Émission de radio L'Autre Monde

Pour écouter, cliquez sur l'image! ..............................................
Suivez aussi L'Autre Monde sur YouTube et sur Twitter

lundi 29 janvier 2007

Nouvelle émission de radio internet!



C`est avec grand plaisir que j`annonce notre nouvelle émission de radio Internet sur les ondes de CHOQ FM, la radio de l`UQAM. L'émission, intitulée L`Autre Monde, est diffusée en direct à tous les dimanches de 8h30 à 9h00pm. Vous pouvez aussi la télécharger et l`écouter sur votre ordinateur ou dans votre IPod!

La première émission a été diffusée dimanche le 28 janvier 2007. Les articles, sources et informations complémentaires aux émissions seront présentés une fois par semaine sur le site Les Nouvelles Internationales ainsi que sur le site de CHOQ FM.

Le sujet de l`émission était:


Info. Archive - 2007-01-28 :
Dimanche 28 janvier 20h30: 1ère émission Présentation générale de l’émission Regard sur l’histoire du contrôle des masses, présentation du film Century of the self http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=8339
Francois nous présente sa chronique Les Nouvelles internationnales, une « cyber revue de presse », qui vise à témoigner de la vivacité de l’information alternative sur Internet.


A venir:

Dimanche 4 février 20h30


Nous recevons en studio un représentant du GRIP-UQAM

Du côté de la chronique Les Nouvelles internationales:

François nous donne des précisions concernant les tentatives de contrôle de l'information sur internet et quelques exemples de propagande et de désinformation dans les médias de masse.

À suivre...


Je vous laisse sur la présentation générale de L`Autre Monde et ce dont on va parler. Alors passez le mot et n`en manquez pas une!

L'Autre Monde

Oscillant entre les mondes macroscopiques des magouilles internationales et l’univers microscopique de nos actions de résistance et de réinvention au quotidien, l’Autre Monde cherche à stimuler la réflexion et à inviter à l’action.

Une partie importante de l’émission cherche à alimenter la réflexion autour de l’information alternative accessible via l’Internet. Nous vous proposons de débroussailler cette jungle informationnelle, pour offrir des balises qui faciliterons la recherche d’information fiable, tout en proposant un questionnement critique autour des nouvelles luttes pour l’accès à l’information. Notre chroniqueur des Nouvelles Internationales attire à chaque semaine notre attention sur des pièces d’information alternative, à travers une cyber revue de presse qui apporte un certain éclairage sur les événements internationaux.

Espace populaire, la deuxième partie de l’émission reçoit, présente et questionne des initiatives locales qui tentent de transformer les différents aspects, économique, écologique, médiatique, social, et artistique de nos modes de vie et de nos façons de concevoir le monde.



tab
jouertelechargertelecharger



dimanche 21 janvier 2007

Nouvelles guerres-agressions militaires US






Nouvelles guerres-agressions militaires US


Sans bruit majeur dans les médias de masse, les États-Unis ont ouvert deux autres fronts militaires, des agressions contre des pays qui ne représentent aucune menace pour la communauté internationale: la Somalie et les Philippines.

L`armée US a mené des opérations de bombardements aériens contre des supposées cibles Al Qaida et de "terroristes islamiques", alors que les informations qu`on reçoit disent que des dizaines de civils innocents incluant femmes et enfants en sont morts, que des petites communautés agricoles furent attaquées et le plus incroyable c`est que des passeports américains et d`autres pistes remontant à l`Angleterre ont été retrouvés sur certains des membres Al Qaida qui ont été tué.

Et ce n`est pas une nouvelle situation: ceci c`est produit aussi bien en Iraq à plusieurs reprises, qu`en Palestine où des agents du Mossad israéliens furent identifiés après s`être fait passer pour des terroristes palestiniens, ce qui est pratique si un état veut blamer et démoniser un autre peuple pour avancer un agenda qui ne serait pas justifiable autrement à la face du monde.

Alors voilà, on se retrouve devant une situation où dans le bruit médiatique une nouvelle guerre vient de commencer, une guerre non-déclarée, illégale, une agression non jutifiée.

Et comme si ce n`était pas assez, il semble que les forces US ont commencé des opérations militaires armées aux Philippines, qui est tout aussi contre la Constitution des Philippines que les conventions internationales.

Avec l`attaque militaire tant désirée par Israël contre l`Iran qui va entrainer les USA inévitablement; la Syrie et le Liban qui sont également dans le viseur, on est en route vers un conflit majeur au Moyen-Orient, et possiblement un conflit mondial majeur (3ième Guerre Mondiale?) puisqu`il est très clair que la Chine et la Russie sont derrière l`Iran où ils ont des intérêts géostratégiques et financiers majeurs à défendre.

Il est clair qu`on se retrouve devant un scénario d`affrontement de l`axe anglo-saxon UK-US-Israël contre l`Iran-Russie-Chine, pour ne nommer que ceux-là, s`il fallait qu`une attaque de la part d`Israël-USA se produise sur les sites nucléaires iraniens. Et une chose est certaine, c`est que tous les préparatifs sont déjà en place pour une telle attaque.

Alors bienvenue dans ce conflit global en carton qu`est la guerre contre le terrorisme: une guerre perpétuelle pour le grand profit du complexe militaro-industriel, en collaboration et pour le profit aussi des banquiers et des politiciens corrompus. C`est la guerre parfaite, celle contre un ennemi invisible caché dans tous les coins, mais qu`on ne voit jamais, mais qui continue de faire des milliers de victimes innocentes et cause la destruction de pays entiers.

Donc voilà, consultez les articles mis en liens ici et informez-vous. J`ai l`impression que trop peu de gens réalisent dans quelle galère nous sommes tous mondialement embarqués, et les graves conséquences irréversibles qui vont en découler.

J`ai mis à la fin quelques courts videos à voir.

Ciao!




Somalie et Éthiopie


Somalie une invasion dangereuse et illégale de Etats Unis
- par Salim Lone - 2007-01-10

US says its pursuit of Somali "al-Qaeda terrorists" a right
The United States has a right to pursue Somalia's Islamists, which it believes have ties to international terror networks, the US embassy in Kenya said Thursday.

"A right"?
By that logic, anyone
from any country who characterizes US foreign policy, and the execution thereof, to be that of a "terrorist state" has the right to pursue all US citizens, right?
And in these 'Undelclared by Congress Wars' in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Somalia, are we prepping to go to war against the entire world?


Another batch of fake "Al Qaeda?"

American Passports Found on Bodies of Al Qaeda Fighters in Somalia.

See
Fake Al Qaeda

"Terrorists" captured in Somalia 'are British'

U.S. says Somalia must not become terror haven
The United States said on Tuesday it was very concerned over the presence of al Qaeda "terrorists" in Somalia, where local officials say the U.S. launched air strikes killing more than 20 people

You mean the
"Al Qaeda" with US passports?
Or the "Al Qaeda" that
work for the US Government?
Or do you mean
THESE "Al Qaeda"?

Somalia terror 'funded in Britain'

US attack in Somalia killed innocents-Arab League

US air strikes killed over 100 Somalians

In Somalia, a reckless U.S. proxy war

Ethiopie - Somalie: L'ombre de Washington plane sur la guerre
- par Tony Busselen - 2007-01-12

Hôtel Corne d’Afrique, grande base américaine
- par Emilio Manfredi - 2007-01-11

US warships guard Somali coast
US forces are being deployed off the coast of Somalia to prevent Islamists with suspected terrorist links from fleeing the country, it was reported today.
"We would be concerned that no leaders who were members of the Islamic Courts, which have ties to terrorist organisations, including al-Qaida, are allowed to flee and leave Somalia," a US government spokesman said.

So what happens when these former Somali Council of Islamic Courts members get captured, if in fact they are captured by US forces?
Will they experience "extraordinary rendition" in some out of the way CIA-sponsored hell-hole, or just wind up getting tortured at Gitmo?


Question: Why doesn't the US condemn Ethiopian invasion and occupation of Somalia ?

Ethiopian troops advance on Mogadishu

Ethiopia launches airstrikes in Somalia



Philipinnes

U.S. GIs fighting in Philippines
U.S. troops, in possible violation of the Philippines' constitution, have taken part in combat operations against guerrillas linked to al-Qaida, an activist group said in a report Monday.

Philippine Military Says U.S. Involved In Intell Ops In Troubled South

The Philippine military on Wednesday admitted that U.S. intelligence experts were involved in tracking down members of the Southeast Asian terror group, Jemaah Islamiya, believed hiding with Abu Sayyaf militants in the southern island of Jolo.



IRAN


Les médias britanniques sont en train de nous conditionner pour une attaque contre l’Iran
- par Robert Fox, - 2007-01-10

Est-ce que le Président a déclaré une "Guerre secrète" à la Syrie et à l'Iran ?
- par Steve Clemons -2007-01-16
Le président pourrait avoir démarré une nouvelle guerre secrète, non-officielle contre la Syrie et l'Iran, sans le consentement du Congrès ou un large débat avec le pays.

Détourner l'attention du Congrès du vrai plan de guerre contre l'Iran
- par Paul Craig Roberts
- 2007-01-16

Attaque militaire US sur l'Iran avant avril 2007
Attaque par mer, frappe des sites pétroliers et nucléaires- par Ahmed Al-Jarallah
- 2007-01-16

Israël dresse des plans pour attaquer l’Iran avec l’arme nucléaire

- par Peter Symonds
- 2007-01-09 Le Sunday
Times a révélé que l’armée israélienne s’entraînait pour faire usage d’armes nucléaires tactiques sur les usines d’enrichissement d’uranium iraniennes...

Planet of The Arabs
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14836.htm
9 Minute Video: Planet of The Arabs
A trailer-esque montage spectacle of Hollywood's relentless vilification and dehumanization of Arabs and Muslims.Inspired by the book "Reel Bad Arabs" by Dr. Jack Shaheen
Official selection of the Sundance Film Festival 2005Out of 1000 films that have Arab & Muslim characters (from the year 1896 to 2000)12 were postive depictions, 52 were even handed and the rest of the 90O and so were negative.
09/04/06 Video Runtime 9 Minutes


Blackadder goes forth - Secret mission
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uzZNWu9LNc




Chasers War On Everything - Americans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCkYfYa8ePI

mardi 16 janvier 2007

Guerres et conflits = excellente busine$$



Guerres et conflits = excellente busine$$

Suite à mon dernier article, ce puissant texte du Prof. Ismael Hossein-zadeh publié sur Global Research, vient expliquer et détailler ce que je présentais comme information; c`est-à-dire que les guerres sont juste des prétextes à enrichissement énorme pour la classe dirigeante. La guerre, dans notre système économique, est une opportunité incroyable de faire beaucoup d`argent, la guerre est une très excellente business, une affaire d`or dont on ne pourrait se passer.

Si vous n`avez pas le courage de lire cet article en long, prière de lire au moins les passages que j`ai ici tiré du texte disponible sur Global Research.

À lire!


Why the US Is Not Leaving Iraq: The Booming Business of War Profiteers


In light of the fact that by now almost all of the factions of the ruling circles, including the White House and the neoconservative war-mongerers, acknowledge the failure of the Iraq war, why, then, do they balk at the idea of pulling the troops out of that country?
Perhaps the shortest path to a relatively satisfactory answer would be to follow the money trail.


Posted Jan 15, 2007 09:31 AM PSTCategory: IRAQ
The defense contractors are the only folks "winning" in these interminable wars, just as it happened in Viet Nam.


Global Research, January 12, 2007
by Prof. Ismael Hossein-zadeh


The military-industrial-complex [would] cause military spending to be driven not by national security needs but by a network of weapons makers, lobbyists and elected officials. — Dwight D. Eisenhower

There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket. — General Smedley D. Butler

Perhaps the shortest path to a relatively satisfactory answer would be to follow the money trail. The fact of matter is that not everyone is losing in Iraq. Indeed, while the Bush administration’s wars of choice have brought unnecessary death, destruction, and disaster to millions, including many from the Unites States, they have also brought fortunes and prosperity to war profiteers. At the heart of the reluctance to withdraw from Iraq lies the profiteers’ unwillingness to give up further fortunes and spoils of war.

Pentagon contractors constitute the overwhelming majority of these profiteers. They include not only the giant manufacturing contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Boeing, but also a complex maze of over 100,000 service contractors and sub-contractors such as private army or security corporations and "reconstruction" firms.[1] These contractors of both deconstruction and "reconstruction," whose profits come mainly from the US treasury, have handsomely profited from the Bush administration’s wars of choice.

The Pentagon contractors are both as a major driving force to the war on Iraq and a major obstacle to the withdrawal of US led forces.

Fantastic returns to these armaments conglomerates have been reflected in the continuing jump in the value of their shares or stocks in the Wall Street: "Shares of U.S. defense companies, which have nearly trebled since the beginning of the occupation of Iraq, show no signs of slowing down. . . . All the defense companies—with very few exceptions—have been doing extremely well with mostly double-digit earnings growth. . . . The feeling that makers of ships, planes and weapons are just getting into their stride has driven shares of leading Pentagon contractors Lockheed Martin Corp., Northrop Grumman Corp., and General Dynamics Corp. to all-time highs. . . ."[3]

Major beneficiaries of war dividends include not only the giant manufacturing contractors such as Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, but also a whole host of other war-induced service contractors that have mushroomed around the Pentagon and the Homeland Security apparatus in order to cash in on the Pentagon’s spending bonanza.


For example, in the same month (October 2006) that the US forces lost a record number of soldiers in Iraq, and the Iraqi citizens lost many more, Halliburton announced that its third quarter revenue had risen by 19 percent to $5.8 billion. This prompted Dave Lesar, the company’s chairman, president and CEO, to declare, "This was an exceptional quarter for Halliburton."

Jeff Tilley, an analyst who does research for Halliburton, likewise pointed out, "Iraq was better than expected. . . . Overall, there is nothing really to question or be skeptical about. I think the results are very good."

The fact that powerful beneficiaries of war dividends flourish in an atmosphere of war and international convulsion should not come as a surprise to anyone. What is surprising is that, in the context of the recent US wars of choice, these beneficiaries have also acquired the power of promoting wars, often by manufacturing "external threats to our national interest." In other words, profit-driven beneficiaries of war have also evolved as war makers, or contributors to war making.[9]

The following is a sample of such unsavory business–political relationships, as reported by Walter F. Roche and Ken Silverstein in a 14 July 2004 Los Angeles Times article, titled "Advocates of War Now Profit from Iraq’s Reconstruction:"

• Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey is a prominent example of the phenomenon, mixing his business interests with what he contends are the country's strategic interests.
• Neil Livingstone, a former Senate aide who has served as a Pentagon and State Department advisor and issued repeated public calls for Hussein's overthrow. He heads a Washington-based firm, GlobalOptions, Inc. that provides contacts and consulting services to companies doing business in Iraq.
• Randy Scheunemann, a former Rumsfeld advisor who helped draft the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 authorizing $98 million in U.S. aid to Iraqi exile groups. He was the founding president of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Now he's helping former Soviet Bloc states win business there.
• Margaret Bartel, who managed federal money channeled to Chalabi's exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, including funds for its prewar intelligence program on Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction. She now heads a Washington-area consulting firm helping would-be investors find Iraqi partners.
• K. Riva Levinson, a Washington lobbyist and public relations specialist who received federal funds to drum up prewar support for the Iraqi National Congress. She has close ties to Bartel and now helps companies open doors in Iraq, in part through her contacts with the Iraqi National Congress.
• Joe M. Allbaugh, who managed President Bush's 2000 campaign for the White House and later headed the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and Edward Rogers Jr., an aide to the first President Bush, recently helped set up New Bridge Strategies and Diligence, LLC to promote business in postwar Iraq.[10]


There are strong indications that these dubious relationships represent more than simple cases of sporadic or unrelated instances of some unscruplulous or rogue elements. Evidence shows that contracts for the "reconstruction" of Iraq were drawn long before the invasion and deconstruction of that country had started. In a fascinating report for The Nation magazine, titled "The Rise of Disaster Capitalism," Naomi Klein describes such long-projected "rebuilding" schemes as follows:

"Last summer, in the lull of the August media doze, the Bush Administration's doctrine of preventive war took a major leap forward. On August 5, 2004, the White House created the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, headed by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Carlos Pascual. Its mandate is to draw up elaborate ‘post-conflict’ plans for up to twenty-five countries that are not, as of yet, in conflict. According to Pascual, it will also be able to coordinate three full-scale reconstruction operations in different countries ‘at the same time,’ each lasting ‘five to seven years.’"[11]

Here we get a glimpse of the real reasons or forces behind the Bush administration’s preemptive wars. As Klein puts it, "a government devoted to perpetual pre-emptive deconstruction now has a standing office of perpetual pre-emptive reconstruction." Klein also documents how (through Pascual’s office) contractors drew "reconstruction" plans in close collaboration with various government agencies and how, at times, contracts were actually pre-approved and paper work completed long before an actual military strike[...]

No business model or entrepreneurial paradigm can adequately capture the nature of this kind of scheming and profiteering. Not even illicit businesses based on rent-seeking, corruption or theft can sufficiently describe the kind of nefarious business interests that lurk behind the Bush administration’s preemptive wars. Only a calculated imperial or colonial kind of exploitation, albeit a new form of colonialism or imperialism, can capture the essence of the war profiteering associated with the recent US wars of aggression. As Shalmali Guttal, a Bangalore-based researcher put it, "We used to have vulgar colonialism. Now we have sophisticated colonialism, and they call it 'reconstruction.'"[12]

dimanche 14 janvier 2007

Les guerres: machines à profits pour banquiers et corporations




Les guerres: machines à profits pour banquiers et corporations


La guerre est un grand racket qui ne sert qu' à enrichir la classe dominante, le complexe militaro-industriel, les banquiers -qui financent dans la plupart des cas les deux partis s`opposant- ainsi que de permettre de maintenir en place l`ordre social en contrôlant la population par la peur.

On a un grave problème quand on fonctionne dans un système économique qui profite de la mort et de la destruction. Un système qui ne fait pas la distinction entre faire du profit sur la vente de croissants ou sur la mort massive de gens innocents dans un pays lointains pour des raisons bidons. Seul le profit compte. Pour poursuivre leur but sacré de la rentabilité à n`importe quel prix, les corporations s`élèvent au-dessus de toute valeur humaine et produisent et vendent des produits qui vont décimer des populations, détruire l`environnement et mettre le futur même de la planète en danger. En fait, selon des analyses psychologiques du comportement des compagnies, si on s`imagine qu`elles sont des personnes, révèlent qu`elles tombent très rapidement dans la catégorie des psychopathes dangeureux.

Depuis le début de la guerre contre le "terrorisme", l`instabilité n`a fait que grandir de par le monde, les conflits se sont envenimé, la peur avec, causant des ventes records d`armements qui rapportent des milliards aux manufacturiers d`armes. Tout les industriels vous le diront: la guerre est toujours une occasion d`enrichissement énorme. C`est l`argent public qui à travers les budgets militaires augmentés, les achats militaires est transféré dans les poches privées des marchants de la mort. C`est exactement ce que c`est: un transfert de notre argent collectif vers une poignée de poches privées. Et quand les guerres deviennent très coûteuses, on emprunte necéssairement l`argent de banquiers privés qui vont en profiter pour s`arranger que des dettes faramineuses seront ainsi crées, permettant d`augmenter leur contrôle sur ces dits pays par leur économie.

C`est comme ça qu`éventuellement les banques centrales de nos pays en viennent à être contrôlé par ces banquiers privés. C`est la guerre perpétuelle qui profite sans fin aux barons de la destruction.

Il y a beaucoup plus d`intérêts et de motifs à continuer les guerres que de les arrêter ou les prévenir. C`est aussi simple que ça. C`est trop payant de faire la guerre. Jusqu`à ce qu`on change ce système sanguinaire basé que sur la valeur de l`argent au lieu de la valeur suprême de la vie il en sera ainsi. Notre Dieu est le cash, peut-être pas pour tous individuellement, mais certainement pour notre système économique mondial. C`est le coeur du problème. Et temps et aussi longtemps que les guerres seront aussi payantes et un outil pour conserver l`ordre établit et maintenir l`élite en place, on va souffrir de ces conflits inutiles.

On assiste alors à un nombre record de mercenaires privés n`étant régit par aucune loi en Iraq, à des entreprises privées en charge de développer des armes nucléaires, à des situations où les mêmes compagnies qui fournissent le matériel pour détruire, rafflent les contrats à coup de milliard$ pour reconstruire ce qu`il ont servit à détruire et qui contôlent l`information par les médias dont ils sont aussi les propriétaires. N`est-ce pas complètement débile???!!

N`est-ce pas un conflit d`intérêts des plus dangeureux qui soit? Les mêmes compagnies qui font du lobby sur nos gouvernements pour vendre leurs armes, qui feront plus d`argent plus il y aura de destruction et de tuerie, sont les mêmes qui feront plus d`argent le plus qu`il y aura à reconstruire, tout ça avec NOTRE argent, et la vie d`innombrable humains.

Pensez-y. C`est sérieux. Prenez le temps d`explorer les liens dans cet article. C`est une réalité qui n`est pas à notre avantage et nous avons du ménage à faire. C`est en fait très pathétique qu`on en soit encore là.

LA GUERRE EST OBSÉNITÉ GROSSIÈRE, UNE HONTE, UNE INDIGNATION SANS NOM. IL EST TEMPS QUE L`HUMANITÉ ÉVOLUE.

Paix


Fanning the Flames of Dissent
+++++

Capital knows neither loyalty nor nationality. Its sole motivation is to maximize profits while minimizing costs by any means necessary. Thus capital seeks the cheapest labor with the least restrictions anywhere in the world. Capital has no qualms about outsourcing jobs and leaving economically devastated communities in its wake. It pits worker against worker to increase production while simultaneously driving down wages worldwide.

Although it was not widely reported in the American press, during World War Two General Motors and the Ford Motor Company simultaneously built armored vehicles for both the U.S. and the Nazis. Alcoa supplied aluminum to both sides, with plants operating in both countries.

Not only did these companies realize enormous profits on the spoils of war, they received huge windfall takings from the U.S. taxpayer for reparations to their bombed out production facilities in Germany at the close of the war.
In reality, there is no such entity as an ‘American’ company. Capital does not care where its wealth is produced or who produces it. The above example, by no means out of the ordinary, demonstrates how corporations reap the profits of war without incurring risk. War is good for business, a win-win for the profiteers of capitalism. It is hell for everyone else.

Virtually every military intervention undertaken by the U.S. throughout the world during the past sixty years was to protect corporate investments and to expand markets. None of these interventions were undertaken to spread democracy or to liberate oppressed people. They often did just the opposite.
The U.S. has a long and brutal history of oppressing Democratic Republics—a list too extensive to site here (see William Blum’s insightful book “Killing Hope”).

Democracy is the enemy of capital, as witnessed by our own bloody labor and civil rights history. Thus it should come as no surprise to anyone that a hundred and fifty U.S. based corporations are reaping obscene profits on the plunder and destruction of Iraq.
The U.S. military is the iron fist of capitalism that oppresses workers at home, and kills millions of innocent people in other parts of the world.

We have troops in 135 of the world’s 192 recognized nations. And we are not sowing democracy. We leave devastated landscapes, misery, and abject poverty in our wake. We set up puppet regimes willing to sell out their own people in exchange for making the world safe for corporate plunder; and we call it democracy.

The saber rattling over Iran is another case and point, another opportunity to prop up the anemic U.S. dollar, extend U.S. hegemony in the region and to secure more stolen oil for affluent multinational corporations with familiar names.
The specter of permanent war, as promised by the governing neocon cabal, guarantee obscene profits to the wealthiest corporations and the richest families on earth. Meanwhile, thousands more young women and men will needlessly die in the mistaken belief that they are defending America from foreign enemies. Millions of innocent Iranian citizens will also likely die as their peaceful nation is dismantled in a huge corporate fire sale like the one occurring in Iraq. It is easy money to be divided among the wealthiest one percent of the population.

Capital does not care how its bread is buttered, so long as it is buttered. A Plutocratic government that does not represent the interests of the people does not deserve the allegiance of the people. It is the moral duty of all citizens to resist unjust government, to overthrow it, and replace it with a form of government that serves them—a representative democracy in which all citizens are equal.

The Cash-cow called Israel ++

Many people go on autopilot when it comes to religion or politics. So here are some empirical facts. Israel is a country that has government-sponsored terrorism, and the US supports it.

They are a country with racially segregated settlements on land that is taken by force. Civilian Palestinians are shot and their homes are bulldozed. Israel is expanding its territory in the name of ‘defense’ though “Jew only” settlements, which the US helps to subsidize.

Why does the US support this? Because Israel is a cash-cow for the American military industrial-complex which earmarks ‘aid’ to be recycled on the defense industry which US politicians profit from though equity firms such as the Carlyle group for whom former president Bush is a spokesperson.

US would consider Israeli request for military aid

Great: US infrastructure crumbling and the people from New Orleans and the Mississippi Delta still without homes and basic services, and this administration is even considering sending MORE aid to Israel?
What about people here in this country: have they ceased to matter? -M. Rivero WRH


Arms sales record as firms duck controls with 'flat-pack' weapons
++

By the end of the year, military spending is estimated to reach $1,058bn (£561bn), about 15 times the amount spent on international aid, say Amnesty, Oxfam, and the International Action Network on Small Arms (Iansa).
The figure is higher than the cold war record reached in 1987-88 of $1,034bn in today's prices, they claim, adding that last year the US, Russia, Britain, France and Germany accounted for an estimated 82% of all arms transfers.

If you ever wondered about the US's 'wars on terror without end', just take a look at the numbers and how profitable war is for the defense contractors.And unfortunately, weaponry seems to be the only American-made (or licensed) item that people are interested in buying these days. -M. Rivero WRH

World military budget tops Cold War record: Oxfam

By Matthew Verrinder
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Global military spending is expected to hit $1.06 trillion this year, topping the record set during the Cold War era, an international aid agency reported on Friday.
"Arms sales do not start conflicts, but they certainly fuel and lengthen them," said Bernice Romero, international campaign director for Oxfam International, the group that released the study. "It is time the world stemmed the uncontrolled flood of weapons into the world's war zones."
The previous record for military spending was set in 1988, toward the end of the Cold War, when governments spent an estimated $1.03 trillion, Oxfam said. After falling off after the Cold War ended, military spending has been steadily climbing since 1999, the group said.


Sales of US arms hit record levels

AMERICAN defence contractors are enjoying a bumper year as arms contracts won from foreign governments surge to record levels. So far this year contracts worth $21.7 billion (£11.5 billion) have been passed to the US Congress for ratification, 76 per cent more than agreed during all of 2005, when America is believed to have lost market share in the global weapons trade to Europe.

US is top purveyor on weapons sales list

The United States last year provided nearly half of the weapons sold to militaries in the developing world, as major arms sales to the most unstable regions -- many already engaged in conflict -- grew to the highest level in eight years, new US government figures show. The United States supplied $8.1 billion worth of weapons to developing countries in 2005 -- 45.8 percent of the total.
The figures underscore how the largely unchecked arms trade to the developing world has become a major staple of the American weapons industry, even though introducing many of the weapons risks fueling conflicts rather than aiding long-term US interests. [The U.S.] also signed an estimated $6.2 billion worth of new deals last year to sell attack helicopters, missiles, and other armaments to developing nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, India, Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.
There is growing evidence that the sales are increasingly more about dollars and cents for the US military-industrial complex. A UN panel [recently] voted to study whether a new treaty might be possible to regulate the sale of conventional arms. The United States was the only country out of 166 to vote no.
A study last year by the progressive World Policy Institute found that the United States transferred weaponry to 18 of the 25 countries involved in an ongoing war. More than half of the countries buying US arms...were defined as undemocratic by the State Department's annual Human Rights Report, including top recipients Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Uzbekistan.

U.S. top arms supplier to developing world

The United States supplied 46 percent of the arms sold to developing countries in 2005, a congressional report said.

Heady Days for Makers of Weapons

THESE are very good times for military contractors. Profits are up, their stocks are rising and Pentagon spending is reaching record levels.

Lockheed Stock and Two Smoking Barrels

Canada to send more high-tech guns to Afghanistan in new year

UN arms trade bill: US casts sole ‘no’ vote against

US casts sole ‘no’ vote against proposed treaty restricting arms tradeBy Kaleem OmarThe United States, which is the world’s biggest exporter of arms and accounts for more than 50 per cent of all arms exports, on Wednesday became the only country in the United Nations to vote against letting work begin on a new treaty to bolster arms embargoes and prevent human rights abuses by setting uniform worldwide standards for arms deals.
The vote in the 192-nation UN General Assembly was 153-1, with the United States casting the sole “no” vote. Twenty-four other nations abstained, including major arms sellers Russia and China and emerging exporters India and Pakistan.

Military may ask $127B for wars


Since 2001, Congress has approved $502 billion for the war on terror, roughly two-thirds for Iraq. The latest request, due to reach the incoming Democratic-controlled Congress next spring, would make the war on terror more expensive than the Vietnam War.

One hundred twenty-seven billion dollars to one hundred sixty billion dollars of YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS - for what?
For more American kids dying and getting maimed, more Iraqis dying and getting maimed?
It appears that the only folks "winning" in this war are the defense contractors, for whom members in congress are simply acquisition. -M. Rivero WRH


Behind the plan to bomb Iran


The fact that the military-industrial complex, or merchants of arms and wars, flourishes on war and militarism is largely self-evident. Arms industries and powerful beneficiaries of war dividends need an atmosphere of war and international convulsion to maintain continued increases in the Pentagon budget and justify their lion's share of the public money. Viewed in this light, unilateral or "preemptive" wars abroad can easily been seen as reflections of domestic fights over national resources and tax dollars.

Just as the powerful beneficiaries of war dividends view international peace and stability as inimical to their business interests, so too the hardline Zionist proponents of "Greater Israel" perceive peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors perilous to their goal of gaining control over the "Promised Land" of Israel. The reason for this fear of peace is that, according to a number of United Nations resolutions, peace would mean Israel's return to its pre-1967 borders; that is, withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

You have to wonder how much war there would be if wor wasn't enormously profitable for some people. -M. Rivero WRH

Corporate War Machine Gathers Speed

There is clear evidence that the leading neo-conservative figures have been longtime political activists who have worked through a network of warmongering think-tanks that are set up to serve either as the armaments lobby or the Israeli lobby, or both.These corporate-backed militaristic think-tanks include Project for the New American Century, the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for Security Policy, the Middle East Media Research Institute, the Middle East Forum, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, and the National Institute for Public Policy.

Major components of the Bush administration's foreign policy, including the war on Iraq, have been designed largely at the drawing boards of these think-thanks, often in collaboration, directly or indirectly, with the Pentagon and the arms lobby.[6]

Even a cursory look at the records of these militaristic think-tanks - their membership, their financial sources, their institutional structures and the like - shows that they are set up in essence to serve as institutional fronts to camouflage the dubious relationship between the Pentagon, its major contractors and the Israeli lobby, on the one hand, and the warmongering neo-conservative politicians on the other.
More critically, this unsavory relationship also shows that powerful interests that benefit from war are also in essence the same powers that can - and indeed do - make war. Additionally, it explains why civilian militarists are so eager to foment war and international tensions.

Blix warns of WMD vicious circle


The US foreign policy of pre-emptive strikes against any perceived weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat, its development of new types of nuclear weapons and the "Star Wars" missile defence shield risked fuelling a new global arms race, said Dr Blix.

... which may be the whole point; to justify taxing the people of all nations into poverty to make defense corporation cronies wealthier. -M. Rivero WRH

Blix warns against regime change


It also urged all nuclear states to reduce their arsenals and halt the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons.
And it firmly rejected the idea that nuclear weapons were only dangerous in the hands of rogue governments.
"The commission does not accept that argument," Mr Blix said.

This is a polite way of saying that the nuclear crisis in the Mideast is the direct result of Israel's clandestine nuclear weapons program. -M. Rivero WRH

US rides weapons wave

War, instability and high oil prices have created a perfect storm of profit for the world's weapons manufacturers. This year, military analysts predict the biggest arms bonanza since 1993, which is saying something because in the aftermath of the first Gulf War the global industry reaped the benefits of a US$42 billion arms race.

Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper

The top profiteers after 9/11 were the CEOs of United Technologies ($200 million), General Dynamics ($65 million), Lockheed Martin ($50 million), and Halliburton ($49 million).

Other firms where CEO pay the last four years added up to $25 million to $45 million were Textron, Engineered Support Systems, Computer Sciences, Alliant Techsystems, Armor Holding, Boeing, Health Net, ITT Industries, Northrop Grumman, Oshkosh Truck, URS, and Raytheon.
While Army privates died overseas earning $25,000 a year, David Brooks, the disgraced former CEO of body-armor maker DHB, made $192 million in stock sales in 2004. He staged a reported $10 million bat mitzvah for his daughter. The 2005 pay package for Halliburton CEO David Lesar, head of the firm that most symbolizes the occupation's waste, overcharges, and ghost charges on no-bid contracts, was $26 million, according to the report's analysis of federal Securities and Exchange Commission filings.


The Black House On Pennsylvania Avenue
++

By that time "corporate personhood" had already been established as a result of the Constitution being further subverted for corporate interests. With corporate personhood, Constitutional rights that were meant for human beings were given to corporations. There is something about corporations, though. Regardless of how many human rights they might claim for themselves, they remain in fact lifeless, devoid of all feelings, and they are mindless except in their desire for profit and gains. They never, ever develop a conscience, although those devoting themselves to corporation frequently lose theirs.

Two life altering events happened in 1913. Early in the year, the alleged ratification of Amendment XVI was announced in which Congress gave itself the power to tax citizens in a manner that directly violated the Constitution. In December of that year, Congress and President Woodrow Wilson, in further violation of the Constitution and without a required Constitutional Amendment, established The Federal Reserve. This turned important powers to coin and regulate money over to private bankers. The private bankers then referred to themselves by the misleading title of the "Federal" Reserve. On Christmas Eve, front page headlines screamed, "Wilson Sees Dawn of New Era in Business." Indeed. (5)

In 1916, Woodrow Wilson campaigned for reelection under the slogan "he kept us out of war," and he won reelection. Five months later, in April of 1917, Wilson asked Congress for a declaration of war against Germany. This was granted and the US entered the First World War. (6)

One of the most highly decorated Marines in US history, Major General Smedley Butler, wrote a book that was first published in 1935 called, War Is a Racket. The subject of his book was the First World War, and according to his book the war racket is one in which "profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War." The du Ponts alone, General Butler stated, had "an increase in profits of more than 950 percent" during the war years. Nickel manufacturers had increases of more than 1,700 percent; and coal companies had increases of 7,856 per cent. In fact, all of the industries General Butler looked into were ladling in for themselves the cream of substantial profits. The bankers who financed the war, however, had the largest ladles of all. "Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations," Butler wrote, "they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never became public--even before a Senate investigatory body." (7)

With corporations having more importance than human life and health in the United States, and with the corporations engorged with profits earned at the cost of human life and health, the stage was set for something new to begin happening in the United States, and happen it did, just like night follows day--just like the expected cycles of summer, fall, winter and spring.

Since the First World War, a major war has been arranged for us to lose our lives in approximately every 20 years or so, always occurring after a major, staged event that results in the preliminary loss of innocent lives. This has historically proven to cause the masses to experience outrage, grief, fear and a sense of togetherness or patriotism--all of which have been traditionally necessary in order to turn us into willing military combatants.

The first catalyzing event was the Lusitania, then came Pearl Harbor, followed by the assassination of President Kennedy and the Gulf of Tonkin lies, and now it appears we have the "new Pearl Harbor," as predicted by the Project for a New American Century, PNAC. The "new Pearl Harbor" has so far led to a profitable "war on terror" that brought the US first to war in Afghanistan, and then on to Iraq, with no end currently in sight. Engorged again in another corporate feeding frenzy, the lifeless doll's eyes of this feeding machine are now possibly looking to engorge itself further with Iran.

The Bush regime's "war on terror" appears to be changing the modus operandi slightly. Apparently, those in charge of this profit-making war machine have now decided to do away with the 20-year pauses originally granted to those actually doing the fighting and doing the dying for corporate profit. Perhaps they have decided they are losing too much money with the old plan that skipped every other generation. The new and improved war plan appears to be intent on waging a permanent war against a select few whose names we might not even know, whose hiding places are not known, and whose actual threat to us is also not really known--or is even completely invented. This new plan will allow corporate and banking America to make long, drawn out, endless profits.

The plan is working well so far, at least for those carrying the cream ladles rather than the rifles. According to a 2004 report on Bloomberg, "U.S. corporate profits surged 87 percent from the third quarter of 2001 to the end of 2003." They based these figures upon Commerce Department records.(8)


But while the United States is now at war with "terrorists," and our task at hand is to apparently rid the world of terrorists, many U.S. Citizens are now falling under the category of being a "terrorist" themselves simply because we are sensing that something is suspiciously not right with the Bush administration and we are speaking out about it, as we are expected to do under the Constitution. The "patriot act," another illegal and unconstitutional law, demands that we obediently obey, and never question government. This violates the very soul of America.
What exactly does the Bush administration consider to be a terrorist? Are terrorists pacifists such as myself, who have never held or fired a gun in their lives, but who have a few select words to say about the mess the Bush family has orchestrated? Are terrorists newsmen such as Keith Olbermann who are daring to speak out against the policies of the Bush administration? Is this "war" Bush keeps reminding us of actually against terrorists, or is it a war against the civil liberties and human rights of people in this country and everywhere else?

vendredi 12 janvier 2007

Dossier nucléaire




Dossier nucléaire


Malheureusement, le sujet du nucléaire militaire est de plus en plus présent sur la scène médiatique pour plusieurs raisons, comme par exemple le redéveloppement des armes nucléaires tactiques aux USA, l`admission qu`Israël possède l`arme nucléaire et menace de s`en servir pour attaquer l`Iran prochainement, avec la Korée du Nord et l`Inde qui ont aquis l`arme totale par la bande sans être signataire des accords internationaux de non-prolifération nucléaire avec l`aide des pays occidentaux dont particulièrement les États-Unis. C`est sans parler de toute la radioactivité qui est relâché dans l`atmosphère à cause de l`utilisation des armes à uranium appauvri par les USA en Iraq, Afghanistan et Yougoslavie.

Aux USA, des rapports ont montré que 765 kg de plutonium manque au Los Alamos National Laboratory, lieu où sont développé des bombes atomiques, quantité suffisante pour faire 150 bombes nucléaires!!!

Pensez-y...

Je vous laisse avec des sources qui documentent où sont stocké les têtes nucléaires dans le monde et en quelle quantité. Assez instructif.


Where the Bombs Are

http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2006/11/new_article_where_the_bombs_ar.php

Ever wondered where all those nukes are stored?
A new review published in the November/December issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists shows that the United States stores its nearly 10,000 nuclear warheads at 18 locations in 12 states and six European countries.


Stocks Nucléaires Mondiaux

Le secret excessif qui entoure le nucléaire militaire empêche le public de connaître le nombre exact d'armes nucléaires dans le monde. Chaque nation protège les détails de son propre arsenal nucléaire, et ne connaît généralement qu'un minimum de détails précis sur la taille et la composition des stocks nucléaires des autres pays.


Classé par l'ONU à la 4ème place au plan mondial, le nucléaire israelien inquiète les arabes

Les pays arabes ont insisté sur l'examen de la question du potentiel nucléaire israélien lors de la conférence de l'Aiea prévue à Vienne. Un récent communiqué de l'ONU se demandait, face au problème posé par le nucléaire iranien, si, pour résoudre ce problème, il ne faut pas choisir ce cadre-là pour résoudre tous les problèmes, y compris le programme nucléaire israélien.

En avril 2004, Ariel Sharon, alors Premier ministre israélien, reconnaissait que son pays possédait un programme d'armement nucléaire. C'était la première fois qu'un officiel de l'Etat hébreu confirmait ce que la communauté internationale sait depuis quarante ans. Depuis que la France lui a fourni, durant les années 1960, un réacteur nucléaire, tous les experts militaires étrangers s'accordent à dire qu'il dispose de 100 à 200 ogives nucléaires.

Egypt want Isreal's nuke acknowledged & inspected.

End double standards on nukes: Egypt

CAIRO: Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit called yesterday for an end to nuclear double standards, after the UN imposed sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt uranium enrichment.
"The negligence of certain Western countries over questions of non-proliferation, and the fact that they permit some states to acquire a nuclear capacity while preventing others from doing so, is nothing but double standards," the foreign minister said in a statement.
"That must stop," he added. "It is known that Israel has a nuclear capability that is not subject to any control by the International Atomic Energy Agency," the UN’s nuclear watchdog in Vienna.


Iran Seeks Condemnation of Israeli Nukes

By EDITH M. LEDERER
Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Iran demanded Tuesday that the U.N. Security Council condemn what it said was Israel's clandestine development of nuclear weapons and ``compel'' it to place all its nuclear facilities under U.N. inspection. If Israel refuses to comply, Iran said the council must take ``resolute action'' under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter which authorizes a range of measures from diplomatic and economic sanctions to military action.



PM puts Israel on nuclear list for first time

IT'S OFFICIAL! OLMERT CONFIRMS ISRAEL HAS NUCLEAR WEAPONS!

This is not news to anyone who has been following Israel's history for any length of time, but it is a major problem for the Israel-firsters in the US, who justify the billions sent to Israel on the need for poor little Israel to defend itself against those mean ol' Arabs.
But now it is confirmed, Israel isn't defenseless. It has nuclear weapons, not subject to any controls at all, with which to threaten their neighbors.
Remember the invasion of Iraq? Remember the REASON we were told we had to invade Iraq, because Iraq had NOOKULAR BOMBS! Of course, as it turned out, they didn't. The nukes are down in Israel, where the Arab nations, Mordecai Vanunu, and assorted bloggers have been telling you they were all along.


So, Olmert has just exposed the total hypocrisy behind the invasion of Iraq.
Needless to say, this also pounds a huge dent in Bush's rush to attack Iran because they MIGHT have a nuclear weapon in ten years, versus Israel's now officially admitted nuclear arsenal and a history of attacks against neighbor nations.


In finally admitting that Israel has had nuclear weapons all along, Olmert has made every US Politician who ever stood up and portrayed Israel as a weak and helpless nation deserving of our billions in tax dollars look like a total blithering idiot at best, at worst complicit in a defrauding of the American taxpayer for the benefit of a foreign nation.

Every politician who ever stood up in Congress supporting yet another appropriations bill for Israel with the claim, "Israel must be defended", must be categorized as a liar. Israel didn't need defending. They just wanted more of our money any way they could get it. And with a few
contributions from Israel's spies, they got it.

You, the taxpayer, have been SWINDLED! Israel has had a nuclear deterrent to protect itself all along, but still tricked you into paying for its "defense". And your Congresscritters helped them do it.
UPDATE: Already this story has been "orwellized" to try to pull back from Olmert's comment about Israel's nuclear weapons. The current spin is that even though Olmert openly talked about Israel's nuclear weapons, that this is not an "official" admission that Israel has them.



Los Alamos Missing Plutonium for 150 Nuclear Bombs


The beleaguered Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is unable to account for 765 kilograms of plutonium -- enough to make 150 nuclear weapons -- according to a letter from nuclear watchdog groups to LANL Director G. Peter Nanos.

Gee, I wonder what nation (which does not allow nuclear inspections of their weapons plant) got that stuff!


Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear

THE SPECTRE of a nuclear race in the Middle East was raised yesterday when six Arab states announced that they were embarking on programmes to master atomic technology.
The countries involved were named by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Tunisia and the UAE have also shown interest.

These governments have seen very clearly what happens to nations which don't have nuclear technology as a bargaining chip in dealing with the West, and they have decided that this is the only option left.
This is another in a huge series of unintended consequences, courtesy of this administration, from the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.



U.S. Selecting Hybrid Design for Warheads

The Bush administration is expected to announce next week a major step forward in the building of the country’s first new nuclear warhead in nearly two decades. It will propose combining elements of competing designs from two weapons laboratories in an approach that some experts argue is untested and risky.



Holocauste Planétaire ou Interdiction de Fission Nucléaire ? Les USA engagés dans la 'solution finale'

Tenus dans l'ignorance de ces plans internationaux visant à l'élimination du danger nucléaire militaire, le peuple américain et les autres peuples, endormis par une information divertissement soporifique, semblent ne pas voir l'Holocauste planétaire qui se prépare, concocté par les bushistes.