The People's Record

An ongoing chronicle of communities of resistance around the world: anti-racism, anti-zionism, anti-imperialism, the Arab Spring, anti-austerity protests in Greece and across Europe, student movements all around the world, the Occupy Movement, anti-capitalist movements, anarchist movements, socialist movements, leftist communities and other relevant international news.

info

Posts tagged Iran

photo

littlemissconceptions: To mark the five year anniversary of the wrongful imprisonment of the seven Iranian Baha’i leaders, the Baha’i International Community is today launching a campaign to call for their immediate release – and to draw attention to the deteriorating human rights situation in Iran. “On 14 May, the seven innocent Baha’i leaders will have been behind bars for five full years, unjustly imprisoned solely because of their religious beliefs,” said Bani Dugal, the principal representative of the Baha’i International Community to the United Nations. “We are asking people of good will around the world to raise their voices in an effort to win their freedom and the freedom of other innocent prisoners of conscience in Iran,” she said. The campaign will run from today through 15 May, under the title “Five Years Too Many.” Around the world, Baha’i communities and others are planning public events that focus on the plight of the seven, who face 15 more years in prison, and whose 20-year sentences are the longest of any current prisoners of conscience in Iran. “The arrest of the seven Baha’i leaders on false charges, their wrongful imprisonment, and severe mistreatment while in detention are emblematic of the suffering of the Iranian Baha’i community as a whole – and, indeed, the situation of the hundreds of other innocent prisoners of conscience who have been incarcerated for their beliefs,” said Ms. Dugal. “Their long sentences reflect the Government’s determination to completely oppress the Iranian Baha’i community, which is the country’s largest non-Muslim religious minority.” Six of the seven Baha’i leaders were arrested on 14 May 2008 in a series of early morning raids in Tehran. The seventh had been detained two months earlier on 5 March 2008. Since their arrests, the seven – whose names are Fariba Kamalabadi, Jamaloddin Khanjani, Afif Naeimi, Saeid Rezaie, Mahvash Sabet, Behrouz Tavakkoli, and Vahid Tizfahm – have been subject to an entirely flawed judicial process. During their first year in detention, the seven were not told of the charges against them and they had virtually no access to lawyers. Their trial, conducted over a period of months in 2010 and amounting to only six days in court, was illegally closed to the public, demonstrated extreme bias on the part of prosecutors and judges, and was based on non-existent evidence. “Human beings should be free as birds.” - Art work by Brazilian Artist Siron Franco for the “Five Years Too Many” Campaign. Click through for more information. I try to be careful not to reblog stuff targeted at enemies of ‘the West’ unless they are overtly violating human rights, indigenous sovereignty, etc, - simply because there is so much misinformation put out by Western media & the military-industrial-complex (which are closely tied together). This seems like legitimate human rights concerns. The United Nations Human Rights Council voted by an overwhelming margin in March for a continuing investigation into human rights violations against the Baha’i community in Iran. “For years, the Iranian government has made excuses or blamed others in the face of mounting documentation that it severely represses its citizens in gross violation of international law – but the wide margin of today’s vote confirms that the world is not buying its justifications,” said Diane Ala’i, the Baha’i International Community’s representative to the United Nations in Geneva.Read more

littlemissconceptions:

To mark the five year anniversary of the wrongful imprisonment of the seven Iranian Baha’i leaders, the Baha’i International Community is today launching a campaign to call for their immediate release – and to draw attention to the deteriorating human rights situation in Iran.

“On 14 May, the seven innocent Baha’i leaders will have been behind bars for five full years, unjustly imprisoned solely because of their religious beliefs,” said Bani Dugal, the principal representative of the Baha’i International Community to the United Nations.

“We are asking people of good will around the world to raise their voices in an effort to win their freedom and the freedom of other innocent prisoners of conscience in Iran,” she said.

The campaign will run from today through 15 May, under the title “Five Years Too Many.” Around the world, Baha’i communities and others are planning public events that focus on the plight of the seven, who face 15 more years in prison, and whose 20-year sentences are the longest of any current prisoners of conscience in Iran.

“The arrest of the seven Baha’i leaders on false charges, their wrongful imprisonment, and severe mistreatment while in detention are emblematic of the suffering of the Iranian Baha’i community as a whole – and, indeed, the situation of the hundreds of other innocent prisoners of conscience who have been incarcerated for their beliefs,” said Ms. Dugal.

“Their long sentences reflect the Government’s determination to completely oppress the Iranian Baha’i community, which is the country’s largest non-Muslim religious minority.”

Six of the seven Baha’i leaders were arrested on 14 May 2008 in a series of early morning raids in Tehran. The seventh had been detained two months earlier on 5 March 2008.

Since their arrests, the seven – whose names are Fariba Kamalabadi, Jamaloddin Khanjani, Afif Naeimi, Saeid Rezaie, Mahvash Sabet, Behrouz Tavakkoli, and Vahid Tizfahm – have been subject to an entirely flawed judicial process.

During their first year in detention, the seven were not told of the charges against them and they had virtually no access to lawyers. Their trial, conducted over a period of months in 2010 and amounting to only six days in court, was illegally closed to the public, demonstrated extreme bias on the part of prosecutors and judges, and was based on non-existent evidence.

“Human beings should be free as birds.” - Art work by Brazilian Artist Siron Franco for the “Five Years Too Many” Campaign.

Click through for more information.

I try to be careful not to reblog stuff targeted at enemies of ‘the West’ unless they are overtly violating human rights, indigenous sovereignty, etc, - simply because there is so much misinformation put out by Western media & the military-industrial-complex (which are closely tied together). This seems like legitimate human rights concerns.

The United Nations Human Rights Council voted by an overwhelming margin in March for a continuing investigation into human rights violations against the Baha’i community in Iran.

“For years, the Iranian government has made excuses or blamed others in the face of mounting documentation that it severely represses its citizens in gross violation of international law – but the wide margin of today’s vote confirms that the world is not buying its justifications,” said Diane Ala’i, the Baha’i International Community’s representative to the United Nations in Geneva.

Read more

photos

Kurdish men in Iran have launched a cross-dressing campaign to redress outmoded concepts of masculinity & femininity and outlandish, sexist punishment administered by the government.
April 24, 2013

Over the last week, over 150 Kurdish men have posted photographs of themselves in women’s clothing to campaign against the sexist nature of a court sentence which led to the public humiliation of a man by dressing him in women’s clothing.

The campaign, entitled Kurd Men for Equality is a response to a sentence given to a convicted man by the Marivan County tribunal court on 15 April. The campaign’s tagline reads: ‘Being a woman is not a way for humiliation or punishment.’ According to Saman Rasoulpour, the convicted man was paraded down the streets of Marivan in a red tchador (traditional Kurdish women’s clothing).

Rasoulpour stated that public humiliation is a common punishment for troublemakers. Rasoulpour told us: ‘[In] this way, authorities are able to both demean the accused and deliver a warning to the public.’ However, Rasoulpour emphasized: ‘This is the first time in Iran that an accused is paraded in women’s clothes in the streets to humiliate him. It is unprecedented anywhere in Iran.’

In response to the judge’s sentence, a local feminist organization of Marivan called the Marivan Womens’ Community held a protest against the misogynistic punishment. The protest brought one hundred women on the streets of Marivan in a civil resistance campaign for gender equality.

In solidarity with the women’s protest, a man named Massoud Fathipour posted a photograph of himself dressed in women’s clothing. According to Rasoulpour, ‘he ignited the spark’. Since the Kurd Men for Equality campaign has been launched on 18 April, it has quickly gained an international following of over 7,000 fans. Over 150 men have submitted photographs of themselves in women’s clothing to emphasize the message that being a woman should not be considered humiliating.

In parliament 17 Iranian MPs have signed a petition addressed to the Justice Ministry which decries this sentence as ‘humiliating to Muslim women’. Supporters of the campaign have written messages in support of the gender equality on the Facebook wall.

Ala M writes: ‘For many years, women in my country have been side-by-side with men, wearing men’s clothes, struggling. Tonight I am happy and honored to wear women’s clothes and be even a small part of the rightful struggle of people to express gratitude and excellence to the women of my country.’

Another supporter, Namo Kurdistani writes: ‘We should gather together and condemn this stupidity, brutality and inhumanity against women. This is the least I can do to support women.’

In one of the protest images posted on Facebook, two LGBT rainbow flags can be seen on the wall in the background. People have commented on the image supporting homosexuality. Women have also supported the campaign by posting photographs of themselves wearing men’s clothing.

Iran claims it treats transgender people well but an expert told GSN the punishment in this case also indicates the stigma and discrimination trans people still face in the country as well as being a sign of simple sexism. According to Rasoulpour, no public apology has been made by authorities and security forces in Iran have strongly criticized the campaign.

Source

photo

anarcho-queer: Obama May Attack Iran In June According To Israeli Media President Barack Obama says the United States could launch an attack on Iran as early as this June, Israeli media reports. According to a report on Israel’s Channel 10 News that has since been picked up by the Times of Israel, Pres. Obama will use an upcoming meeting overseas to discuss a military strike on Iran. Pres. Obama is scheduled to visit Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu next month, and during the get-together the two leaders will reportedly work out the details for a possible assault. Pres. Obama will tell Netanyahu that a “window of opportunity” for a military strike on Iran will open in June (when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s term is up), Channel 10 claims. Israel has long-urged the White House to use its military prowess to intervene in Iran’s rumored nuclear weapon procurement plan, demands which have by-and-large been rejected by the Obama administration. According to the latest reports, though, the United States might finally be willing to use its might to make a stand against Iran’s race for a nuke. Only days earlier, The Jerusalem Post reported that Netanyahu said the details of a confidential report by the International Atomic Energy Agency suggested that that Iran had begun installing advanced centrifuges at its main uranium enrichment facility, sparking “very grave” concerns that Israel could be hit with a nuke. Right now, five members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany are holding talks with Iranian officials in Kazakhstan, with the goal of reaching a diplomatic answer to the nuclear crisis. However, domestic tensions within Iranian political elite do not make the prospect of a solution any more viable for now. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s second and final term in office is set to wrap up this June, and political fights within the country’s top contenders for the position has prompted possible presidents to take harsh stance on the issue and resist outside pressure

anarcho-queer:

Obama May Attack Iran In June According To Israeli Media

President Barack Obama says the United States could launch an attack on Iran as early as this June, Israeli media reports.

According to a report on Israel’s Channel 10 News that has since been picked up by the Times of Israel, Pres. Obama will use an upcoming meeting overseas to discuss a military strike on Iran. Pres. Obama is scheduled to visit Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu next month, and during the get-together the two leaders will reportedly work out the details for a possible assault.

Pres. Obama will tell Netanyahu that a “window of opportunity” for a military strike on Iran will open in June (when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s term is up), Channel 10 claims.

Israel has long-urged the White House to use its military prowess to intervene in Iran’s rumored nuclear weapon procurement plan, demands which have by-and-large been rejected by the Obama administration. According to the latest reports, though, the United States might finally be willing to use its might to make a stand against Iran’s race for a nuke.

Only days earlier, The Jerusalem Post reported that Netanyahu said the details of a confidential report by the International Atomic Energy Agency suggested that that Iran had begun installing advanced centrifuges at its main uranium enrichment facility, sparking “very grave” concerns that Israel could be hit with a nuke.

Right now, five members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany are holding talks with Iranian officials in Kazakhstan, with the goal of reaching a diplomatic answer to the nuclear crisis. However, domestic tensions within Iranian political elite do not make the prospect of a solution any more viable for now. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s second and final term in office is set to wrap up this June, and political fights within the country’s top contenders for the position has prompted possible presidents to take harsh stance on the issue and resist outside pressure

(via silas216)

photos

‘West pitting Syrian rebels against Hezbollah’
February 23, 2013

RT: You have recently been to Syria - with the West pushing for democratic change there, do you think the Syrians will actually get that after the violence they’ve endured for so long?

Danny Makki: I think there is much consensus among the Syrian people and in Syria that there has to be democratic change but there is a very big difference between democratic change from the grassroots level and what is being supported and funded by Western countries in Syria now. What we see now is terrorism. And people have to differentiate between a freedom fighter and a terrorist. I don’t think this is pathway to democracy, I think in fact this is a  pathway to a failed state.

RT: The Free Syrian Army has apparently set an ultimatum for Hezbollah, threatening to shell its positions in Lebanon. Lebanon is itself divided over the civil war in neighboring Syria, what could the consequences be if large-scale violence spills over there?

DM: With the Syrian crisis there is a danger of it spilling across borders to Iraq, or Lebanon, or even Turkey. The biggest problem in Lebanon is that some of the Western countries are really trying to pit one of the Islamist movements against each other – the Sunni FSA against the Shia Hezbollah. It’s essentially a policy of divide and conquer, which is being instigated media-wise by the West, create divisions and fractures within Arab Syrian and Lebanese societies. And this is the issue they are working today.

By pitting the FSA Hezbollah they are create more division and tension between Syria and Lebanon. And we’ve seen with recent conflict in Tripoli in northern Lebanon that the Syrian crisis is not necessarily in Syria. Syria is the linchpin of the region and there is great tension both in Syria and Lebanon. And there is great fear and anxiety that the struggle in Syria could spill into Lebanon. Lebanon had its own civil war which was very bloody and killed hundreds of thousands. So Lebanon is very scared at the moment of the Syria crisis turning into a Lebanese crisis.

RT:  On Monday, Syria said it is prepared to talk to the armed opposition groups, which it has long-dismissed as terrorists – is it a positive change on the way?

DM: In any state terrorism inside the country is a red line that cannot be crossed. We cannot accept terrorism in any country in the world – whether in Syria, America or Britain, or Russia. However there has to be a level of negotiations and dialogue internally speaking to at least have a ceasefire.

There has to be a level of openness between the Syrian government and between rebel forces maybe to instigate exchanges of prisoners, ceasefires in certain areas, to let humanitarian aid reach areas which are under rebel control. These all are issues that have to be negotiated for. And it shows that the Syrian government is not taking the path of an in-transition government. They truly do want to see diplomacy and dialogue to solve this and the fact that they are willing to negotiate with theses armed groups signifies a change of policy in terms of [that] they comprehend there can be no military solution and that any solution which comes within the Syrian crisis at this current moment in time has to be a political solution to stop the suffering of the people and to find a real exit and negotiated settlement to his ongoing crisis.

Source

Cartoons’ source

photo

US cyberwar virus aimed at Iran, infects Chevron accidentally  November 9, 2012 America’s cyberwar is already seeing collateral damage, and it’s hitting the country’s own billion-dollar companies. Oil giants Chevron say the Stuxnet computer virus made by the US to target Iran infected their systems as well. California-based Chevron, a Fortune 500 company that’s among the biggest corporations in the world, admits this week that they discovered the Stuxnet worm on their systems back in 2010. Up until now, Chevron managed to make their finding a well-kept secret, and their disclosure published by the Wall Street Journal on Thursday marks the first time a US company has come clean about being infected by the virus intended for Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. Mark Koelmel of the company’s earth sciences department says that they are likely to not be the last, though. “We’re finding it in our systems and so are other companies,” says Koelmel. “So now we have to deal with this.” Koelmel claims that the virus did not have any adverse effects on his company, which generated a quarter of a trillion dollars in revenue during 2011. As soon as Chevron identified the infection, it was taken care of immediately, he says. Other accidental targets might not be so lucky though, and the computer worm’s complex coding means it might be a while before anyone else becomes aware of the damage. “I don’t think the US government even realized how far it had spread,” Koelmel adds. Discovered in 2010, the Stuxnet worm was reported with all but certainty to be the creation of the United States, perhaps with the assistance of Israel, to set back Iran’s nuclear enrichment program as a preemptive measure against an eventual war. Only as recently as this June, however, American officials with direct knowledge of the worm went public with Uncle Sam’s involvement. In a June 2012 article published by The New York Times, government agents with direct knowledge of Stuxnet claimed that first President George W. Bush, then Barack Obama, oversaw the deployment of the worm as part of a well-crafted cyberassault on Iran. Coupled with another malicious program named Flame and perhaps many more, Stuxnet was waged against Iran as part of an initiative given the codename “Olympic Games.” Rather than solely stealing intelligence through use of computer coding, the endeavor was believed to be the first cyberattack that intended to cause actual hard damage. “Previous cyberattacks had effects limited to other computers,” Michael Hayden, the former chief of the CIA, explained to the Times earlier this year. “This is the first attack of a major nature in which a cyberattack was used to effect physical destruction.” On the record, the federal government maintains ignorance on the subject of Stuxnet. With American companies perhaps soon coming out of the woodwork to discuss how they were hit, though, the White House may have to finally admit that they’ve had direct involvement. After the Times published their expose in June, Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of Intelligence Committee, called for an investigation to track down how the media was first made aware of America’s involvement in Olympic Games. “I am deeply disturbed by the continuing leaks of classified information to the media, most recently regarding alleged cyber efforts targeting Iran’s nuclear program,” Feinstein said through a statement at the time. “I made it clear that disclosures of this type endanger American lives and undermine America’s national security.” When Feinstein spoke to DC’s The Hill newspaper, she said, “the leak about the attack on Iran’s nuclear program could ‘to some extent’ provide justification for copycat attacks against the United States.” According to the chairwoman, “This is like an avalanche. It is very detrimental and, candidly, I found it very concerning. There’s no question that this kind of thing hurts our country.” Just last month, a shadowy Iranian-based hacking group called The Qassam Cyber Fighters took credit for launching a cyberattack on the servers of Capital One Financial Corp. and BB&T Corp., two of the biggest names in the American banking industry. Days earlier, Google informed some of its American users that they may be targeted in a state-sponsored cyberattack from abroad, and computer experts insist that these assaults will only intensify over time. “We absolutely have seen more activity from the Middle East, and in particular Iran has been increasingly active as they build up their cyber capabilities,” CrowdStrike Security President George Kurtz told the Times. Speaking of the accidental impact Stuxnet could soon have in the US, Chevron’s Koelmel tells the Journal, “I think the downside of what they did is going to be far worse than what they actually accomplished.” Source

US cyberwar virus aimed at Iran, infects Chevron accidentally 

November 9, 2012

America’s cyberwar is already seeing collateral damage, and it’s hitting the country’s own billion-dollar companies. Oil giants Chevron say the Stuxnet computer virus made by the US to target Iran infected their systems as well.

California-based Chevron, a Fortune 500 company that’s among the biggest corporations in the world, admits this week that they discovered the Stuxnet worm on their systems back in 2010. Up until now, Chevron managed to make their finding a well-kept secret, and their disclosure published by the Wall Street Journal on Thursday marks the first time a US company has come clean about being infected by the virus intended for Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. Mark Koelmel of the company’s earth sciences department says that they are likely to not be the last, though.

“We’re finding it in our systems and so are other companies,” says Koelmel. “So now we have to deal with this.”

Koelmel claims that the virus did not have any adverse effects on his company, which generated a quarter of a trillion dollars in revenue during 2011. As soon as Chevron identified the infection, it was taken care of immediately, he says. Other accidental targets might not be so lucky though, and the computer worm’s complex coding means it might be a while before anyone else becomes aware of the damage.

“I don’t think the US government even realized how far it had spread,” Koelmel adds.

Discovered in 2010, the Stuxnet worm was reported with all but certainty to be the creation of the United States, perhaps with the assistance of Israel, to set back Iran’s nuclear enrichment program as a preemptive measure against an eventual war. Only as recently as this June, however, American officials with direct knowledge of the worm went public with Uncle Sam’s involvement.

In a June 2012 article published by The New York Times, government agents with direct knowledge of Stuxnet claimed that first President George W. Bush, then Barack Obama, oversaw the deployment of the worm as part of a well-crafted cyberassault on Iran. Coupled with another malicious program named Flame and perhaps many more, Stuxnet was waged against Iran as part of an initiative given the codename “Olympic Games.” Rather than solely stealing intelligence through use of computer coding, the endeavor was believed to be the first cyberattack that intended to cause actual hard damage.

“Previous cyberattacks had effects limited to other computers,” Michael Hayden, the former chief of the CIA, explained to the Times earlier this year. “This is the first attack of a major nature in which a cyberattack was used to effect physical destruction.”

On the record, the federal government maintains ignorance on the subject of Stuxnet. With American companies perhaps soon coming out of the woodwork to discuss how they were hit, though, the White House may have to finally admit that they’ve had direct involvement.

After the Times published their expose in June, Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of Intelligence Committee, called for an investigation to track down how the media was first made aware of America’s involvement in Olympic Games.

“I am deeply disturbed by the continuing leaks of classified information to the media, most recently regarding alleged cyber efforts targeting Iran’s nuclear program,” Feinstein said through a statement at the time. “I made it clear that disclosures of this type endanger American lives and undermine America’s national security.”

When Feinstein spoke to DC’s The Hill newspaper, she said, “the leak about the attack on Iran’s nuclear program could ‘to some extent’ provide justification for copycat attacks against the United States.” According to the chairwoman, “This is like an avalanche. It is very detrimental and, candidly, I found it very concerning. There’s no question that this kind of thing hurts our country.”

Just last month, a shadowy Iranian-based hacking group called The Qassam Cyber Fighters took credit for launching a cyberattack on the servers of Capital One Financial Corp. and BB&T Corp., two of the biggest names in the American banking industry. Days earlier, Google informed some of its American users that they may be targeted in a state-sponsored cyberattack from abroad, and computer experts insist that these assaults will only intensify over time.

“We absolutely have seen more activity from the Middle East, and in particular Iran has been increasingly active as they build up their cyber capabilities,” CrowdStrike Security President George Kurtz told the Times.

Speaking of the accidental impact Stuxnet could soon have in the US, Chevron’s Koelmel tells the Journal, “I think the downside of what they did is going to be far worse than what they actually accomplished.”

Source

photos

The People’s Record Daily News Update - Whose news? Our news!

November 9, 2012 

Here are some stories you may not otherwise hear about today:

  • Seven NAVY Seals face disciplinary action after consulting for EA on the videogame ‘Medal of Honor: Warfighter’ and “disclosing classified information”. While these soldiers will face “disciplinary action” for selling classified information, alleged Wikileaks informant Bradley Manning remains imprisoned without conviction for more than 900 days for leaking human rights violations and war crimes committed by the United States military. 

Follow us on Tumblr or by RSS feed for more daily updates.

photo

US and Israel to launch major military drill ”Austere Challenge 2012”, involving nearly 5,000 troops aimed at Iran. October 19, 2012 The United States and Israel are set to launch a major military exercise in a show of unity aimed at Iran, despite friction between American and Israeli leaders over how to counter Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. The air defence drills, dubbed “Austere Challenge 2012,” will unfold later this month and last about three weeks, with 3,500 US troops and 1,000 Israeli forces taking part, officers said on Wednesday. “This is the largest exercise in the history of the longstanding military relationship between the US and Israel,” said Lieutenant General Craig Franklin, 3rd Air Force Commander, who is overseeing the drill along with his Israeli counterpart, Brigadier General Nitzan Nuriel. “This exercise will improve the cooperative missile defence of Israel and will promote regional stability and help ensure a military edge,” Franklin told reporters in a teleconference. But the drill is about more than missile defenses. The elaborate exercise takes place at a politically charged moment, amid speculation about a possible Israeli pre-emptive attack on Iran, a hotly contested US presidential election weeks away and parliamentary polls expected in Israel within a few months. ‘Strong message’ The drill’s “scenario is to deal with threats from all fronts”, Nuriel, the Israeli commander, told the same phone conference. “Anybody can get any type of message he wants from this exercise. The fact we are practicing together and working together is a strong message by itself.” In a report this year to congress, the Pentagon warned that Iran’s missiles could hit Israel and Eastern European countries, including an extended-range version of the Shahab-3 and a medium-range ballistic missile with a range of 2,000km. The missile threat, combined with the crisis over Iran’s disputed nuclear program, prompted Israeli authorities in August to test a SMS public alert system designed to warn the population of an imminent attack. In the works for two years, the joint exercise originally was scheduled for April but was postponed at Israel’s request, without an official explanation. Source Despite widespread disapproval, we keep moving closer and closer to war with Iran. If you listen to the election rhetoric, it sounds like the United States and Israel will be engaging Iran militarily either way, unfortunately. 

US and Israel to launch major military drill ”Austere Challenge 2012”, involving nearly 5,000 troops aimed at Iran.

October 19, 2012

The United States and Israel are set to launch a major military exercise in a show of unity aimed at Iran, despite friction between American and Israeli leaders over how to counter Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

The air defence drills, dubbed “Austere Challenge 2012,” will unfold later this month and last about three weeks, with 3,500 US troops and 1,000 Israeli forces taking part, officers said on Wednesday.

“This is the largest exercise in the history of the longstanding military relationship between the US and Israel,” said Lieutenant General Craig Franklin, 3rd Air Force Commander, who is overseeing the drill along with his Israeli counterpart, Brigadier General Nitzan Nuriel.

“This exercise will improve the cooperative missile defence of Israel and will promote regional stability and help ensure a military edge,” Franklin told reporters in a teleconference.

But the drill is about more than missile defenses.

The elaborate exercise takes place at a politically charged moment, amid speculation about a possible Israeli pre-emptive attack on Iran, a hotly contested US presidential election weeks away and parliamentary polls expected in Israel within a few months.

‘Strong message’

The drill’s “scenario is to deal with threats from all fronts”, Nuriel, the Israeli commander, told the same phone conference.

“Anybody can get any type of message he wants from this exercise. The fact we are practicing together and working together is a strong message by itself.”

In a report this year to congress, the Pentagon warned that Iran’s missiles could hit Israel and Eastern European countries, including an extended-range version of the Shahab-3 and a medium-range ballistic missile with a range of 2,000km.

The missile threat, combined with the crisis over Iran’s disputed nuclear program, prompted Israeli authorities in August to test a SMS public alert system designed to warn the population of an imminent attack.

In the works for two years, the joint exercise originally was scheduled for April but was postponed at Israel’s request, without an official explanation.

Source

Despite widespread disapproval, we keep moving closer and closer to war with Iran. If you listen to the election rhetoric, it sounds like the United States and Israel will be engaging Iran militarily either way, unfortunately. 

photo

Has the Afghan surge been a complete failure? October 2, 2012 As new data suggests that the US surge in Afghanistan has failed, we ask how it will impact the upcoming US elections. It was arguably the most important foreign policy decision of Barack Obama’s first term as US president. Now new data suggests that the Afghan surge has been a military failure. “Afghanistan is an extremely varied country and there are a lot of different attitudes. I think that we sometimes assume that bringing in services would automatically win over hearts and minds, when in reality sometimes just the intrusion of any outsider … was actually destabilising.” - Frances Bown, a fellow at the council on foreign relations With just over a month until the election, the US military has withdrawn the last of the 33,000 troops Obama sent to Afghanistan in December 2009. But according to data released by the NATO command in Afghanistan or ISAF obtained by Wired magazine the Taliban’s momentum is fiercer now than before the surge. Insurgent attacks may be lower than last year, but they are significantly higher when compared to 2009 before the surge was launched. And the number of civilian casualties caused by insurgent attacks in August 2012 was the highest for three years. The surge was presented as the culmination of Obama’s careful deliberation - a sign of the qualities he brought to his role as commander in chief. That the decision has so little to show for the cost in lives and money should be a major issue on the campaign trail. But with Republican candidate Mitt Romney seemingly loathe even to mention Afghanistan, it is not. “The fact is that the Taliban has been able to vastly increase the numberof IED attacks that are effective in causing casualties on the part of the foreign troops. If you look at the figures for actual casualities from those attacks - its really quite dramtic.” Gareth Porter, an investigative reporter And beyond a vague promise to withdraw American troops by the end of 2014 neither the president nor Romney seem to have any clear vision for the future. NATO’s lack of confidence in the Afghan forces that were meant to be strengthened by the surge was made abundantly clear when the US temporarily scaled back joint operations earlier this month after a string of so-called green on blue attacks. Operations did resume on Thursday but with far stricter safeguards in place. So has the surge been a complete failure? And how will it impact the upcoming US presidential elections? Inside Story US 2012, with presenter Shihab Rattansi, discusses with guests: Lieutenant colonel Tony Shaffer, a former US intelligence officer who has served two combat tours in Afghanistan; Frances Bown, an international affairs fellow at the council on foreign relations; and Gareth Porter, an investigative reporter and historian. “From day one of the surge all we [the US] have been doing is adding fiction to the friction - there’s no actual achievable objectives within the military context of this effort … The real issue is something that this administration has not been able to grasp. It’s all about the ideology – the tribal nature of the environment. Because they’ve never grasped that, they have continued to use a western methodology without understanding what they are actually going to try to achieve and what is sustainable.” Tony Shaffer, a former US intelligence officer Source

Has the Afghan surge been a complete failure?

October 2, 2012

As new data suggests that the US surge in Afghanistan has failed, we ask how it will impact the upcoming US elections.

It was arguably the most important foreign policy decision of Barack Obama’s first term as US president. Now new data suggests that the Afghan surge has been a military failure.

“Afghanistan is an extremely varied country and there are a lot of different attitudes. I think that we sometimes assume that bringing in services would automatically win over hearts and minds, when in reality sometimes just the intrusion of any outsider … was actually destabilising.”

- Frances Bown, a fellow at the council on foreign relations

With just over a month until the election, the US military has withdrawn the last of the 33,000 troops Obama sent to Afghanistan in December 2009.

But according to data released by the NATO command in Afghanistan or ISAF obtained by Wired magazine the Taliban’s momentum is fiercer now than before the surge.

Insurgent attacks may be lower than last year, but they are significantly higher when compared to 2009 before the surge was launched. And the number of civilian casualties caused by insurgent attacks in August 2012 was the highest for three years.

The surge was presented as the culmination of Obama’s careful deliberation - a sign of the qualities he brought to his role as commander in chief.

That the decision has so little to show for the cost in lives and money should be a major issue on the campaign trail. But with Republican candidate Mitt Romney seemingly loathe even to mention Afghanistan, it is not.

“The fact is that the Taliban has been able to vastly increase the numberof IED attacks that are effective in causing casualties on the part of the foreign troops. If you look at the figures for actual casualities from those attacks - its really quite dramtic.”

Gareth Porter, an investigative reporter

And beyond a vague promise to withdraw American troops by the end of 2014 neither the president nor Romney seem to have any clear vision for the future.

NATO’s lack of confidence in the Afghan forces that were meant to be strengthened by the surge was made abundantly clear when the US temporarily scaled back joint operations earlier this month after a string of so-called green on blue attacks. Operations did resume on Thursday but with far stricter safeguards in place.

So has the surge been a complete failure? And how will it impact the upcoming US presidential elections?

Inside Story US 2012, with presenter Shihab Rattansi, discusses with guests: Lieutenant colonel Tony Shaffer, a former US intelligence officer who has served two combat tours in Afghanistan; Frances Bown, an international affairs fellow at the council on foreign relations; and Gareth Porter, an investigative reporter and historian.

“From day one of the surge all we [the US] have been doing is adding fiction to the friction - there’s no actual achievable objectives within the military context of this effort … The real issue is something that this administration has not been able to grasp. It’s all about the ideology – the tribal nature of the environment. Because they’ve never grasped that, they have continued to use a western methodology without understanding what they are actually going to try to achieve and what is sustainable.”

Tony Shaffer, a former US intelligence officer

Source

photo

Apple feels reporting drone strikes is ‘objectionable & crude’; rejects app August 31, 2012 It seems that today you can’t spit in the wind without hitting a story about some US drone killing a bunch of people in a country somewhere overseas. Every known drone strike is accompanied by news reports of the location and the number of people killed. Yet, even with all these stories about drone strikes, it can a daunting task for those interested in following them to keep up with them all. So what is a drone enthusiast, or someone just appalled by the frequency of the strikes, to do? One creative iPhone developer, Josh Begley, took the time to create an app that sought out news articles about drone strikes. When it would find one, it would send a push notification to the owner of the iPhone and then display a Google map of the area with a push pin of the location of the strike. He had hoped to have it released in the wild by now, but Apple keeps rejecting his application. It’s the third time in a month that Apple has turned Drones+ away, says Josh Begley, the program’s New York-based developer. The company’s reasons for keeping the program out of the App Store keep shifting. First, Apple called the bare-bones application that aggregates news of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia “not useful.” Then there was an issue with hiding a corporate logo. And now, there’s this crude content problem. It’s this last rejection that has Josh scratching his head. How can a news aggregating application be in any way crude or objectionable? Yes, I know that many people feel that news reports from the mainstream media could easily be classified as such, but that is beside the point. This app provides a useful service for those who want to keep abreast of the latest news regarding drone strikes. It doesn’t show graphic images or other caricatures of the attacks, merely a push pin and a link to the story. If it is the content that is objectionable, he may just turn to a less strict operating system for the next version. Begley is about at his wits end over the iOS version of Drones+. “I’m kind of back at the drawing board about what exactly I’m supposed to do,” Begley said. The basic idea was to see if he could get App Store denizens a bit more interested in the U.S.’ secretive, robotic wars, with information on those wars popping up on their phones the same way an Instagram comment or retweet might. Instead, Begley’s thinking about whether he’d have a better shot making the same point in the Android Market. Its this kind of rejection of an interesting and thought provoking app that will turn people away from walled gardens. We talked recently about Microsoft’s moves toward further locking down Windows resulting in developers seeking the more open alternative of Linux. The same will happen with the iPhone. As more developers continue to have their apps rejected with little to no context, those developers will become much more frustrated with the whole process and leave for Android. Is this really the lesson that Apple wants young developers taking from this and similar experiences?  Source

Apple feels reporting drone strikes is ‘objectionable & crude’; rejects app

August 31, 2012

It seems that today you can’t spit in the wind without hitting a story about some US drone killing a bunch of people in a country somewhere overseas. Every known drone strike is accompanied by news reports of the location and the number of people killed. Yet, even with all these stories about drone strikes, it can a daunting task for those interested in following them to keep up with them all. So what is a drone enthusiast, or someone just appalled by the frequency of the strikes, to do?

One creative iPhone developer, Josh Begley, took the time to create an app that sought out news articles about drone strikes. When it would find one, it would send a push notification to the owner of the iPhone and then display a Google map of the area with a push pin of the location of the strike. He had hoped to have it released in the wild by now, but Apple keeps rejecting his application.

It’s the third time in a month that Apple has turned Drones+ away, says Josh Begley, the program’s New York-based developer. The company’s reasons for keeping the program out of the App Store keep shifting. First, Apple called the bare-bones application that aggregates news of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia “not useful.” Then there was an issue with hiding a corporate logo. And now, there’s this crude content problem.

It’s this last rejection that has Josh scratching his head. How can a news aggregating application be in any way crude or objectionable? Yes, I know that many people feel that news reports from the mainstream media could easily be classified as such, but that is beside the point. This app provides a useful service for those who want to keep abreast of the latest news regarding drone strikes. It doesn’t show graphic images or other caricatures of the attacks, merely a push pin and a link to the story. If it is the content that is objectionable, he may just turn to a less strict operating system for the next version.

Begley is about at his wits end over the iOS version of Drones+. “I’m kind of back at the drawing board about what exactly I’m supposed to do,” Begley said. The basic idea was to see if he could get App Store denizens a bit more interested in the U.S.’ secretive, robotic wars, with information on those wars popping up on their phones the same way an Instagram comment or retweet might. Instead, Begley’s thinking about whether he’d have a better shot making the same point in the Android Market.

Its this kind of rejection of an interesting and thought provoking app that will turn people away from walled gardens. We talked recently about Microsoft’s moves toward further locking down Windows resulting in developers seeking the more open alternative of Linux. The same will happen with the iPhone. As more developers continue to have their apps rejected with little to no context, those developers will become much more frustrated with the whole process and leave for Android. Is this really the lesson that Apple wants young developers taking from this and similar experiences? 

Source

photo

Media blackout on chicken in Iran to prevent social upheaval July 23, 2012 Iran, a country rich in oil with no need for nuclear power, has nevertheless sacrificed Iranian delicacies like chicken to build nuclear plants. NOTE: This is not valid justification for America to invade and destroy millions more lives/inflict immeasurable suffering onto the Iranian people. After Iran’s national Police Chief Esmail Ahmadi recently felt it necessary to address the nation’s “chicken crisis,” public emotion has flown the coup, ultimately leading to the banning of televised images of people eating chicken, according to a Rueters report. The soaring price for the culinary common that Iranians relish cooked with saffron, plums or pomegranates has become a simmering public debate, as international nuclear sanctions take hold of the Iranian economy. Ahmadi urged television stations to avoid broadcasting images of people eating chicken, saying such pictures could fire up social tensions, with perhaps unforeseen consequences. “Certain people witnessing this class gap between the rich and the poor might grab a knife and think they will get their share from the wealthy,” Mehr news agency quoted him as saying. Apparently, one way of identifying “the wealthy” in Iran is too spot them enjoying some chicken nuggets prepared with saffron. As Iran’s economy withers under erratic government management and international sanctions imposed over the country’s disputed nuclear program, food and fuel prices have the public clucking increasingly louder over the past 18 months. As a reaction to Ahmadi-Moghaddam’s words, Mana Neyestani, a leading Iranian cartoonist, published a cartoon on “chicken story” (above). The text in the cartoon depicts a father scolding his son, saying: “How many times have I told you not to watch a film with chicken in it.” Photo source Source

Media blackout on chicken in Iran to prevent social upheaval

July 23, 2012

Iran, a country rich in oil with no need for nuclear power, has nevertheless sacrificed Iranian delicacies like chicken to build nuclear plants. NOTE: This is not valid justification for America to invade and destroy millions more lives/inflict immeasurable suffering onto the Iranian people.

After Iran’s national Police Chief Esmail Ahmadi recently felt it necessary to address the nation’s “chicken crisis,” public emotion has flown the coup, ultimately leading to the banning of televised images of people eating chicken, according to a Rueters report.

The soaring price for the culinary common that Iranians relish cooked with saffron, plums or pomegranates has become a simmering public debate, as international nuclear sanctions take hold of the Iranian economy.

Ahmadi urged television stations to avoid broadcasting images of people eating chicken, saying such pictures could fire up social tensions, with perhaps unforeseen consequences. “Certain people witnessing this class gap between the rich and the poor might grab a knife and think they will get their share from the wealthy,” Mehr news agency quoted him as saying.

Apparently, one way of identifying “the wealthy” in Iran is too spot them enjoying some chicken nuggets prepared with saffron. As Iran’s economy withers under erratic government management and international sanctions imposed over the country’s disputed nuclear program, food and fuel prices have the public clucking increasingly louder over the past 18 months.

As a reaction to Ahmadi-Moghaddam’s words, Mana Neyestani, a leading Iranian cartoonist, published a cartoon on “chicken story” (above). The text in the cartoon depicts a father scolding his son, saying:

“How many times have I told you not to watch a film with chicken in it.”

Photo source

Source

text

A looming war with Iran? US sends fourth aircraft carrier & dozens of underwater drones to Iran

July 13, 2012

The US Navy has unexpectedly dispatched a fourth aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf, along with a fleet of underwater drones in what is being considered just the latest move in a series of escalations leading towards a potential war with Iran.

The deployment of dozens of small, unmanned submarine-like watercraft was confirmed by the Los Angeles Times this week, which cites military officials speaking on condition of anonymity.

This particular type of craft, unmanned SeaFox submersible, are reported to be sent to the Gulf so that the US military can detect and destroy any mines that may be planted in the waterway by Iranian officials if they escalate efforts to block the Strait of Hormuz, a strategically important narrow stretch of water that exists as an immensely important conduit for any resources being moved in or out of the Middle East.

The Times says that the subs, at only 4 feet long and fewer than 100 pounds apiece, can move at speeds up to six knots at depths of 300 feet. The price-tag is reported to be $100,000 each, which includes an intricate waterproof television camera and a homing sonar system. The US rush-ordered a shipment in May in a deal with Germany under the direct of Marine Gen. James Mattis, the top US commander in the Middle East. It is reported that a fleet of SeaFox subs were deployed overseas several weeks back, but has only been confirmed now.

The United States has already sent three massive aircraft carriers to the waterways outside of Iran, including the USS Enterprise, the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and the USS Abraham Lincoln, and will now add the USS John C Stennis to that fleet in August. Unlike these behemoth ships equipped with billions worth of weaponry and service personnel, America’s other new addition to the battlefront is invisible to those on land and can be controlled from anywhere in the world.

“In the Cold War, minesweeping warfare was a large part of what the Navy did, but we have lost a lot of our minesweeping capability,” Christopher Harmer, a senior analyst at the Institute for the Study of War, tells the Times. “The SeaFox is a relatively simple, off-the-shelf system that we can put off our minesweepers but also any surface ship.”

Harmer adds to the paper that although Iran has the capabilities of coming through with its threats of closing the strait, the latest addition to the United States Navy would make sure a blockade wouldn’t last long.

“If they wanted to close the Strait of Hormuz, they could do it, but they would only be able to do it one time,” he says.

The new fleet of SeaFox subs will accompany two massive aircraft carriers and a collection of F-22 fighter jets that America has already sent towards Iran. When the United States upped its presence in Persian Gulf earlier this year, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters, “We want them to know that we are fully prepared to deal with any contingency and it’s better for them to try to deal with us through diplomacy.”

Source

link

NATO: Just why are people protesting?

amodernmanifesto:


The backstory: 

  1. NATO — the North Atlantic Treaty Organization — was formed in 1949 to make the world safe from communism and safe for capitalism. Today, NATO includes 28 nations, including many in the east previously within the political orbit of the former Soviet Union.
  2. On a practical level, NATO worked to contain the political, military and economic reach of the Soviet Union and its allies, and to preserve and advance “the West” — which inevitably meant then and means today the economic and political interests of U.S. and Western European corporations and governments — not the economic and political interests of people in NATO countries or in places that NATO bombs and occupies.
  3. NATO’s agenda has historically dovetailed nicely with efforts in NATO member countries at home, including Italy, France and Greece, to suppress secular progressive political movements that sought to shift resources away from permanent war and into human needs on the ground. NATO’s military agenda has also historically pitted it against homegrown movements against militarism.
  4. NATO countries account for two-thirds of the $1.5 trillion a year the world spends on militaries (not including huge “indirect” costs like caring for injured soldiers or paying interest on the government debt that bankrolls these expenditures). US expenditures (again, NOT counting ‘indirect’ costs) account for 70% of NATO expenditures, or roughly half of total global military expenditures.
  5. NATO is NOT a defensive group. It is a global intervention power – and its intervention is selective. NATO ‘intervened’ in Libya, where multinational oil companies are now hustling to take over Libya’s vast oil resources and the ‘rebels’ we backed are gutting human rights, including womens’ rights. NATO is fine with US drone attacks in Yemen, which support one of the region’s most ruthless dictatorships, and the U.S. and NATO turn a blind eye to the brutality of the Bahraini dictatorship, essentially aiding and abetting these governments’ suppression of protest movements against corruption and dictatorship.
  6. The $700+ BILLION that U.S. taxpayers fork out for the military each year, including over $700 milliion/year for NATO, could bankroll living wages for tens of millions of teachers, health care workers, firefighters, and other vital service providers — or $25,000/year in unemployment for almost 30 million out-of-work people, or tuition at state colleges for more than 60 million college students.
  7. The U.S. government had no qualms about forking over $750 billion to bail out big banks that continue to charge exorbitant credit card interest rates and refuse to renegotiate underwater mortgages. If we can spend $750 billion to bail out big banks, we can shift hundreds of millions of dollars in NATO funding each year to human needs at home, instead.
  8. NATO bankrolls a growing number of private military contractors with our tax dollars. The consequences of this push to privatize the business of war? Destruction, death and mayhem in targeted countries abroad – at the hands of privateers who literally have no accountability under law – and a new corporate elite at home staked to profiting off a permanent war economy at the expense of funding for human needs.
  9. NATO functions as a military wing for most of the governments of the G8 — the U.S., the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Japan and Canada. G8 member Russia — not so much. NATO actions in Afghanistan, Libya and Pakistan, in particular, parallel the historic economic and imperial interests of the Western elites who run NATO governments.
  10. Unemployed Illinois workers on unemployment — which maxes out at barely $15,000/year, with most receiving much less — pay more in taxes than some of the biggest defense contractors. From 2008-10, defense giants Boeing and Honeywell International paid NO federal income taxes. Taxpayer-funded U.S. dollars for NATO are the gift that keeps on giving, while unemployment compensation for many out-of-work people, who pump virtually every penny back into local economies — ends after a year, along with the income and sales taxes they pay to fund more vital human needs — like unemployment compensation. Defence contractors have no such salary caps — or a foreseeable end to the gravy train.

TODAY: The U.S. and NATO

  1. NATO is responsible for 70% of world military expenditures – and the U.S. is responsible for 50% of world military expenditures, $711 billion in 2011 alone. And that’s just the part of the military budget that’s not secret or buried in other parts of the budget.
  2. The U.S. contributes between 1/5 and 1/4 of NATO’s budget. In FY2010 that contribution totaled $711.8 million, according to CBS news. Hmmm. The numbers seem pretty confusing, don’t they? Why? Because our tax dollars for the U.S. military-industrial complex are buried in many different parts of the U.S. budget, not just the budget for the Department of Defense — and because part of the U.S. budget for outfits like the CIA are SECRET.
  3. NOT counted in the U.S. military budget: care for over 30,000 U.S. soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan (Veterans Affairs); nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup and production (Department of Energy), payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families (Treasury Department); interest on debt for past wars and to bankroll current wars; State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance; defense spending that is not “military” in nature, like the Department of Homeland Security, FBI counter-terrorism spending, and NASA intelligence-gathering costs: these additional costs push the real cost of the U.S. military machine to between $1-1.4 trillion dollars for 2012 alone.
  4. The U.S. boosted spending on unmanned Predator and Reaper drones by almost 60% in 2011, to $1.9 billion — enough to eliminate the budget deficits of the Chicago Transit Authority ($277 million), the Chicago public schools ($720 million), and the City of Chicago ($635 million) — which is closing mental health clinics and cutting other neighborhood services to “save” money — even though the hidden costs of service cuts push up fiscal pressures on families, neighborhoods, hospital emergency rooms and the Cook County jail, which jail officials have described as “the largest mental health provider in Illinois.”
  5. U.S./NATO wars have been accompanied by an explosion in the ‘privatization’ of these wars to the economic benefit of the arms industry and its corporate ‘service’ providers — and those contracts are often awarded and ‘managed’ with virtually no public oversight. The role of “support service contractors” — mercenaries and other employees of corporate war profiteers — has increased since 2001, with payments for contractor services exceeding investments in equipment for the armed forces for the first time in 2007 — the same year Blackwater mercenaries slaughtered 17 unarmed Iraqi citizens, yet incredibly were found not to be legally liable for this massacre to either U.S. or Iraqi military or civilian law.
  6. A 2011 Pentagon review found service contractors to be “increasingly unaffordable,” with service contractors costing taxpayers $50 billion more than the cost of all uniformed personnel in 2010.
  7. Mairead Corrigan Maguire, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1976 for her efforts to end sectarian violence in her native Northern Ireland, withdrew from the World Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates in Chicago this April, saying that participating in a conference partnered with the U.S. government, a member of NATO, would compromise her position and jeopardize her work in the Middle East and other areas.
  8. The recent invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were largely funded through supplementary spending bills outside the Federal Budget, so they weren’t included in military budget figures before 2010. By the end of 2008, the U.S. had spent approximately $900 billion in direct costs on the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. Indirect costs — like interest on the additional debt and incremental costs of caring over 30,000 wounded soldiers paid by the Veterans Administration are counted separately, with some experts estimating that these “indirect costs” will eventually exceed the direct costs of these wars.
  9. Despite claims that the U.S. military is “winding down” in places like Afghanistan, the dollars tell a different story. U.S. defense secretary Leon Panetta is pushing forward with funding for a trillion-dollar Lockheed-Martin F-35 fighter jet program that’s more than a million man-hours behind schedule, billions of dollars over budget, using a flawed, dangerous design, and nowhere near ready for use in combat; and a cash-cow V-22 Osprey vehicle that’s nowhere near as cost-effective as alternative systems — and has a nasty habit of deadly, bad performance.
  10. The twenty-first century is shaping up right now largely as a confrontation between the U.S./NATO and the BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa — with the danger that somewhere down the line these competing economic and political interests turn into a full scale military confrontation.

Afghanistan:

  1. NATO’s Afghanistan war is the longest in U.S. history, and 2011 was the deadliest year in the Afghanistan war since the U.S. began its invasion and occupation — under the banner of NATO — in 2001.
  2. 450 people a day are displaced in Afghanistan, and 250 children a day die in Afghanistan due to malnutrition, according to Voices for Creative Nonviolence.
  3. The U.S. is NOT leaving Afghanistan — in April 2012, the U.S. and Afghanistan announced a new “strategic partnership agreement” through at least 2024.
  4. The decade-long War in Afghanistan has caused the deaths of thousands of Afghan civilians directly from insurgent and foreign military action, as well as the deaths of possibly tens of thousands of Afghan civilians indirectly as a consequence of displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment, crime and lawlessness resulting from the war. Civilian death tolls are estimated at upwards of 40,000 people, with direct and indirect deaths linked to U.S./NATO military action estimated conservatively at more than 9,000 — and perhaps as many as 29,000 — civilians.

Pakistan:

  1. Drone attacks by the U.S. in Pakistan, conducted in tandem with the “NATO” war in Afghanistan, have had lethal consequences for civilians. More than 175 children are among at least 2,347 people reported killed in US attacks since 2004. There are credible reports of at least hundreds of civilians among the dead.
  2. Research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has found that since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed, including more than 60 children; at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners — tactics condemned by leading legal experts.
  3. Although drone attacks began in 2004 under the Bush administration, the Obama administration has stepped them up enormously in Pakistan, with at least 260 attacks by unmanned Predators or Reapers in Pakistan since 2008 through February 2012 – averaging one every four days. Because the attacks are carried out by the CIA, no information is given on the numbers of people killed.

Iraq, the war that hasn’t really ended:

  1. Despite global opposition to the war, the U.S. and its key NATO ally the United Kingdom and a handful of other countries invaded Iraq in 2003. NATO signed on officially a year later, with ‘training’ support.
  2. Economist Joseph Stiglitz has estimated that the cost of the Iraq war could easily top $3 trillion, or close to $10,000 for every woman, man and child in the United States. Documented civilian deaths have topped 100,000, and hundreds of thousands more have died from disease and malnutrition driven by years of privation, destruction and economic blockade.
  3. Meanwhile, despite the war’s official ‘end’ in December 2011, thousands of State Department ‘employees’ and security staff remain in country — including at least 5,000 mercenaries being bankrolled at U.S. taxpayer expense to protect places like the vast bunker that is the U.S. embassy complex in the Green Zone. The official military officially goes home; the hired mercenaries roll in on our dime. The country’s infrastructure remains in shambles, and civilians are still dying, from causes that range from sectarian bombings to treatable illnesses, at much higher rates than before the U.S. invasion.
  4. More than 4,400 U.S. military troops were killed in Iraq — and tens of thousands more live today with severe injuries, from amputated limbs to traumatic brain injuries. The costs for their care are born by their families and U.S. taxpayers — if soldiers are lucky enough to access care through the Veterans Administration. For these people, as for the Iraqi people, the Iraq war has not ended.

Yemen, Libya, Palestine, Bahrain and beyond:

  1. NATO was all about ‘regime change’ and ‘humanitarian’ bombing in Libya, where casualty estimates range between 2,000 and a staggering 30,000 – and western corporations now have access to millions of gallons of Libyan sweet crude oil. Meanwhile, no U.S. support for regime change in places like Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen and other Arab countries where popular, mass-based protests struggle to throw off the shackles of U.S.-backed dictatorships. A few of those governments have shuffled the deck chairs of their titular leaders to pretend ‘reform’ — and that’s good enough for NATO.
  2. A Bureau of Investigative Journalism study reveals that U.S. drone attacks in Yemen now equal those in Pakistan, killing hundreds in the past year, and provoking the same kind of anger at the U.S. in Yemen as they have in Pakistan. At the same time, the Obama Administration gave defense and intelligence officials broader authority to use drone strikes against militants in Yemen even when the identities of those who could be killed aren’t known. That authorization, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, is a shift from the policy that allowed only focused attacks on known al-Qaeda affiliates in Yemen.
  3. Yemen has been embroiled since 2011 in a popular rebellion against the ruling dictatorship, an ally of the U.S. and other local dictatorships. As with other Arab Spring rebellions in countries with dictatorships allied with the U.S. government and its corporate interests — including Bahrain and Egypt — the U.S. and NATO have turned a blind eye to the repression and violence of these dictatorships, including Yemen’s bloody crackdowns on protesters calling for reforms.
  4. “A world power equips a dictatorship that kills, tortures, and imprisons unarmed protesters” — that’s how the Friends Committee on National Legislation has described the U.S. posture towards Bahrain. While NATO/US military activity in Yemen has grown in the last two years, NATO has felt no need to ‘intervene’ in the Bahraini government’s slaughter of its people.
  5. In the past year, the Bahraini regime has systematically tortured and gunned down members of opposition groups, killed and detained children, and banned entry for foreign journalists while firing on local journalists covering the repression. At least 70 protesters have been killed in the last year — significantly higher than the July ’09 post-election crackdown in Iran. Yet the U.S. has largely been silent, despite the fact that Bahrain’s protests in February 2012 were the largest of the Arab Spring relative to the country’s population. Al Jazeera described the Bahraini revolution as “abandoned by the Arabs, forsaken by the West and forgotten by the world.” Why? Because Bahrain’s ruling elite are close allies of the Saudi Arabian dictatorship — a dictatorship with which the U.S. and its corporate multinational friends maintains close ties.
  6. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has expanded well beyond Western Europe. Included: an effort to make Israel NATO’s first non-European member, despite Israel’s atrocious human rights record, decades-long illegal occupation of Palestine and chronic military attacks against nearby countries , from Lebanon to Iran.
  7. In 2009, U.N. officials exposed Israeli war crimes during Israel’s 2008-09 assault on Gaza, including the slaughter of civilian children, women and men and the use of white phosphorus chemical weapons. NATO responded by sending Military Committee Admiral Di Paola to Israel — to study Israel’s military  tactics and methods for NATO use in Afghanistan, including “intelligence gathering capabilities and methods” used in civilian population centers — methods that include torture and abuse. Not a peep about killing Palestinian civilians or using lethal — and illegal — chemical weapons on them.
  8. Unique perks for Israel: The first non-European member to finalize the Individual Cooperation Program (ICP), allowing NATO and Israel to engage in joint military exercises and intelligence sharing — including studying Israeli military tactics in occupied Palestine. Israel has joined NATO’s Mediterranean “naval control system,” posts an Israeli liaison officer at NATO’s Naples HQ, and can join NATO forces in patrolling the Mediterranean. In 2005, Israel joined NATO’s Parliamentary Assembly; a political body that helps set policy agenda. No such parallel access for the people Israel occupies, the Palestinians.
  9. For years, right wing Israeli politician Avigdor Lieberman has advocated for full NATO membership to strengthen Israel’s military posture in the region. NATO would also be willing to enforce any peace plan between Palestinians and Israel — under U.S. command. That scenario raises alarm bells, with Israel’s close ties to NATO and the U.S., which gives Israel $3 billion in military aid each year, and U.S. willingness to turn a blind eye to Israeli policies of collective punishment and other human rights abuses. If Israel were to join NATO and be attacked (even by a country responding in self-defense against Israeli aggression), then a NATO response could be triggered, with devastating consequences for the region, but especially for Palestinians, who are always the biggest losers of land and lives in Israel’s wars.

Bringing the U.S./NATO war machine home:

  1. Just as spending for U.S./NATO spending has exploded abroad, U.S. domestic security spending has doubled since 2001, with evidence that much of this domestic spying is targeting political dissent, including opposition to war and economic inequality, right here at home.
  2. Screw accountability at home for war crimes: On April 3, 2012, the Obama administration indicted intelligence whistleblower John Kiriakou, the sixth whistleblower that the Obama administration has charged under the Espionage Act for the alleged mishandling of classified information – more than all past administrations combined. Kirakou’s ‘crime’? Blowing the whistle on Bush administration waterboarding and refusing to engage in torture; he’s the only person to be criminally prosecuted in connection with the Bush-era torture program.
  3. Homeland Security officials have spent six years and more than $250 million building the nation’s largest fleet of domestic surveillance drones, yet the nine Predators used on America’s borders have yet to prove very useful in stopping contraband or undocumented immigrants — but they HAVE jumpstarted enthusiasm among law enforcement agencies across the nation for using drone technology to observe and spy on local residents.
  4. In February 2012, Congress directed the Federal Aviation Administration to craft regulations governing the licensing of commercial drones. That could open the skies to increased domestic surveillance and commercial data-gathering of the sort that concerns groups like the ACLU.
  5. Drones “really have the potential to become a new avenue of surveillance in American life. There are 747-size drones, but there are drones as small as little hummingbirds that can fly up, buzz around, look in windows and stuff like that,” Jay Stanley, an ACLU senior analyst, has said. The FAA has approved 300 certificates to operate drones filed by public entities including local police departments, universities, and federal departments.

So important. 

Read & reblog!

Following