hunger strike. With all the happenings in Lebanon we seem to have forgotten why the US invaded Iraq and why they are still there.

One of the reasons for invading Iraq was the dubious connection with Weapons of Mass Destruction. Following the invasion, the Pentagon and CIA conducted a six-month intensive search, the result was that they did not find any weapons of mass destruction.

Prior to the United States invasion, the UN and many western nations announced serious misgivings as to the accuracy of WMD claims. One of those persons was former Ministry of Defence employee Dr David Kelly. Its been 3 years since his death but Lib Dem MP Norman Baker has not given up the investigation to uncover Dr Kelly’s mysterious death.

Melanie Philips of The Mail on Sunday produced a brilliant article – Read below:

Will we ever be told the truth about the death of Dr David Kelly?
by MELANIE PHILLIPS, Mail on Sunday, 15:02pm 24th July 2006

Everyone knows, don't they, that most untoward events generally have banal explanations such as muddle, incompetence or sheer blind chance.

To believe otherwise is to run the risk of being branded a 'conspiracy theorist', a small step away from being lumped together with the kind of people who think that crop circles are designed by visitors from Mars or that Princess Diana was murdered by MI6.

The death of the weapons inspector Dr David Kelly in 2003 triggered a political firestorm of the highest order. His apparent suicide put the Government under enormous pressure following his unmasking as the source of the BBC's claim that the Government had 'sexed up' the case for war in Iraq.

All attention focused on the epic battle between Alastair Campbell and the BBC over this claim, and the treatment the Government meted out to Dr Kelly.

Even though the inquiry into the affair by Lord Hutton exonerated ministers and officials of virtually all charges, merely rebuking them for not having warned Dr Kelly that his name was about to be made public, the Government was still widely blamed for driving him to his death.

Suspicions
Right from the start, however, there were many who were not convinced Dr Kelly had taken his own life at all. Many aspects of the story just didn't seem to add up. First was the character of the man and his demeanour on the day he died.

Although he was under intense pressure, he was known to be a strong character and belonged to the Baha'i faith, which prohibits suicide.

Those closest to him (such as his sister), and even neighbours he met on his last walk, said that on the day he died he had shown no signs of depression.

The Hutton inquiry, and the experts it called, dismissed out of hand any idea that Dr Kelly had not killed himself. But the suspicions wouldn't go away, and developed a life of their own on the internet.

Claims were made that Dr Kelly's body had been moved from its original prone position on the ground, and propped up against a tree. Items said to have been found near his body had not been seen by the paramedics who first found him. And so on.

Such claims were given considerably more authority in 2004 when three medical specialists wrote in a letter to the Press that they did not believe the official finding that Dr Kelly died either from haemorrhaging from a severed ulnar artery in his wrist, or from an overdose of coproxamol tablets, or a combination of the two.

Such an artery, they said, was of matchstick thickness and severing it would not lead to the kind of blood loss that would kill someone. They also pointed out that, according to the ambulance team at the scene, the quantity of blood around the body was minimal — hardly what one would expect if someone has just haemorrhaged to death.

Even stranger, although Dr Kelly was said to have swallowed 29 coproxamol tablets, only one-fifth of one tablet was found in his stomach, and the level found in his blood was far less than a fatal dose.

Despite the expertise of these sceptics, their claims went largely unnoticed. The implications seemed too far-fetched to be taken seriously. After all, if Dr Kelly did not commit suicide, and clearly didn't just drop dead of natural causes, he must have been killed.

Who could have done such a deed? The Iraqi secret service? Our own? Shadowy terrorists lying in wait in the Oxfordshire woods armed with undetectable poisons and an array of evidence to lay a false trail and bamboozle everyone?

No, this kind of thinking properly belonged in the pages of John Le Carre's fiction.
But now, it has not only been taken up within Parliament, but the original charges of inconsistency have been embellished with much more evidence which can no longer be ignored.
Discrepancies

The tenacious Lib Dem MP Norman Baker gave up his front-bench job to investigate these claims. What he has uncovered is remarkable and poses questions which demand to be answered.

Mr Baker has not only found experts who confirm the analysis of the three doctors about the discrepancies and scientific improbabilities in the official account.

He has also discovered that only one person in the UK was said to have killed himself by slitting his ulnar artery that year — and that was Dr Kelly.

This is hardly surprising since this is just about the most improbable way to commit suicide, made even more difficult by the inappropriate knife that Dr Kelly is said to have used.
More explosively still, however, are Mr Baker's discoveries (published in yesterday's Mail on Sunday) about the behaviour of the police and the coroner.

The normal practice in such circumstances would be for the coroner to issue a temporary death certificate pending the official inquiry into such a death.

But in this case, the coroner issued an unprecedented full death certificate, just one week after the inquiry started into the circumstances of Dr Kelly's demise — and after the coroner had held a meeting with Home Office officials.

What on earth could have been the point of such a meeting at such a sensitive time, except for the Government to direct the coroner in some unspecified and possibly improper way?
As for the police, their behaviour appears to have been even more bizarre.

According to Mr Baker, their operation to investigate Dr Kelly's death started around nine hours before the weapons expert was reported missing. What astounding prescience! With such psychic powers among the police, one wonders there is any crime at all.

Many of these curiosities surfaced in evidence to the Hutton inquiry, only to be batted away. Lord Hutton's brief was simply to inquire into 'the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly'. Clearly, he could have investigated the manner of his death, but he chose not to do so.

Inexperienced
Instead, he took it as a given that Dr Kelly had taken his own life — and stated that he was satisfied by claims which we are now told were scientifically impossible, that Dr Kelly killed himself by slitting his left wrist and that his death was hastened by the number of coproxamol tablets he had taken.

Mr Baker claims that Lord Hutton was chosen at speed by a cabal around the Prime Minister because he was inexperienced and could be relied upon to toe the line.

When his report exonerated the Government, he was rounded upon as a patsy by those who were certain that it had Dr Kelly's blood on its hands. But maybe, just like Lord Hutton himself, such critics missed the fact that he had asked the wrong questions altogether.

Now, it has taken just one terrier-like MP to unearth all this information.

Why has no official body asked the same questions about all these obvious peculiarities? Why has no one given a straight answer to those who have raised them?

What is the point of going to the expense and public performance of a high-profile official inquiry, only to find that the most basic of questions about evidence that is either contradictory or doesn't stand up to scrutiny haven't even been asked?

In the light of all this, the coroner's decision not to resume the inquest into Dr Kelly's death because there were 'no exceptional circumstances' appears totally unsustainable. A full inquest is now imperative to get to the bottom of this disturbing mystery once and for all.

Condi goes to the Middle East

On Sunday, President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met up with
Saudi Foreign Minister Saud-al-Faisal and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the head of the Saudi National Security Council.

Considering the Saudis have no REAL influence over the current conflict in the Middle East, What was this meeting about? Oil perhaps? We know there is a special relationship between the Bush family and the Saudi Royal Family. We also know that most of the Bush administration have in the past been directors of international oil companies including Condi.

Recent British archives revealed, the Saudi Arabians ministers, in the past, were usually drunk, had a superiority complex and liked taking bribes e.g. as in the case of the UK selling military equipment to Saudi Arabia. I doubt anything has changed.



Toady, Ms Rice finally arrived unannounced in the Middle East. She met up with Lebanon’s PM Fouad Siniora and is expected to unveil an aid package for Lebanon. Ms Rice will later head to Israel to meet Prime Minister Ehud Olmert

En route from Washington, Ms Rice said there was an "urgent" need for a ceasefire - but that conditions had to be right.

Maybe when there is no one left standing, our American friends will consider it the right time for ceasefire? The UN have been critical of Israel but with the US and UK still favouring Israel the UN has no real power nor has it got any purpose to exist.

UK Minister of State criticises Israel

It’s been a strange weekend.

Dr Kim Howells (Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office) criticised Israel's bombardment of Lebanon while on a visit to Beirut. It was strange because he is former Chairman of Labour Friends of Israel.

He broke with the UK Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary's less critical line, saying:

“The destruction of the infrastructure, the death of so many children and so many people. These have not been surgical strikes. And it's very difficult, I think, to understand the kind of military tactics that have been used. You know, if they're chasing Hezbollah, then go for Hezbollah. You don't go for the entire Lebanese nation.”

I wonder how long he will remain in his present job or maybe it’s a change of heart by the Blair government? It’s a positive start so well done Mr Howells.

Yo, Blair. How are you doing?

During the G8 summit a fascinating “informal” conversation took place between Tony Blair and George Bush. Both were unaware that the microphones were picking up their conversations. It illustrated the “special” relationship between Mr Bush and Mr Blair and reflected their views on the Middle East.

Below is an extract from the Independent newspaper, 18 July 2006:


Bush: Yo, Blair. How are you doing? (Does he regard Mr Blair as an equal? What about 'Yo, Tony'?)
Blair: I'm just...
Bush: You're leaving?
Blair: No, no, no not yet. On this trade thingy.... (inaudible) (Mr Blair is getting anxious that the World Trade Organisation is falling apart because some nations, including the US, are putting domestic interests before a worldwide free trade agreement)
Bush: Yeah, I told that to the man.
Blair: Are you planning to say that here or not?
Bush: If you want me to.
Blair: Well, it's just that if the discussion arises...
Bush: I just want some movement.
Blair: Yeah.
Bush: Yesterday we didn't see much movement.
Blair: No, no, it may be that it's not, it may be that it's impossible.
Bush: I am prepared to say it.
Blair: But it's just I think what we need to be an opposition...
Bush: Who is introducing the trade?
Blair: Angela (The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, will lead the trade discussion. That is good for Mr Blair. She is on his side.)
Bush: Tell her to call 'em.
Blair: Yes.
Bush: Tell her to put him on, them on the spot. Thanks for the sweater it's awfully thoughtful of you.
Blair: It's a pleasure.
Bush: I know you picked it out yourself.
Blair: Oh, absolutely, in fact (inaudible)
Bush: What about Kofi? (inaudible) His attitude to ceasefire and everything else ... happens. (Change of subject. Now they are on to Lebanon and the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan)
Blair: Yeah, no I think the (inaudible) is really difficult. We can't stop this unless you get this international business agreed.
Bush: Yeah. (Mr Blair is trying to push the idea of a UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon. That 'yeah' does not sound like a wholehearted agreement)
Blair: I don't know what you guys have talked about, but as I say I am perfectly happy to try and see what the lie of the land is, but you need that done quickly because otherwise it will spiral. (Meaning: 'Please, George, let me go to the Middle East and be a world statesman')
Bush: I think Condi is going to go pretty soon. (Meaning: 'No')
Blair: But that's, that's, that's all that matters. But if you... you see it will take some time to get that together. (Meaning: 'Oh well, all right, if you don't want me to. Just a thought')
Bush: Yeah, yeah.
Blair: But at least it gives people...
Bush: It's a process, I agree. I told her your offer to... (Meaning: 'Drop it. You're not going.')
Blair: Well... it's only if I mean... you know. If she's got a..., or if she needs the ground prepared as it were... Because obviously if she goes out, she's got to succeed, if it were, whereas I can go out and just talk.
Bush: You see, the ... thing is what they need to do is to get Syria, to get Hizbollah to stop doing this shit and it's over. (Mr Bush is expressing his belief that Syria is pulling Hizbollah's strings, while Mr Blair is hinting the Syrians might be up to no good as well)
Blair: (inaudible)
Bush: (inaudible)
Blair: Syria.
Bush: Why?
Blair: Because I think this is all part of the same thing.
Bush: Yeah.
Blair: What does he think? He thinks if Lebanon turns out fine, if we get a solution in Israel and Palestine, Iraq goes in the right way... (Here they might be talking about Kofi Annan, or they may mean the Syrian President, Bashir Assad)
Bush: Yeah, yeah, he is sweet. (Mr Bush is probably being sarcastic)
Blair: He is honey. And that's what the whole thing is about. It's the same with Iraq.
Bush: I felt like telling Kofi to call, to get on the phone to Assad and make something happen.
Blair: Yeah.
Bush: (inaudible)
Blair: (inaudible)
Bush: We are not blaming the Lebanese government.
Blair: Is this...? (at this point Blair taps the microphone in front of him and the sound is cut.)

G8 and the Middle East

Last week a meeting took place in St Petersberg, Russia. It was a G8 summit. Talks took place between the leaders of eight of the world's most powerful nations - Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Some may argue that only the United States has any real influence on global issues.

Amongst various items, the situation on the Middle East was on the agenda. The group came up with the following statement:

"These extremist elements and those that support them cannot be allowed to plunge the Middle East into chaos and provoke a wider conflict. The extremists must immediately halt their attacks."

"It is also critical that Israel, while exercising the right to defend itself, be mindful of the strategic and humanitarian consequences of its actions. We call upon Israel to exercise utmost restraint, seeking to avoid casualties among innocent civilians and damage to civilian infrastructure and to refrain from acts that would destabilize the Lebanese government. "

"The most urgent priority is to create conditions for a cessation of violence that will be sustainable and lay the foundation for a more permanent solution."

"The most urgent priority is to create conditions for a cessation of violence that will be sustainable and lay the foundation for a more permanent solution. This, in our judgment, requires:

· The return of the Israeli soldiers in Gaza and Lebanon unharmed;
· An end to the shelling of Israeli territory;
· An end to Israeli military operations and the early withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza;
· The release of the arrested Palestinian ministers and parliamentarians. "

The meeting ended on the July 17th so why has nothing been done?

The U.S. State Department has described the G8 statement as "extraordinary."

"The statement... is really, if you will, an action plan. It lays out a roadmap to try to address these various issues," said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

"It does provide a way forward," he added. He also emphasized that the G8 leaders had pointed out the fundamental reasons that had led to the current situation.

McCormack confirmed that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will visit the region, but could not elaborate on the timeframe.

Why is Condoleezza Rice not in the Middle East?
The official reason is Rice wanted to hear the conclusions and recommendations of the UN mission sent to the Middle East by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan before she went. The real reason is not known, but what is known is that more and more innocent people on both sides of the War will continue to die.

Earlier today, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for a cease-fire to the violence in Lebanon, but Israel and the U.S. rejected the idea. The UK will probably do the same. John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said it was time for the Security Council to start considering a response, but he ruled out a cease-fire. The Bush administration is playing down expectations for Rice's upcoming trip to the Mideast, saying she will not shuttle among capitals to broker a deal.

Why is Israel overreacting?

I've taken this article from a newspaper article as it sums up everything perfectly.

Israel and the US fall into another trap of their own making

Israel's disproportionate military response to the abduction of one of its soldiers and the killing of two more by Palestinian militants nearly three weeks ago and to similar action by the Lebanese Hezbollah last week has generated a regional crisis.

The Bush Administration's public backing of such a response can only increase resentment of both Israel and the US in the Arab and Muslim worlds, further undermining Washington's efforts in the war on terrorism.

In part, Israel's overreaction may reflect the inexperience of its new Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, and Minister for Defence, Amir Peretz.

Yet Israel's operations appear to be designed to go well beyond punishing Palestinian militants and Hezbollah.

What started as two minor skirmishes on Israel's borders with Gaza (which despite Israel's formal withdrawal from the strip a year ago has, for all practical purposes, remained under its control) and Lebanon, have been blown out of all proportion. The Palestinian and Hezbollah kidnappings are nothing new in the region. Israel has kidnapped, jailed and killed Palestinians and Lebanese in the hundreds over the years in the name of self-defence and combating terrorism, as defined by Israel.

Why has Israel overreacted? It is using the abductions to achieve a wider goal. In the case of the Palestinians, it has been deeply troubled by the rise to power of the radical Islamist group Hamas through a democratic election early this year. Although Israel initially backed the formation of Hamas in the late 1980s as a counter to the secularist Palestine Liberation Organisation, which it then rejected as a terrorist organisation, it has increasingly found it expedient to do everything possible to prevent Hamas from governing and strengthening the forces of political Islam in the region.

Israel's ultimate objective seems to be to cause the demise of the Hamas Government, and a civil war between the PLO and Hamas supporters as a way out of negotiating a possible end to its occupation. In this, it has had the support of Bush, who has been unhappy with the outcome of the Palestinian process of democratisation.

Similarly, Israel has been increasingly uncomfortable with the growth of Hezbollah and the speed of Lebanon's recovery following its civil war and democratisation, especially since Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon after 20 years of costly occupation.

Since its foundation in 1948 Israel's policy in historical Palestine has been to do whatever it takes to ensure that its Arab neighbours remain weak and divided. On this basis, while it has neutralised the Egyptian and Jordanian regimes through peace treaties and American influence, and the US has paralysed Iraq as a threat to the Jewish state, Israeli leadership has been keen to ensure favourable regime change in Syria and its regional ally, Iran, along with the destruction of the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah.

Israel is seeking to destroy not only Hezbollah, but also Lebanon. Its wider objective is to set back Lebanon's reconstruction by years so that it could never rival Israel politically and economically, as well as to undermine the chances of any US-Iran agreement over Iran's nuclear program.

Israel has embarked on a dangerous game. Syria and Iran will not leave Hezbollah in the lurch.
The situation that Israel has generated by its overreaction will leave both Israel and the US vulnerable to wider accusations of a Jewish-Christian conspiracy against Islam, and an upsurge in secular and religious radicalism among Arabs and Muslims.

This can only assist al-Qaeda and its supporters, and may well illustrate once again the immaturity of the Israeli leadership, and the naivety of the US in handling the Middle East conflict.

Taken from article written by Amin Saikal, July 17, 2006
Sunday Morning Herald, Australia

Afghanistan and the war against drugs

Last week the US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called on Russia and Europe to do more to stem drug trafficking from Afghanistan warning that it is fuelling a Taliban resurgence and threatens to undermine Afghanistan.

"I'm concerned about the role that narcotics are playing in this sense: when there's that much money involved, you have to worry that it is going to be attractive," he told reporters.

The United States currently has 23,000 troops in Afghanistan. Rumsfeld put the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) at about another 15,000 to 20,000 and Afghan security forces at about 70,000.


Some facts you might NOT know:

Afghanistan is the world’s largest grower of opium poppies. This tiny country produces nearly three quarters of the world’s opium supply.

When the Taliban came into power in 1997 they began cracking down on the opium growers. We may have detested the Taliban and their (so called) oppressive regime but at least they did something positive!

Poppy fields were burned and the heroin processing plants were shut down. Within a few years opium production in Afghanistan had plummeted from CIA estimated 4,042 tons per year to only 81.3 tons per year

In 2001 The United States provided $43 million worth of supplies (primarily wheat) to humanitarian relief organizations in Afghanistan. This was widely reported by critics of U.S. policy to be a $43 million reward to the Taliban for reducing poppy production.

Global Oil companies also had an interest in Afghanistan to build pipelines through Afghanistan to link Caspian Sea oil and gas reserves to Central and South Asia. Members of the Taliban had visited the US to look at the plans for this operation.

All was going well…. until 9/11. The group that was bankrolled by the United States to fight off the Russians (as part of group of Mujahideen) did the unthinkable and attacked America (well Al-Qaeda to be specific who were protected bt the Taliban in Afghanistan).

The United States decided to find the culprits and occupied Afghanistan later in 2001. Poppy production hit a record high since the fall of the Taliban government. In 2004, under the U.S. occupation, an estimated 4,950 metric tons of opium gum potentially producing 582 metric tons of heroin were harvested. Most of these opium would be sold in Europe and not the United States.


Why didn’t the Americans destroy the poppy fields and the heroin processing plants?

In order to minimize American casualties during the invasion, U.S. forces allied themselves with a group known as the Northern Alliance. The Northern Alliance was a band of warlords who, in addition to controlling their own private armies, also controlled much of the drug trade in Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance is also supported and funded by several countries, including Russia, Iran and India.

Many warlords joined the Northern Alliance in order to defend their poppy fields against the Taliban’s crackdown. In exchange for their help against the Taliban, America allowed Northern Alliance members to continue growing poppies with relative impunity. Not only had the drug trade blossomed since the American invasion, it also had become far more profitable.

The current Afghan government has promised to crack down on drug trafficking, but their efforts have yielded few tangible results. The poppy growers have simply moved their fields away from government controlled areas and into the wild hinterlands controlled by the warlords.


So what should be done - What are the solutions?

Donald Rumsfeld is right in saying that Europe needs to do more in stopping the drug trafficking but so do the Americans.

With so many troops in Afghanistan I find it hard to understand why the Afghan government & the US find it difficult to destroy poppy crops. Maybe it is not in their best interest to do so? Maybe it would be better to reintroduce the Taliban? At least when they were in power they controlled the drug trade and stabilised the country.

Secondly, we need to get a better understanding why farmers grow Opium. Opium is not just a crop in Afghanistan; it is a way of life. It is used for trading with other goods, a form or barter. Farmers need to be introduced to alternative crops as a means of income. The Afghan government needs to subsidize these farmers, ensure proper infrastructure is in place to help the farmers and have stronger law enforcement in place.

Finally, the Americans (and United Nations) clearly need to do more. Now that they have established a correlation between the farming of opium and funding of terrorist (what took them so long?) Will they be going after the Northern Alliance (and its Warlords) rather than the Taliban? Do they know the difference? Have they realised that they “themselves” are responsible for the situation? Do they care? If they do maybe they will take it seriously and prioritised the war against drugs in this region.

Freedom of Speech - Dutch political party

THE HAGUE, Netherlands - A Dutch court refused on Monday to ban the PNVD political party (Dutch abbreviation of Brotherly Love) whose main goal is to lower the age of sexual consent from 16 to 12. The judge said it was the voters' right to judge the appeal of political parties.

The party has only three known members, one of whom was convicted of molesting an 11-year-old boy in 1987. Widely dubbed the "paedophile" party, it is unlikely ever to win a seat in parliament. The group would need around 60,000 votes, and pollsters estimate it would get fewer than 1,000.

"Freedom of expression, freedom ... of association, including the freedom to set up a political party, can be seen as the basis for a democratic society," Judge H. Hofhuis said in his ruling. "These freedoms give citizens the opportunity to, for example, use a political party to appeal for change to the constitution, law, or policy."

This news-piece only made it to very small columns in the media almost hidden away in the back pages. This piece of information disgusts me but it raises an important question of whether freedom of speech should be given to people whose actions & words may harm the public.

Whatever opinions people may have it is important to protect vulnerable people, whether they are a majority or a minority.

We have in the past seen damage done by the freedom of speech i.e. Danish newspapers publishing cruel cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). To me, freedom of speech means responsibility for any actions caused by this freedom. This is an important responsibility and something we all need to consider.

War in the Middle East – What is the solution?

The Balfour Declaration of 1917 has caused a regrettable mess in the Middle East. Since the paper was introduced and approved by the British Government we have seen the creation of Israel in Palestine (against the wishes of the local Palestinians & surrounding Arab countries).

It can be argued that Israel was created by the European and American Governments as a way of apologising to the Jewish Community for their failure to protect them during the world wars. But for many countries it was also a way of shifting these communities (from their respective countries) to the Middle East.

Other will argue that Israel was created as a way of controlling the Middle East. Western governments of the UK and United States have financed Israel to keep control of the region. It is important for the UK & US to have a stable region for Economic benefits.

Israel became the homeland of many Jews from the first wave of migration starting in 1881 to followed by migration of Holocaust survivors then followed general migration of Jews wishing to retire & settle in Israel. The population of Israel grew and many non-Jews (Muslims, Christians & others) had been forced out of the major cities like Jerusalem and many have been kicked out of the country.

Land gained from the Arab-Isralie wars have been used by developers to house the mass-immigration of American & Eastern Eurpean Jews.Today we have fighting all over the region. Various fractions of arab groups (labled Terrorists) have attacked Israel and Israeli army have done vice versa with more aggression. We tend to forget that the so called good guys (Israel) as labelled by Western Governments are not as clean as people think they are.

Little information of their terreroit past & present have been published in the western world or even condemmed by western governments.We tend to forget the hanging of the British sergents and officers by the Israelis as well as the killing of 34 American Serviceman of the USS Liberty by Israeli airforce.

Western governments turned a blind eye to Jewist terrorist activities including bombing of various Arab markets and cafes which killed many civilians, including women and children and the taking up of Palestinian homes, land and possessions.

We also forget that during the 80’s Israel supported the apartheid government of South Africa. Arms were sold to the South African Army. Israel also helped develop & enhanced the South African army with military training. Israel also helped South Africa develop Nuclear Technology.

Israel’s enemy are mainly groups like Hezbollah & Hamas. The South Africans were fighting the ANC (whose members included the likes of Nelson Mandella). It is ironic how yeterdays terrorists have become todays freedom fighters. Maybe leaders of Hezbollah & Hamas will be seen as freedom fighters in the future?

In acts of war there can be no winners. Hezbollah & Hamas have done damage to Isralies and Israel has retaliated against the Paliestinians and their neighbouring countries. If a war broke out by all Arab countries they will stand no chance against the might of Israel.

So how can we settle the situation, are there any solutions?

(1) Israel holds the key, they have the power. Arab extremists will never be happy until they reclaim their land including east Jerusalem. Israeli extremists will never be happy until they own all of Palestine.

(2) The solution would be for Israel to move back to the 1967 border. It would also help if they stopped stalling peace talks and stopped plans to expand its settlements.

(3) Western government (particularly United States) should stop the continued funding of Israel and use their might to force all parties to accept peace in the region. Israel is out of control. It knows that the United Nations is weak and ineffective and any action it takes against its enemies will not be condemned by western governments or western media.

If nothing is done I fear continued retaliation from Islamic extremists throughout the world and everyone (not just Israel) will suffer.

Hello and Welcome

Welcome to my Blog.

I am the speaker of the truth.

I am here to provide you with information, some of them my own opinion, whilst others relating to the topic of the day. I hope you find these to be interesting and stimulating.

I will try to publish information that governments, corporations or media tycoons will detest, as the information provided may not agree with their views. For years the public have been indoctrinated with information that has been manipulated to justify the views of governments and organisations, it is time the truth be told, Ladies and Gentleman, I am your speaker, I am the speaker of the truth.