Er det vores kære allierede USA, der har brugt Muhammed tegningerne til at skabe splid mellem os europæere og den islamiske verden - som et led i forberedelserne til et amerikansk angreb på Iran?

Er Daniel Fried's besøg i Danmark et led i dette?
Hvis man læser DR Nyheders omtale grundigt, så er det helt klart muligt at fortolke det sådan.

Jeg går ud fra, at hverken statsministeren eller udenrigsministeren har lugtet lunten - de æder alt råt, når det kommer fra "storebror".

Det modsiger heller ikke, at Saudi-Arabien kan være brugt som "mellemled".

Se også:

Prison Planet

Provocation all the way down

Russian ultranationalist leader...

Daniel Fried

Hvor er det nu lige, Bush-regimet ikke ønsker noget regimeskifte?

Saudi-Arabien!

Det er sandsynligvis Saudi-Arabien der står bag anvendelsen af Muhammed-tegningerne til andre politiske formål. Det fremgår af Lindsay Beyersteins artikel "Provocation all the way down" som du også kan finde på min blog Essays & Articles.

Men amerikanerne bruger det altså også "selektivt" til deres egen fordel.

Ex-U.N. inspector: Iran's next: Ritter warns that another U.S. invasion in Mideast is imminent

By Brandon Garcia

02/06/06 (Santa Fe New Mexican, The (KRT) Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) The former U.N. weapons inspector who said Iraq disarmed long before the U.S. invasion in 2003 is warning Americans to prepare for a war with Iran.

"We just don't know when, but it's going to happen," Scott Ritter said to a crowd of about 150 at the James A. Little Theater on Sunday night.

Ritter described how the U.S. government might justify war with Iran in a scenario similar to the buildup to the Iraq invasion. He also argued that Iran wants a nuclear energy program, and not nuclear weapons. But the Bush administration, he said, refuses to believe Iran is telling the truth.

He predicted the matter will wind up before the U.N. Security Council, which will determine there is no evidence of a weapons program. Then, he said, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, "will deliver a speech that has already been written. It says America cannot allow Iran to threaten the United States and we must unilaterally defend ourselves."

"How do I know this? I've talked to Bolton's speechwriter," Ritter said.

Ritter also predicted the military strategy for war with Iran. First, American forces will bomb Iran. If Iranians don't overthrow the current government, as Bush hopes they will, Iran will probably attack Israel. Then, Ritter said, the United States will drop a nuclear bomb on Iran.

The only way to prevent a war with Iran is to elect a Democratically controlled Congress in November, said Ritter, a lifelong Republican. He later said he wasn't worried his advice would be seen as partisan because, "It's a partisan issue." He said the problem is one party government and if Democrats controlled the presidency and Congress, he would advise people to elect Republicans.

Most of Ritter's hour-long speech focused on Iraqi weapons programs from shortly before the Persian Gulf War in 1991 to 2003, when the U.S. invaded Iraq. He also discussed the weapons-inspections process during that time.

Ritter was in charge of U.N. weapons inspections until he resigned in 1998. Before the Iraq invasion, Ritter said, he told Congress that inspections needed to continue.

He also said he was a Marine in the Persian Gulf War and was part of an assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein in the early 1990s.

Throughout the 1990s, Ritter said, America's real policy for Iraq was regime change -- not forcing Iraq to disarm and destroy chemical-, biological- and nuclear-weapons programs. The U.S. insisted on regime change, he said, because it believes transforming the Middle East countries into democracies will help ensure American access to oil.

The policy, he said, was borne from a political problem, not a threat to national security.

Ritter said the CIA knew Iraq had no ballistic, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons by 1995. "We knew there were no WMDs in Iraq," he said.

Ritter blamed Americans' apathy for allowing Bush to claim there was an intelligence failure. Presidents can lie to the public too easily about national security issues because Americans aren't paying attention, he said.

"It's a damn shame there's so many more people interested in the Seattle Seahawks and the Pittsburgh Steelers," he said in reference to the two teams that played in Sunday's Super Bowl.

After his speech, Ritter took questions from the audience. The first questioner wondered whether the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were faked. Ritter, a fiery speaker, seemed irritated by the question and said the attacks were real.

Someone else asked if he was interested in running for Congress. While the question drew applause, Ritter responded, "I hate politics."

Ritter, 44, was promoting his book Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of the Intelligence Conspiracy to Undermine the UN and Overthrow Saddam Hussein. The speech was sponsored by Peace Action New Mexico.

Contact Brandon Garcia at 995-3826 or at bgarcia@sfnewmexican.com.

---
source: Information Clearing House

By Jim Silva

02/06/06 "Lompoc Record" -- -- Have you seen the latest blockbuster? Like Star Wars, it's classic good verses evil - a power hungry dictator plotting to seize control of a goodly Republic. The twist is it's for adults. Ones who know reality is stranger than fiction. You guessed it! This epic thriller is actually your life, and it's called "The Fall of the Republic - Sleeping Through the Revolution." Here's a behind the scenes look:

Bush Jr. came to power surrounding himself with far right "neo-conservatives" that his daddy called "crazies in the basement."

Who are the crazies? A militant, anti-communist group of mainly Jewish intellectuals who studied the Trotskyite, Machiavellian political philosophy of Prof. Strauss at the University of Chicago. Wolfowitz, Ashcroft, Perle, Abrams, Chalabi, Bennett, Ho, Shulsky, Khalilzad, Schmitt, Kristol, are a few of the invasion architects, intelligence crafters, torture lawyers, Iraq ambassadors and U.S. puppets who studied under Strauss.

Together with Straussian devotees at neocon and pro-Israeli think tanks, they now control all powerful positions in our government.

What do neocons believe and want? They are anti-democratic, authoritarian, and they want power. Straussianism provides the intellectual framework and personal justification for their actions.

Strauss taught that an elite, wise ruling class must rule the unsophisticated masses by telling them noble lies for their own good.

Strauss loved Plato, interpreting his teachings to mean, "... true democracy is an act against nature and must be prevented at all costs."

He wrote leaders must use religion to control the masses.

"Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed," Strauss wrote. "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people." Leaders must always provide an enemy.

Straussian teachings spark delusions of grandeur in neocon intellectuals, who imagine themselves as the wise ruling elite, set free of the bonds of honesty and equality.

The Project for a New American Century think tank springs directly from this authoritarian power cult. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Abrams, Libby, Perle, and others signed PNAC documents in 1997 advocating aggressive, militaristic world domination, domination of space, control of cyberspace (they don't want much), permanent bases in the Middle East, and employing troops in constabulatory (police) duties to enforce U.S. world empire, Pax Americana.

Neocon papers are thick with delusional paranoia like the following from Richard Perle, National Security Council: "No stages, this is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute Fellow, former NSC, State, and Defense Department consultant and influential White House advisor writes, "We can lead by the force of high moral example ... [but] fear is much more reliable, and lasts longer. Once we show that we are capable of dealing out terrible punishment to our enemies, our power will be far greater. Š We are a warlike people and we love war."

Perle, Wolfowitz, Bolton and others have a long history of calling for "winnable nuclear war."

Henry Kissinger described the baffled response of established powers in the face of revolutionary challenge. "Lulled by a period of stability which seemed permanent, they find it nearly impossible to take at face value the assertion of the revolutionary power that it means to smash the existing framework. Those who warn against the danger in time are considered alarmists: those who counsel adaptation Š are considered balanced and sane."

This movie will soon be over. Better wake up your congressman.

Jim Silva is a resident of Lompoc. He can be reached at: http://mysite.verizon.net/jazzyjim

Copyright © 2006 Lee Central Coast Newspapers

---
source: Information Clearing House

Ifølge DR Nyheder fordømmer USA branden på den danske ambassade i Syrien. I en erklæring fra Det Hvide Hus hedder det:

"Vi vil holde Syrien ansvarlig for sådanne voldelige demonstrationer, da de ikke finder sted i landet uden regeringens vidende og støtte."

Hvem er det nu, der i længere tid har villet have et såkaldt "regimeskifte" i netop Syrien?

Svar: USA + Israel

Utroligt så belejligt det kommer for USA og Israel. Nu er der et påskud for at invadere Syrien, som det altid har været planen.

Næste skridt er sandsynligvis et begrænset angreb på Iran, muligvis med anvendelse af atomvåben (tnw). Foreløbig har man fået isoleret landet internationalt.

Godt man har nogle nyttige idioter til at hjælpe sig (den danske regering f.eks.)

Et atombevæbnet Iran ville være farligt - men de har ikke atomvåben.

Amerikanske politikere siger, Iran er farligere end noget andet.

Det passer ikke!

Der er en ting, der er farligere, meget farligere:

Et amerikansk-israelsk angreb på Iran.

Det er planlagt til at ske i løbet af marts...

Planlagt!

---
*ovenstående er en kopi af et indlæg på MOMIBLOG DK 4/2 ca. 18:42
(mine blogspot weblogs er blokeret!)

Som bekendt var ruslands Putin en af dem, der har givet udtryk for kritik af Jyllands-Postens tegninger af Muhammed.

Noget tyder på, at hans motiv ikke er helt det samme som andres. At han gerne ser en bevægelse i retning af en indskrænkning af ytringsfriheden i EU - fordi det kan gøre det nemmere at slå ned på tjetjenske oprørere, under falsk påskud af netop dette.

Måske en god grund mere til ikke at ændre på reglerne for ytringsfrihed?

---
*rekonstruktion

Gad vidst om det kun er mig der har alvorlige problemer med mine blogspot weblogs?

Det mystiske er, at det forekommer at være selektivt, dvs. ikke teknisk.

Eller er det mig der er ved at få Paranoia?

(mange af os er nok lidt nervøse for tiden)

Jeg har ikke så meget forstand på det tekniske, men forsøger blot at få det ud, jeg har af informationer/egne indlæg.

Foregående indlæg på engelsk har jeg postet fordi min linkning til det bliver obstrueret. Det er systematisk og selektivt, så det er næppe en teknisk fejl.

Hvad forklaringen er, aner jeg ikke. Men indholdet kan jo have betydning.

Derfor.

update:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4678022.stm

The editor of a US-funded newspaper in central Russia has been found guilty of inciting ethnic hatred in his coverage of the conflict in Chechnya.

Stanislav Dmitriyevsky, the head of the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society, was given a two-year suspended jail term.

The charges relate to statements by Chechen rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov, published by the paper two years ago.

Dmitriyevsky insists the charges were politically motivated in retaliation for his reporting of rights abuses.

følgende er blevet fjernet fra min blog MOMIBLOG DK:
----------------------------------------------------
overskrift: Søren Espersen

Søren Espersen fra Dansk Fjolseparti mener, at englands udenrigsminister Jack Straw skulle tage og holde sin beskidte mund, fordi han har sagt noget der generer Pia.

Han bilder sig åbenbart ind, at man behøver at tage hensyn til andre, når man ytrer sig.

Eller på nysprog:

loyalitet = at holde sin kæft, hvis man ikke accepterer nysprogs definition af "ytringsfrihed" (s.d.)

ytringsfrihed = retten til at spotte og forhåne andre, når blot det sker i fuld respekt for deres værdighed, tro og integritet.

------
overskrift: Putin

Som bekendt var ruslands Putin en af dem, der har givet udtryk for kritik af Jyllands-Postens tegninger af Muhammed.

Noget tyder på, at hans motiv ikke er helt det samme som andres. At han gerne ser en bevægelse i retning af en indskrænkning af ytringsfriheden i EU - fordi det kan gøre det nemmere at slå ned på tjetjenske oprørere, under falsk påskud af netop dette.

Måske en god grund mere til ikke at ændre på reglerne for ytringsfrihed?

------

Tager lige denne post med (hvis blogspot skulle strejke):
---

Saudi Arabien er et af de lande, der har haft mest travlt med, at Danmark skulle vise respekt for Islam.

Herskerne i Saudi Arabien er tilsyneladende ret så hyklerisk anlagt.

Fra en amerikansk kilde har jeg følgende udtalelse om Saudi Arabien:

Madison also shared about Saudi Arabia. "This country, which constantly tops our list as the worst persecutor of Christians, was rebuked this year by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Three Christians were arrested at the end of January and as usual, deported from the country shortly thereafter."

Citatet er fra en "Top 10 liste" på en kristen hjemmeside der hedder Worthy News

Listen kan du også læse på min blog Essays & Articles

Følgende kommentar til "Saudierne" vil blogspot ikke publicere:

---

Spejlbilledet has left a new comment on your post "Saudierne":

Det kan jeg bekræfte. Jeg sidder i Saudi og skriver disse ord. Har været på flere besøg hernede og har selvfølgelig aldrig set en kirke eller symboler fra andre religioner end islam. Ikke engang et kors om halsen er tilladt - så deres tolerance ligger vist et meget lille sted. Alligevel er min holdning at vi skal respektere deres religion og ikke nedgøre profeterne.

---
Jeg har ikke nogen forklaring på det...

update: da linket til "Spejlbilledet" ovenfor heller ikke virker, er det her:

http://spejlet.blogspot.com/

Profilen i blogspot er:

Spejlbilledet

• Industry: Engineering
• Location: Silkeborg : Denmark

About Me

Min alder er over al forventning. Jeg er født og delvist opvokset på den lille tange i Nordeuropa, der, med tilhørende småøer, kaldes Danmark. Her fik jeg også min uddannelse. Mit arbejde bringer mig rundt i verden til andre normer, kulturer, religioner og sprog. Jeg er vild med chokolade og andre fristelser. Jeg elsker især min familie og kvinder generelt - med enkelte undtagelser.

---

De krigsliderlige bukke i og omkring Det Hvide Hus kan godt gå hjem og lægge sig! Der er ikke nogen beviser på at Iran har et atomvåbenprogram, ifølge DR-nyhederne.

Men selvfølgelig er det mildt sagt lidt uheldigt, at Iran sandsynligvis bedre kan slippe afsted med at bluffe, eller påbegynde et atomvåbenprogram - på grund af USA's totale mangel på troværdighed.

Ulven kommer ...

Der er et dansk ordsprog, der lyder: "Sig mig hvem du omgåes, og jeg skal sige dig hvem du er". Det er muligvis ikke det klogeste og rimeligste ordsprog der findes, men alligevel:

En af de personer på den amerikanske højrefløj, der har støttet Bush mest, er en religiøs fanatiker ved navn Pat Robertson. Læs her hvad han mener om en aktuel sag:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166478,00.html