Dougal Dixon - Man After Man : An Anthropology of the Future (1990)

Flickr set here

"The book begins with the impact of genetic engineering. For 200 years modern humans morphed the genetics of other humans to create genetically-altered creatures. The aquamorphs and aquatics are marine humans with gills instead of lungs. One species - the vacuumorph - has been engineered for life in the vacuum of space. Its skin and eyes carry shields of skin to keep its body stable even without pressure. Civilization eventually collapses, with a few select humans escaping to colonize space. The humans that manufactured these species degrade to simple farmers and following a magnetic reversal, were driven to extinction. Other humans, the Hitek, become almost totally dependent on cybernetic technology. With Magnetic reversal imminent, the Hitek built genetically altered humans to occupy niches: Genetically-altered humans include a temperate woodland species, a prairie species, a jungle species, and a tundra-dwelling species.

Since then the genetically-altered humans must face a new phenomenon. They can no longer be genetically tweaked in a lab, so all modifications must naturally evolve. Many new forms resulted from natural selection. Socials, colonial humans with a single reproductive parent, Fishers, otter-like fishing humans, Slothman sloth-like humans, Spiketeeth, saber-toothed predatory humans, and even parasitic humans developed through natural changes.

After five million years of uninterrupted evolution, the descendants of modern man that retreated into space returned. Then the world changed dramatically. Earth was terraformed and covered in vast alien cities. The humans and other life forms in this new Earth must breathe air with low oxygen content. Thus the alien invaders use cyborg-technology to fuse the bodies of the few human species they find useful on the planet with air tanks and respiration systems. Genetic modification also returned and giant building humans and tiny connection humans were bred to aid city construction. Genetically created horse-like men serve as mounts for the invaders. Some engineered human species even became farmed like pigs or cattle. As with all civilization, this new era of man fell apart once again.

Eventually the spacefaring humans left, the Earth was left in ruins. With barely any oxygen left in the Earth's atmosphere, all terrestrial life on the planet perished. At the bottom of the world's oceans, at the oases that were the underwater hot springs, life continue. In the abyss, was Piscanthropus profundus, a deep-sea descendant of the now-extinct Aquatic evolved. It is implied that Piscathropus profundis would eventually recolonize Earth's surface." - quote source from Wikipedia article


The book can be read online here.

Learn more about the artist, Dougal Dixon, at his website. I'll be sharing more of his work in the near future.

And this is where I'd normally link to a purchase link for the book but it's been out of print for twenty years and used copies are not cheap.

Shalom, et à la prochaine

The sweetest thing: "Rabbi Hillel Yisraeli playing guitar at Gilan and Chava's wedding"

PS. Suite au vote de la Chambre des communes, ce blogue suspend opération pendant un bout, à moins qu'il y ait quelque chose d'extraordinaire qui se produit. Le résultat fut prévisible, mais il fallait qu'on le voit de nos yeux, pour le croire. Les libéraux ayant refusé de débattre de la mission quand ils avaient la chance, le blogue s'est suspendu, jusqu'à ce que le Bloc ait soumis sa motion, permettant le vote nécessaire. Quoique sachant fort bien qu'il était assez sûr que la motion du Bloc serait défaite, il fallait demeurer logique, et conséquente. Tant qu'il y avait de l'espoir pour que les députés se montreraient dignes de leur fonction, on se devait de lutter. Mais voilà, par leur vote ou par leur absence, une majorité des députés de la chambre des représentants du peuple canadien a voté pour condamner des canadiens à se faire blesser et à se faire tuer, sachant pertinemment bien que la cause est perdue, et que nos efforts sont en vain, que le Canada et l'OTAN se retireront éventuellement sans laisser un héritage productif permanent. Nos efforts sont des châteaux de sable qui disparaîtront avec le retour inévitable de la marée intégriste qui nous succédera.

Voter contre la volonté populaire est légitime, si notre vote est l'expression honnête de notre propre conscience. Ce n'est pas le cas, ici. En 2001, ou 2003, ou 2005, ou 2006, ou même, en 2008, il était possible de croire qu'une majorité des députés pensaient (toujours) que la mission afghane était sensée, en toute honnêté. Mais pas en 2010. Les preuves de la folie de cette aventure sont devenues tellement accablantes qu'il faudrait prendre nos députés pour des imbéciles, au sens technique, pour leur croire aujourd'hui quand ils disent que cette mission est sensée. Harper l'admet lui-même, qu'au fond, il s'oppose à la prolongation de la mission. Les députés ne sont pas des morons, malheureusement. C'est bien pire. Ils sont, dans la majorité, de toute évidence, des colonisés et des peureux. Ils savent que cette mission est insensée, du point de vue d'un Canada souverain. Mais ils sont convaincus qu'ils doivent la prolonger, de peur des conséquences internes et externes. Les considérations politiques internes sont minables. Et les peurs des répercussions externes sont fausses, les conséquences de l'intériorisation d'une perspective de colonisé. Personne n'a toujours pas expliqué le calcul de la valeur des vies canadiennes relative aux possibles répercussions externes, c.-à-d., américaines. Si au moins ils avaient cette honnêté-là.

On ne voit pas comment on peut passer à autre chose comme si rien n'y était. On envoie des canadiens en zone de guerre, sachant que certains seront blessés et tués pour une cause perdue, afin de plaire aux américains, ou, pire encore, afin de plaire à la direction de son parti. Puis on va discuter de la santé, de l'éducation, etc., comme si rien n'y était? Une obscénité. EFL refuse.

Toute décision de politique publique est une décision de vie et de mort. Mais généralement, les uns et les autres peuvent argumenter de bonne foi et de bonne volonté, plus ou moins, sans savoir qui a raison et qui a tort à l'avance. Mais la guerre, c'est un cas clair de A à B. On connaît les conséquences. Donc, on doit faire preuve d'un jugement sérieux, des perspectives intellectuelle et morale. Vu, pour les raisons minables évoquées, le manque de sérieux démontré par les députés, il devient difficile de prendre la politique fédérale au sérieux. Si nos députés ne sont pas en mesure de se comporter dignement quand il est question de la guerre et de la paix, de la vie et de la mort, pourquoi, et comment, continuer de faire de la politique? On ne voit pas de réponse immédiate.

Pas question d'abandonner la chose politique, pourtant. Il y a toujours de l'espoir. Mais il faudra s'y prendre différamment, puisque le problème est structurel et psychologique. Donc, si on se retire de la lutte partisane pendant un moment, ce n'est pas pour abandonner le combat politique, mais pour mieux lutter, en fait. Et il y a déjà quelques projets qui mijotent pour remédier aux problèmes profonds. Ils seront dévoilés, le moment venu.

Il ne faut pas perdre de vue, quand même, que les opposants à cette guerre, en forçant le tenu d'un vote, et d'un examen plus méticuleux des faits et des arguments invoqués pour la justifier, ont déclenché un processus qui devrait, normalement, s'ils tiennent bons, mener à la fin de l'implication canadienne en 2014, sauvant ainsi quelques vies canadiennes. Ne s'y méprenant pas, l'OTAN / les USA reviendront certainement nous voir en 2012-2013 pour nous demander de laisser quelques forces pour trois ans de plus... L'excellent travail des députés qui ont su résister à la prolongation actuelle aurait pour conséquence que l'on saura résister à ces pressions, finalement. On félicite ces députés de leur travail dans ce dossier existentiel.

Nous ferons notre part, de notre façon. Et si on ressent le besoin, ce blogue sera réactivé. On le laisse en opération quelques heures encore, pour que ceux qui s'y intéressent puissent prendre connaissance du charmant vidéo inspirationnel çi-haut, et des deux en bas.

On a fait la connaissance d'une chanson qui évoque bien la solution au long-terme, avec le fédéralisme, pour le Canada et pour la planète. On admire sa tension rythmique inhérente, qui accompagne admirablement les lyriques - un peu comme Sinatra, il y a une lutte interne dans le rythme, le beat, la vitesse, illustrant ainsi le même conflit social qui y est invoqué. En plus, le brin d'humour du doigt dans l'oeil du CIA est à saluer. Les deux vidéos suivants sont les meilleurs qu'on a pu trouvés, le premier, gamin, innocent et drôle, le second, didactique et évocateur (le STOP n'est pas mal non plus). C'est ça le Canada. C'est ça le pays. C'est ça le peuple. Ils méritent mieux. Fais ce que dois.

@globeandmail #lpc #fail: "ISAF to bleed...slowly" NOWHERE in paper

It's a sad day for Canadian democracy and journalism when the most important news in Wikileaks re. Canada, so far, ISAF to bleed...slowly, carried in the New York Times, is completely absent from today's Globe, which, manfully edited, has this all-time infamous ellipsis on front page: "Judd added that he and his colleagues are 'very, very worried' about Iran. ... 'We have not figured out what they are up to,' Judd confided." (NB. If true, then CSIS even dimmer than assumed). It's on the front page of the National Post. It's online at the Star. But literally nowhere in the Globe, in print or online.

So this is what you have been reduced to, eh? The Riggy-Harper, CPC-LPC Globe family compact can't argue the case on its non-existent merits, so they are just going to try to ignore it. Good to know that the kids we're sending to die for democracy are so lucky to be getting the whole story, to know what's going on, and what we're asking them to fight and die for. But I guess in Etobicoke-Lakeshore, in Toronto Centre, on Front Street, y'all just dismiss them as rural yokels whose lives are less important than your own.

What despicable, cowardly tossers you are. Really. A first-rate country, with first-rate people, ruled by third-class, third-world elites. For shame.

If you had a case you'd admit information, and argue the merits, as they do in USA, UK, France. But you don't, so you won't. Just run and hide away, like Riggy. Useless.

Canada in Afghanistan: bad editors, bad journalism, bad politicians, bad politics, bad, murderous, wasteful policy.

Chickenshit chickenhawks.

This is your third-rate version of Canada. It is unworthy of Canadians. It is not theirs, nor mine. We are better than this, better than you. And we will make it what it should be, what it already is, beneath the layers of bullshit you heap on top.

We've had enough. You cannot send Canadians to die for bad to no reasons, lie about it, hide it, and think there will be no reckoning. There will. Et nous nous souviendrons.

Iran: Fake Intelligence to Justify a Pre-emptive Nuclear War

 The Mysterious "Laptop Documents",Using Fake Intelligence to Justify a Pre-emptive Nuclear War on Iran

By Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, November 24, 2010

The UN Security Council on June 9 2010 adopted the imposition of a fourth round of sweeping sanctions against The Islamic Republic of Iran. UNSC Resolution 1929 includes an expanded arms embargo as well as "tougher financial controls":

   “[Resolution 1929 (June 9, 2010)] Decides that all States shall prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer to Iran, from or through their territories or by their nationals or individuals subject to their jurisdiction, or using their flag vessels or aircraft, and whether or not originating in their territories, of any battle tanks, armoured combat vehicles, large calibre artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles or missile systems .... , decides further that all States shall prevent the provision to Iran by their nationals or from or through their territories of technical training, financial resources or services, advice, other services or assistance related to the supply, sale, transfer, provision, manufacture, maintenance or use of such arms and related materiel, and, in this context, calls upon all States to exercise vigilance and restraint over the supply, sale, transfer, provision, manufacture and use of all other arms and related materiel;" (Security Council Imposes Additional Sanctions on Iran, Voting 12 in Favour to 2 Against, with 1 Abstention, Includes complete text of UNSC Resolution 1929, UN News, June 9, 2010, emphasis added, )

Both the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China caved in to US pressures and voted in favor of UNSC Resolution 1929. In November, following a decree issed by president Dmitry Medvedev, Moscow announced the cancellation of its military cooperation agreement with Iran pertaining to the S300 air defense system.

Without Russian military aid, Iran is a "sitting duck". Its air defence system depends on continued Russian military cooperation.

These developments strike at the very heart of the structure of military alliances. They prevent Russia and China to sell both strategic and conventional weapons and military technology to their de facto ally: Iran. In fact, that was one of major objectives of Resolution 1929, which Washington is intent upon enforcing.

Fake Intelligence

UNSC Resolution 1929 is based on a fundamental falsehood. It upholds the notion that Iran is an upcoming nuclear power and a threat to global security. It also provides a green light to the US-NATO-Israel military alliance to threaten Iran with a pre-emptive punitive nuclear attack, using the UN Security Council as  rubber stamp.

The US stance in the UN Security Council, has in part based on alleged intelligence documents which provide  "evidence" of Iran's nuclear weapons program.

In November 2005, the New York Times published a report by William J. Broad and David E. Sanger entitled "Relying on Computer, U.S. Seeks to Prove Iran's Nuclear Aims". Washington's allegations, reported in the NYT  hinged upon documents "obtained from a stolen Iranian computer by an unknown source and given to US intelligence in 2004". (See Gareth Porter, Exclusive Report: Evidence of Iran Nuclear Weapons Program May Be Fraudulent, Global Research, November 18, 2010, emphasis added).

These documents included "a series of drawings of a missile re-entry vehicle" which allegedly could accommodate an Iranian produced nuclear weapon.

   "In mid-July, senior American intelligence officials called the leaders of the international atomic inspection agency to the top of a skyscraper overlooking the Danube in Vienna and unveiled the contents of what they said was a stolen Iranian laptop computer.

   The Americans flashed on a screen and spread over a conference table selections from more than a thousand pages of Iranian computer simulations and accounts of experiments, saying they showed a long effort to design a nuclear warhead, according to a half-dozen European and American participants in the meeting.

   The documents, the Americans acknowledged from the start, do not prove that Iran has an atomic bomb. They presented them as the strongest evidence yet that, despite Iran's insistence that its nuclear program is peaceful, the country is trying to develop a compact warhead to fit atop its Shahab missile, which can reach Israel and other countries in the Middle East."(William J. Broad and David E. Sanger Relying on Computer, U.S. Seeks to Prove Iran's Nuclear Aims - New York Times, November 13, 2005)

These "secret documents" were subsequently submitted by the US State Department to the International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA, with a view to demonstrating that Iran was developing a nuclear weapons program.

While their authenticity has been questioned on several occasions,  a recent article by investigative reporter Gareth Porter confirms unequivocally that the mysterious laptop documents are fake. The drawings contained in the documents do not pertain to the Shahab missile but to an obsolete North Korean missile system which was decommissioned by Iran in the mid-1990s.

How stupid! The drawings presented by US State Department officials pertained to the "Wrong Missile Warhead":

   In July 2005, ... Robert Joseph, US undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, made a formal presentation on the purported Iranian nuclear weapons program documents to the agency's leading officials in Vienna. Joseph flashed excerpts from the documents on the screen, giving special attention to the series of technical drawings or "schematics" showing 18 different ways of fitting an unidentified payload into the re-entry vehicle or "warhead" of Iran's medium-range ballistic missile, the Shahab-3.

   When IAEA analysts were allowed to study the documents, however, they discovered that those schematics were based on a re-entry vehicle that the analysts knew had already been abandoned by the Iranian military in favor of a new, improved design. The warhead shown in the schematics had the familiar "dunce cap" shape of the original North Korean No Dong missile, which Iran had acquired in the mid-1990s. ...

   The laptop documents had depicted the wrong re-entry vehicle being redesigned. ... (Gareth Porter, op cit )

Who was behind the production of fake intelligence? Gareth Porter's suggests that Israel's Mossad has been a source of  fake intelligence regarding Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program:

   The origin of the laptop documents may never be proven conclusively, but the accumulated evidence points to Israel as the source. As early as 1995, the head of the Israel Defense Forces' military intelligence research and assessment division, Yaakov Amidror, tried unsuccessfully to persuade his American counterparts that Iran was planning to "go nuclear." By 2003-2004, Mossad's reporting on the Iranian nuclear program was viewed by high-ranking CIA officials as an effort to pressure the Bush administration into considering military action against Iran's nuclear sites, according to Israeli sources cited by a pro-Israeli news service." (Ibid)

Lies and Fabrications to Justify a Military Agenda

The laptop documents were essential to sustaining America's position in the UN Security Council.

We are dealing with a clear case of fake intelligence comparable to that presented by Colin Powell in February 2003 on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction. The fake intelligence presented to the UN Security Council was used as a justification for the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

   "The evidence, or lack thereof, speaks for itself. In the months leading up to the war in Iraq, the Bush administration produced hundreds of pages of intelligence for members of Congress and for the United Nations that showed how Iraq’s President Saddam Hussein possessed tons of chemical and biological weapons and was actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

   The intelligence information, gathered by the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, a Department of Defense agency that gathers foreign military intelligence for the Pentagon, was used by the Bush administration to convince the public that Iraq posed a threat to the world." (See Jason Leopold, Powell Denies Intelligence Failure In Buildup To War, But Evidence Doesn’t Hold Up, Global Research, 10 June 2003)

Iran's Shahab Missile system

The US has once again used fake intelligence to build a justification to wage war.

The position of the US in the UN Security Council falls flat. The important question is whether Russia and China will revise their stance in the United Nations Security Council pertaining to the Iran's sanctions regime?

Will the US antiwar movement confront Washington's plans to wage a pre-emptive nuclear war against Iran based on fake intelligence?

___________________________________________________________________
The url address of this article is:http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22085

 © PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011 

Intellectual Rights Retained

FEDS PLANT INERT BOMB IN PORTLAND BEFORE ARRESTING MUSLIM MAN

Nov-28-2010 22:27

Political Perspective by Tim King Salem-News.com

Media Circus: police could have arrested the man sooner; they took part in his suspected terrorist act.

(PORTLAND, Ore.) - An alleged plot to detonate a bomb at the Pioneer Square Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony in Portland Friday was foiled by FBI agents and Portland Police officers. A close examination of the facts raises concerns that the story is simply conditioning to prepare Americans for more military conflict in the Middle east.

Vehicle based IED's (Improvised Explosive Device) are known in Iraq and Afghanistan as 'VBID's' and they are among the deadliest bombs. The VBID can be maneuvered into very busy areas before being blown up; they are a frightening thought.

Portland Police Bureau Chief Michael Reese stated, "This threat was very real but at no point was the public ever in danger. The cooperation of various law enforcement agencies was critical in making this case. I appreciate the partnership we have with the FBI and I'm very proud of the Portland Police Bureau's role in this investigation. The Portland Police Bureau works to maintain the highest level of safety for our community and this case stands as an example of our commitment to the people we serve."

That sure sounds reassuring, but I wouldn't take it to the bank. Like recent similar stories, the 'official' account is missing a few key ingredients. Yet it makes great reading for the average citizen who believes there are dangerous 'Muslims' lurking around the corners of their living room.

It has all of the catch phrases:

    * The suspect's name is "Mohamed".

    * He allegedly yelled "Allah Akbar" when arrested.

    * He supposedly has links to al Queda.

    * Evidence is sealed and the investigation will never reveal many details.

    * The FBI informant doesn't use their name.

    * Interestingly, the alleged crime never involved any danger to the public.

The suspect is a naturalized U.S. citizen from Somalia. 19-year old Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a resident of Corvallis, Oregon, was arrested Friday in connection with the alleged plan to detonate a vehicle bomb at the Christmas tree lighting event.

Police say Mohamud attempted to remotely detonate what were "believed to be" explosives in a van that was parked near the Christmas tree lighting ceremony. The device was in fact inert and the public was never at risk, police say.

I have been reading other accounts of this event and it is clear that the anti-Muslim lobby in the US scored big with this story.

FOX News doesn't hold back at all, stating:

    "Attorney General Eric Holder said the indictments reflect a disturbing trend of recruitment efforts targeting U.S. residents to become terrorists."

    FOX follows that with...

    "Officials have been working with Muslim community leaders across the United States, particularly in Somali diasporas in Minnesota, trying to combat the radicalization." [1]

Stranger than fiction Order Now

Wow, millions believe it is sort of "radical" for Americans to support Israel's continual brutal occupation and genocide in Palestine. Yes, downright radical to support an apartheid government that grinds people up and spits them out without ever stepping out of the victim role that truly belongs to a past generation.

My question is, how do we know he couldn't have been working with a second group that law enforcement didn't know about?

It amounts to a slew of attention on Islam and enforcing the same paranoia that has swept this nation since 2001 when Saudi Arabian terrorists allegedly boarded airplanes, flew them into buildings in New York, and then had their passports miraculously land on the sidewalks below, legible enough to indict the men almost immediately.

I know the Saudi Arabians have sponsored many terrorists, that is where the crazy Wahhabi religious zealots with the money come from. They are close allies with the U.S. government and Saudi oil families are closely affiliated with Texas oil families; roger, got that. But Somalia, really?

Salem-News.com readers know we cover Somalia's piracy problem regularly, frequently offering in-depth accounts of the situation with the help of our friends at ECOTERRA Intl. in Nairobi, Kenya who monitor the situation from Africa, not a New York or Los Angeles news office.

This is the single most violent and impoverished country in the world. Somalia is controlled by a group known as al Shabab and they are dangerous, known for elevated levels of piracy that plague African waters. Yet Somalia's piracy began as a response to the environmental pillaging of Somalia's coast and the overfishing of its waters. They used to and still frequently avoid killing their captives. The media almost never mentions that part.

What if there was a simultaneous bomb set to go off at the same time?

Terrorizing America would logically be the last of their concerns.

Why? Because nations like Iraq don't have to lift a finger toward the U.S. in order to watch over a million people blasted into oblivion by American bombs and munitions. Afghan people by and large didn't even know where the U.S. is on a map, yet they have watched collateral damage claim lives in the tens of thousands, probably much higher.

To suggest that any small nation would come and pick a fight with a warmongering nation like the United States of America is pretty silly really.

It is the same thing in Palestine.

People there know that if they fire a slingshot at an Israeli soldier, they could see a reprisal leaving dozens or more dead. People learn over time who not to mess with. I fear that this story may be rigged with propaganda, regardless of whether this 19-year old kid had evil intent or some level of involvement. It sounds like he was led down a road to notorious stardom.

Killing people en masse is terrorism and there is never an excuse for it. It is the work of cowards any time civilians are in the mix.

On that note, there are British soldiers who are active, free and clear; men who were caught by the Iraqi police immediately after a shootout that left Iraqi officials dead. The men were transporting weapons and explosives and picked out of a group as they looked suspicious. The men were busted out of jail by British troops.

According to The Insider:

    British soldiers have been caught posing as Arabs and shooting Iraqis in the occupied city of Basra in southern Iraq. A group of them was caught yesterday by Iraqi police. They were driving an Iraqi car, wearing Arab clothing, and carrying weapons and explosives.

    The Iraqi police were patrolling the area looking for suspected "terrorists" or "insurgents", and they noticed that the men were acting suspiciously. Suddenly, without warning, the suspicious men started shooting at people, but the new Iraqi security forces managed to capture some of them before they could escape. Obviously, if these men had not been caught, the mass media would now be reporting the incident as just another attempt by evil "terrorists" to create civil war in Iraq.[2]

Then there is the massive list of Israeli war criminals who the U.S. blocks from being brought to justice. We just published an extensive piece on that recently[3][4].

There is no honor in any of this. Bring them all to a world war crimes court in handcuffs; law enforcement has no business being selective.

Police Endanger Portland

Fox News confirms that Friday:

    "an agent and Mohamud drove to downtown Portland in a white van that carried six 55-gallon drums with detonation cords and plastic caps, but all of them were inert, the complaint states."

Do Portland residents appreciate that the feds actually placed their supposedly "inert" bomb laden van in Portland's downtown district with the suspect?

I wouldn't think so.

The feds sound like they took this guy by the hand and somehow became the "terrorists" he was working with. In fact from the various media accounts, there doesn't seem to be proof that this man ever talked to any actual "terrorists" except the FBI.

FOX also reports that "As a trial run, Mohamud and agents detonated a bomb in Lincoln City, Ore., earlier this month."

A trial run? A real bomb? Feds and a supposed terrorist? And that wasn't enough to arrest him?

I have dear friends in Lincoln City, I used to live there, in fact I was in Lincoln City last night. This is a populated coastal city, not the middle of the desert, I am truly shocked to learn of this.

Arresting this guy before he tried to do a "media worthy" act would have eliminated the FBI's chance to scare the living bejesus out of people with this "Allah Akbar" story. The police let the supposed terrorist detonate the "fake bomb" and then, "swooped down on him" according to FOX and other sources.

My question is, how do we know he couldn't have been working with a second group that law enforcement didn't know about?

What if there was a simultaneous bomb set to go off at the same time?

Of course you would probably need real terrorists for that.

But what would have happened then?

I guess they had to run the full course in order to get this story out. I cry foul at this point and I believe absolutely nothing the feds are reporting. I'm not saying they are dishonest, it just fits a pattern of conditioning that is part of a ramp up for more military action in the Middle east, namely against Iran. No bombs blow up, but "Muslims" are constantly in the news for these supposed bomb plots. It all might be a big crockpot of sh*t, it pays to look closely. And when these supposed terrorists turn out to have ties with Israel, it is amazing how quickly the mainstream media forgets the events ever existed.

But here is the coup de grace; Portland Mayor Sam Adams now says Portland will begin "cooperating" with the federal government at a higher level, just what we need. According to the New York Times:

    In response to the thwarted plot, Mayor Sam Adams has floated the idea of cooperating more fully with federal law enforcement agencies. In 2005, the Portland City Council passed an ordinance that put conditions on the city’s continued participation in the F.B.I. Joint Terrorism Task Force out of concern for the civil liberties of residents.

    Now Mr. Adams said he was prepared to reconsider his opposition. “It’s been five years since our last policy review,” he said.

    City officials said they were also concerned about the safety of Portland’s Muslim population. The police authorized additional patrols around Muslim community centers, said Sgt. Peter Simpson, a police spokesman[5].

Extra police patrols? That's funny, I haven't heard of any incidents that would require that, and some people would not consider increased police patrols in their area a courtesy, more like harassment by policy. But what I really find interesting is how that story suggests Portland is "hands off" with the feds; like they have been keeping them out of Oregon.

It was just three years ago that Portland devoted enormous time and resources to a huge federal emergency planning event that was not just federal, it was actually sponsored by Homeland Security.

We covered the story in October 2007:

    Using resources that Congress made available to prepare for acts of terrorism, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security sponsors the TOPOFF exercises as part of a thorough assessment of America’s ability to prevent, prepare for, respond to and recover from an attack that involves a weapon of mass destruction.

    Each TOPOFF exercise involves a two-year cycle of seminars, planning events, and exercises. The exercises enable federal, state and local agencies to identify ways to improve their ability to save lives and protect property when any major public emergency occurs, regardless of whether that emergency is natural or manmade[6].

I am going to continue studying this story and this Muslim-indicting pattern that the feds and western media are peddling like Lance Armstrong on race day.

It is amazing how many alleged Muslim "terrorists" are constantly arrested and caught "just in time" when in fact no bombs are detonating and no people are dying from these supposed actions. If there are terrorists operating here then of course they must be stopped, but why the big show?

I said it early in the story and I will say it again; Americans are being conditioned to hate Muslim people as the U.S. prepares for war on Iran, the ancient land of Persia that has zero history of attacking other nations off its own soil, with very few exceptions, yet is continually pushed to the brink by Israel because it is one of the few countries that openly condemns Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine.

Remember, that is always what it is about.

Law enforcement agencies involved in the investigation include the FBI, with assistance from the Oregon State Police, the Corvallis Police Department, the Lincoln County Sheriff's Office, and the Portland Police Bureau.

Mohamud was booked into the Multnomah County Jail and is expected to make his initial appearance in federal court in Portland on Monday. He faces a maximum statutory sentence of life in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted of the charge of attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction.

[1] Nov-27-2010: Somali-Born Teen Who Plotted Car Bombing Contacted Suspected Terrorist - FOX News

[2] Nov-29-2010 British special forces caught dressed as Arab 'terrorists' - The Insider

[3]Nov-17-2010: Israeli Military War Crime Suspects Revealed - Salem-News.com

[4]Nov-24-2010: 200 Israeli War Criminals Better Hope for Palestinian Amnesty - Opinion by Gilad Atzmon Salem-News.com

[5] Nov-28-2010: After Thwarted Attack, Question Is ‘Why Portland?’ - Beth Slovic

[6] Oct-15-2007: TOPOFF 4 Exercise Begins in Portland - Salem-News.com
___________________________________________________________

Tim King: Salem-News.com Editor and Writer

Tim King is a former U.S. Marine with twenty years of experience on the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist, reporter and assignment editor. In addition to his role as a war correspondent, this Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com's Executive News Editor. Tim spent the winter of 2006/07 covering the war in Afghanistan, and he was in Iraq over the summer of 2008, reporting from the war while embedded with both the U.S. Army and the Marines.

Tim holds numerous awards for reporting, photography, writing and editing, including the Oregon AP Award for Spot News Photographer of the Year (2004), first place Electronic Media Award in Spot News, Las Vegas, (1998), Oregon AP Cooperation Award (1991); and several others including the 2005 Red Cross Good Neighborhood Award for reporting. Tim has several years of experience in network affiliate news TV stations, having worked as a reporter and photographer at NBC, ABC and FOX stations in Arizona, Nevada and Oregon. Serving the community in very real terms, Salem-News.com is the nation's only truly independent high traffic news Website. As News Editor, Tim among other things, is responsible for publishing the original content of 65 Salem-News.com writers. He reminds viewers that emails are easily missed and urges those trying to reach him, to please send a second email if the first goes unanswered. You can send Tim an email at this address: newsroom@salem-news.com 

© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011

Intellectual Rights Retained

Wikileaks – The Tel Aviv Connection

Jeff Gates November 2010

What is Tel Aviv to do now that it’s known Israelis and pro-Israelis ‘fixed’ the intelligence that induced the U.S. to war in Iraq?

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Con me consistently for six decades and the relationship is over, as is Israel’s credibility as a legitimate nation state.

Tel Aviv knows this. But what can the Zionist state do about it? Answer: Wikileaks.

Why now? Misdirection. Shine the spotlight on Washington to take it off Tel Aviv. That’s good old-fashioned psy-ops.  And challenge the credibility of the U.S. That’s Wikileaks.

Any credible forensics would start by asking: to whose benefit? Then look to means, motive and opportunity plus the presence of stable nation-state intelligence inside the U.S.

Other than Israel, who else is a credible candidate? Notice how quickly Israel’s role in the peace process vanished from the news. Now it’s Iran, Iran and more Iran. To whose benefit?

Tel Aviv knows that the phony intelligence on Iraq leads to those skilled at waging war “by way of deception”—the motto of the Israeli Mossad. Wikileaks are noteworthy for what’s missing: the absence of any material damaging to Israeli goals.

But still Tel Aviv faces an unprecedented peril: transparency. Americans know they were duped. And Israel rightly fears that Americans will soon realize by whom.

Tepid Support will not Suffice

Obama has behaved as anticipated by those who produced his presidency. Anyone surprised at the lack of change in U.S. policy in the Middle East fails to grasp the power of the Israel lobby.

Did he hesitate to support their latest Israeli strategy for scuttling peace negotiations? Absent peace, the U.S. will continue to be the target of those outraged at America’s unflinching support for Israel’s thuggish behavior in pursuit of its expansionist goals.

Confirming the lobby’s influence, Netanyahu announced he would not agree to halt settlements on Palestinian land until Obama reduced to writing a $3 billion bribe.

In return for a proposed 90-day freeze, what form of bribe will America provide? Twenty F-35 jets at $150 million each plus parts, maintenance, training and armaments.

That’s $231 million per week or $1,373,626 per hour. What will the U.S. receive in return? A temporary partial freeze on settlements. How many more times can this ruse work?

Israel has evaded a peace agreement since it drove Palestinians from their land in 1948 and seized more land in 1967 to shape today’s geopolitics.

Should Israel reach an agreement with the Palestinians, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proposes a "comprehensive security agreement." At what cost no one knows. The U.S. Congress has already budgeted $30 billion for Israel over 10 years. This latest $3 billion is on top of that.

That doesn't include the cost to American credibility posed by an offer to veto U.N. recognition of Palestine as a state. And a pledge Never Again to pressure Israel on settlements. Plus the freeze omits East Jerusalem where Tel Aviv insists on moving ahead with new housing starts.

Timing Is Everything

By scheduling its latest incursion into Gaza between Christmas 2008 and the January 2009 Obama inaugural, Tel Aviv ensured only muted opposition during political down time in the U.S. Thus it came as no surprise to see an agent provocateur operation on Thanksgiving Day 2010 as Israel demolished a West Bank Mosque and a Palestinian village. 

After seven hours of nonstop talks, Hillary Clinton praised Netanyahu as a "peacemaker." In return, he agreed only to "continue the process." Meanwhile, U.S. elections marked a major victory for Israel when incoming Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a Jewish Zionist, announced that the new majority would "serve as a check on the Obama administration."

The Israel lobby has good reason to gloat. Confirming ongoing duplicity, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman proclaimed: "a permanent agreement is impossible."

Wikileaks’ release of confidential diplomatic cables provides Israel an opportunity to undermine U.S. relations worldwide while also inflicting lasting damage on U.S. interests in the Middle East. After this, what nation would trust the U.S. to maintain a confidence?

In October, Turkey asked that the U.S. not share intelligence with Israel. Now who dares share intelligence with the U.S.?

This may signal the beginning of the end for the Obama presidency his domestic policy failures are eclipsed by his failures in foreign policy.

This may also signal pre-staging for the 2012 presidential primary with a weakened Obama forced to name Clinton as his running mate or stepping aside so she can lead the ballot.

Her 2008 presidential campaign promised recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state” and promised an “undivided Jerusalem as the capital.” Tel Aviv was elated. A second Clinton presidency would ensure another victory for Israel—and no peace.

Israeli psy-ops typically serve multiple purposes. Wikileaks is no exception.
_______________________________

Jeff Gates is author of Guilt By Association—How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War. See www.criminalstate.com

© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011 

Intellectual Rights Retained

Mossad Criminals Murder Iranian Scientist and Wound Another In Bomb Attacks

© AP Photo
An Iranian nuclear scientist was killed and another injured in Tehran today.

The physicists were targeted by cowardly Mossad agents riding motorcycles

The Daily Mail, UK 

Sun, 28 Nov 2010 22:56

An Iranian nuclear scientist has been killed and another injured in separate attacks in Tehran today.

The scientists were targeted in two different locations by men riding motorcycles who attached bombs to their car windows as they drove to work.

One device killed Dr Majid Shahriari, a member of the nuclear engineering faculty at the Tehran University, and wounded his wife.

The second blast seriously wounded nuclear physicist Dr Fereidoun Abbasi. His wife was also injured.

Iran's nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, said Dr Shahriari was involved in a major project at the country's chief nuclear agency, though he did not give specifics.

State television swiftly blamed Israel for the attacks.

At least two other Iranian nuclear scientists have been killed in recent years in what Iran has alleged is part of a covert attempt by the West to damage its controversial nuclear program.

One of those two, Massoud Ali Mohammadi, was killed in an attack similar to today's, in January.

Mr Mohammadi, a 50-year-old professor from Tehran University, had just left his house on his way to work when a remote-controlled bomb rigged to a motorbike exploded.

'Don't play with fire. The patience of the Iranian nation has limits. If it runs out of patience, bad consequences will await enemies,' the official news agency IRNA quoted Mr Salehi as saying as he met Dr Abbasi at his hospital bedside.

Mr Salehi, one of Iran's vice presidents, was apparently referring to Israel and the U.S., which Iran alleges are trying to damage its nuclear program.

Tehran's uranium enrichment programme is at the center of a bitter row between Iran on one side and the U.S. and its allies on the other. Uranium enrichment is a process that can be used to produce both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons.

A number of world powers suspect Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons, an allegation the government denies.

Tehran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment has brought on multiple rounds of U.N. sanctions against the country.

Washington has strongly denied allegations of links to previous attacks. There are several active armed groups that oppose Iran's ruling clerics, but it's unclear whether they could have carried out the apparently coordinated bombings in the capital.

Most anti-government violence in recent years has been isolated to Iran's provinces such as the border with Pakistan where Sunni rebels are active and the western mountains near Iraq where Kurdish separatists operate.

The assailants, who escaped, drove by their targets on motorcycles and attached the bombs as the cars were moving. They exploded shortly thereafter, state television reported.

Dr Shahriari, the scientist who was killed, was a member of the nuclear engineering faculty at Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran. His wife, who was in the car with him, was wounded.

Dr Salehi, the nuclear chief who also heads the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), said Shahriari was one of his students and his death was a big loss.

He said: 'Shahriari had good cooperation with the AEOI. He was involved in one of the big AEOI projects which is a source of pride for the Iranian nation.'

He didn't provide any details on the project. But the AEOI is involved in Iran's uranium enrichment program.

Dr Salehi added: 'The enemy took our dearest flower, but must know that this nation, through resistance and all its might, will make efforts to remove problems and achieve its desires.'

A second, separate attack in the capital Tehran wounded nuclear physicist Dr Abbasi. His wife was also in the car with him, and she was also wounded.

A pro-government website, mashreghnews.ir, said Abbasi held a PhD in nuclear physics and was a laser expert at Iran's Defence Ministry and one of few top Iranian specialists in nuclear isotope separation.

Isotope separation is the process of concentrating specific isotopes of a chemical element by removing other isotopes, for example separating natural uranium from enriched uranium. This is a crucial process in the manufacture of uranium fuel for nuclear power stations, and is also required for the creation of uranium-based nuclear weapons.

The site said Abbasi has long been a member of the Revolutionary Guard, the country's most powerful military force. It said he was also a lecturer at Imam Hossein University, affiliated to the Guard.

The attacks bore close similarities to another in January that killed Tehran University professor Masoud Ali Mohammadi, a senior physics professor. He was killed when a bomb-rigged motorcycle exploded near his car as he was about to leave for work.

In 2007, state television reported that nuclear scientist Ardeshir Hosseinpour died from gas poisoning. A one-week delay in the reporting of his death prompted speculation about the cause, including that Israel's Mossad spy agency was to blame.

Iran has continued to state clearly that its nuclear program is under constant attack from the West and its allies. These include alleged abductions of nuclear officials and, more recently, a computer worm known as Stuxnet that experts say was calibrated to destroy uranium-enrichment centrifuges by sending them spinning out of control. Iran says its experts stopped Stuxnet from affecting systems at its nuclear facilities.


Source: Sott.net Signs of the time

Comment: Big brave Mossad agents murdering innocent men and injuring women. If the Mossad can gain entry to Iran and carry out such murderous attacks, imagine the freedom they have to move around a friendly country like the USA.

© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011 

Intellectual Rights Retained

#Afghanistan: "ISAF to bleed...slowly"

"it is clear that the "Iranians want ISAF to bleed...slowly." You all know this, right? Old news. Training? A deadly joke. Along with Pakistan, Pushtun, and all the rest of it. (CSIS as respectful of human rights as ever...) Look before you leap. Get. Out. Of. Afghanistan. NOW! Why are we sending men to die and be wounded, at great expense, for a cause negative to our interests, which serves only foreign scoundrels' interests? Who of Riggy, Harper, et.al., will have the honesty, ten to twenty years from now, to visit the families of the dead and admit their error, their political and foreign policy imbecility and cowardice? All to please The USA, to get Obama re-elected? Criminal cowardly colonised treason. Folly. Folly. Stop the March of Folly! For Gods' sakes. This is quite good, especially the quote from Eisenhower:
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children....This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from an iron cross."

This war does not make sense for CANADA! Screw the USA. Screw 'em. If they want to be fools, let 'em. We don't have to be.

Pearson me no Pearsons. PEARSON KEPT US OUT OF VIETNAM!

Saul Rae & George Ignatieff would be incredulous at the foolishness of their children. Fools.

Check out this photo!

This photo appears in Wildfire Today. Courtesy National Geographic and Sean Heavey.

Wuerthner: Tony Dean Wilderness "Ironic"

In his latest New West post, author George Wuerthner mentions S. 3310 coming up as a part of the upcoming, likely doomed Omnibus Wilderness Bill:

SOUTH DAKOTA: America has very little of its native prairie in any protected status. Most of the plains have been carved up by till farming, and the rest is grazed by livestock. Tony Dean Cheyenne River Valley Conservation Act would correct this by designating 48,000 acres as wilderness in the Indian Creek, Red Shirt and Chalk Hills areas of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland on the borders of Badlands NP.

Walking these vast open breathing spaces reminds me of being on the vastness of tundra in Alaska. It’s a sense of freedom that is more difficult to experience in more forested terrain. As with any designated wilderness, livestock grazing will continue. This is particularly ironic since Tony Dean, who was an outdoor writer in South Dakota, railed against welfare ranchers and their impact on the state for decades.

---------------------------------------------------

Update: Text of Omibus Wilderness Bill:

Uno Moralez

See more here.

Nuclear Technology Basics: Introduction (Fun With Fission)

Well, I have just returned from Thanksgiving break. As promised, I will begin a series of posts concerning nuclear reactor technology and how different types of nuclear reactors differ from one another. In the near future, I will also include a glossary entry on my blog that people can reference at a later date in case they come across terminology that is not clear to them.

At the most basic level, all thermally-based power plants share the same mechanics of how they generate electrical energy. A heat source is used to generate steam, which causes a turbine to spin from the pressure provided by the steam which is being used as a working fluid. The action of the spinning turbine is connected to a generator which converts mechanical energy into electrical energy by the rotation of the turbine. Coal, oil, biomass and natural gas facilities use the combustion of these fuels to provide heat to create steam while solar thermal power stations use light from the sun and convert it into a source of heat. Geothermal energy is also thermally-based because it relies on heat from under the ground in geologically active regions in order to operate. Non-thermally based methods of electricity generation such as wind, hydroelectric, and wave energy turbines are directly spun by the movement of wind or water. Photoelectric solar stations generate electricity from solar cells using the photoelectric effect.

In the case of nuclear energy, heat is harnessed from a sustained nuclear chain reaction to drive a steam turbine. Nuclear reactions concern the interaction of an atom's nucleus with the nuclei of other atoms. Heat and subatomic particles are often produced as a result of a nuclear reaction, depending on what type of nuclear reaction it is and what elements are involved. A nuclear chain reaction is when the products of one nuclear reaction trigger additional nuclear reactions within a whole group of nearby atoms in a positive feedback loop. There are two main types of nuclear chain reactions, nuclear fission and nuclear fusion.

Nuclear fusion is when the nuclei of a pair or more of atoms become fused together. The fusion of the atoms releases large amounts of energy. Nuclear fusion is what powers stars in space and has also been achieved within a human laboratory. While nuclear fusion could hypothetically be used as a source of terrestrial power, this has proven to be quite difficult. Surrounding each atom is a positively charged field known as the electrostatic force that tends to repel other atoms away before a pair of atoms can become close enough for their nuclei to fuse. It requires massive amounts of energy to overcome the repulsion of the electrostatic forces between neighboring atoms. Although the development of a nuclear fusion reactor has been a high priority for many governments around the world for many decades, nuclear fusion reactions being carried out in a laboratory have yet to result in a sustainable fusion chain reaction as it seems to require more energy to cause atoms to fuse than what is actually released during the fusion process when attempted on Earth. Because of this, it is likely that a working fusion reactor is still many years away from being a reality.

Nuclear fission is the second type of nuclear chain reaction. It is basically the process of causing atomic nuclei to fragment by ramming them with subatomic particles, which in turn causes the subatomic particles that result from the fragmented nuclei to crash into the nuclei of other atoms and repeat the process. Fission reactions produce heat and other forms of radiation depending on what the products of the fission reaction are. Since the successful operation of the first fission reactor in 1942 at the University of Chicago, all reactors that have been built by humans have been fission-based. Interestingly enough, the existence of naturally occurring fission reactors has also been observed in nature such as the Oklo fossil reactors in Gabon, Africa where the isotopic ratio of uranium deposits within the area allowed nuclear fission to sustain itself. In addition, the georeactor theory in the geological field postulates that the Earth's magnetic field and the heat that is produced from its core might arise from the activities of a naturally occurring reactor in its interior similar to what has been seen at Oklo. However, the georeactor theory has little in the way of evidence that supports it at this time although this may change in the future.

That is enough for now, as I do not want to get too long-winded with each post. The next part of this series will be a look at the basics of nuclear fuel, reactor design, and the fuel cycle itself. Feel free to ask any questions that you might have.

Grid-free Basin family attends permaculture conference

Dave and Susie live on Pole Mountain about a thousand feet in elevation above Basin.

The house they built themselves from mostly found and salvage materials is about 1500 square feet with views looking south across a mind-blowing part of the Boulder Batholith, The architectural design is functional, yet roomy. It is not huge, but, it is not humble, either.

Their Bosch refrigerator runs on propane, solar cells power a set of batteries that manage their electrical needs (including a welder), Leah and Micah's diapers were washed in rainwater collected in a cistern that also waters the garden. Goats supply milk and meat. The orchard provides fruit. They recently added a chest freezer.

They just spent half of October and half of November at a permaculture conference in California and insist that what they learned changed their lives.

ip posts this knowing that they read this blog. Sarina called it a propaganda site over Thanksgiving. I did not disagree.

With some luck, Dave and Susie will contribute more. Just click the comments button at the bottom of this post, guys.

This article on smart growth appears at the blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Strike the Illegal separation wall in Abu Dis

جدار الفصل الاسرائيل  The  Israeli separation wall

ILLEGAL ANNEXATION

في المناطق الفلسطي of Palestinian territories

اضربوا الجدارStrike the Wall
المؤلف : هيامby Hiyam Noir

اهدموا الجدار

strike the wall
ادعموا الشجعان

support the bravest

اضربوا الجدار بقسوه

strike the wall hard
وسوف تتفتح البوابات

and the gates will open
اضربوا الجدار و سووه بالارض

strike the wall earthward
سوف يترنح و يسقط

and it will sway and fall

ادعموا المكافحون الشجعان

support our courageous fighters
اضربوا جدار الفصل العنصري

strike the apartheid wall
اطردوا الصهاينه

expel the Zionists
يا رجال الكرامه و الشجاعه

the men of dignity the men of brave
ستنتصرون على المحتل

will over reach the occupant

الصهيوني المتعبد

the worshipping Zionist
ينتزع العيون و القلوب

extract eyes and hearts
من شعبنا

from our people
يمزقون الاحشاء

tear the intestines
من شعبنا

from our children to
نتحول من رصاص الى ذهب

change lead to gold

أغضب الصهاينه السماء و الارض

the Zionists have enraged heaven and earth
خطوط المقاومه الفلسطينيه

strong lines of Palestine resistance
لن تسقط و تترابط الطرق السريه

will not fall apart will connect in thin ways
و تمد الاجيال بالحياة

lives and lives become generations made

فورا ملايين المناضلين الفلسطينيين الشجعان

soon millions of bravest Palestine fighters
تسلحوا بالغضب والمعنويات المقدسه

armed and fueled with wrath and holy spirit
سينطلقوا من بين السماء القتمه و ينظفون

will storm out of dark skies and sweep
وطنهم من بنذكرى الاحتلال المسمومه

their homeland clean of the poison plaque
البنادق والسيوف الحادهالبنادق والسيوف الحاده سوف تنق

rifles and sharpened swords will break up on the backs
على ظهور جنودنا الشجعان والقبضات الحقه

of our brave soldiers and righteous fists
عن الوطن فلسطين مدافعه

defender of glorious Palestine homeland
نار الرصاص والصواريخ سوف لا تقتل الاجساد الطاهره

bullets rocket fire will not perpetrate sacred bodies

اخلاق جماهير العالم الخونه تنسى

the world audience of traitors low moral and neglect
ستصرخ و تفكر عاليا كذلك سيموتون

will cry out aloud thinking they will also die
و عيون تنظر فجاة , سيقفون بلا مساعده

eyes will pop out they will stand unaided
سوف لا يحركون اي عضله

not one will they move

تركض باتجاههم امرأة مرتدية درعها

a women dressed in armor run towards them
بكلمات شديده و سيف حاد

with strong words and sharpen sword
تطعن جلودهم بالحال و سريعه ضربتها

their skin pierced at ones her strikes are swift
لكنها ليست مؤذيه اكثر من نسمه

yet not more harmful than a gentle breeze

لم تهدر قطرة دم

not one drop of blood is shed
بالنهايه استخدمت البندقيه المخفيه

finally she use the shotgun hidden
قرب جسمها الغض ادارت الاسطوا نه

near her soft skin she spin the cylinder
و اطلقت النار على جدار الكراهيه

and fired upon the wall of hate

ستطلق النار مره ثانيه و ثانيه

she will fire again and again
وصل قربها طفل بحجر بقبضته الصغيره

a boy holding a stone reach towards her
وبلطف وضعت البندقيه بيديه

with much tenderness she placed the shot gun in his hands
والآن افرغ الرصاص تحت اقدامهم

as now he fires the bullets roll under their feet's

فجأة , ساد الصمت لا صوت ولا صرخه

suddenly a silence no sound no cry
نور السماء المفتوحه العظيمه نزل الارض

open heaven glorious light came down to earth
سقط المحتل و اجسادهم

the occupant was toppled and their bodies
كما تسقط الاشجار للخلف

as fallen trees were backwards stapled

ستعود فلسطين و سيولد اطفالها

Palestine will be returned sons will be born again
ستنمو الجذور سيأتي الربيع سيبقون

roots will root again  when spring comes they will remain
سيولدون ثانية سوف لا يوقفنا الجدارولن يمزقنا

reborn again no wall can stop us tear us apart
سف نضرب الجدار ثانية و بقسوه

we will strike the wall again so hard

ادعموا المقاتلين الفلسطينيين الشجعان

support our courageous Palestinian fighters
اضربوا جدار الفصل العنصري,اطردوا الصهاينه

strike the apartheid wall expel the Zionists
رجال الكرامه و رجال الشجاعهt

the men of honor  the men of brave
سينتصرون على المحتل

will over reach the occupant

سيأتي مطر السماء

Heavenly showers will ones more
ستنمو بذور وطن فلسطين

seed sacred Palestinian homeland
ستنتشر الاخبار السارهt

the good news will be spread
بعيدا في كل العالم

worldwide and far away

©Hiyamcopyright2003

Translation Ma Jenin

Photo capture the Illegal Separation Wall in Abu Dis

Contact the author hiyamnoir@gmail.com

© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011 

Intellectual Rights Retained

Mission in Afghanistan - Mr. Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, NDP) & Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP):

Mr. Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, NDP):  
    Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate the motion before us with regard to the extension of the Afghan mission.
    As of Saturday, November 27, 2010, NATO will have been in Afghanistan longer than the Soviet Union had been in its military excursion into Afghanistan. This is a sober reminder of the need to change direction and to change, in effect, what we have been doing in Afghanistan. Sadly, instead of changing the direction of the mission in Afghanistan, the government has decided, along with the support of the opposition Liberals, to continue in the same direction.
    We must make no mistake that when we hear from the government that this is honouring the previous motions that we would have withdrawn all of our military by 2011, it in fact is not. Not only is the government breaking its promise to Canadians and Parliament by extending the military mission in Afghanistan, but, instead of changing directions, I believe we are furthering the muck that is the situation in Afghanistan right now. I will explain that.
    When I stood to speak to this issue in 2006, in 2008 and in other interventions, I, along with my party, said that it was time to change directions and put a different emphasis on the mission in Afghanistan. We, like others, did not believe that the war in Afghanistan would be solved militarily speaking. We said that time and time again. In 2006, the government, aided and abetted by the Liberal opposition, extended the war but told us not to worry because by 2009 it would be done.
    We have heard time and time again from both members of the Liberal Party and the government that this is different because we are training troops. If we look back to the debates and the motions, training of the troops was embedded in both of those debates and in both of those motions. We saw that again in 2008 and in the extension to 2011.
    Here we are again debating the extension of the war in Afghanistan, the extension of our government sending our men and women to continue to be in harm's way, and saying to them yet again that this will be the end as of 2014. Why would anyone believe the government or anyone else in this Parliament who said that will be the final date?
    It is clear how this decision was made. It was exactly the same situation as in 2005 when we ended up in Kandahar. We all remember what happened there. We did not have a plan to get to Kandahar. We did not have sufficient equipment. We did not have a plan as to what were our goals and we did not have an exit plan. We are there yet again. We know that as of two weeks ago the Prime Minister said to Canadians and to Parliament that was it, that the military mission was done. We would leave a couple of guards in front of the embassy but that was it. He cannot walk away from those words without being held accountable, and that is what we are doing today.
    What has happened is very clear. He did not consult government within, which was clear at yesterday's Afghan committee. The officials who were working for two years in an entirely civilian mission, which we supported and which would have had development, diplomacy and transitional justice funded, were cut loose. I do not even think the Minister of National Defence was consulted on this. I have watched very carefully how this has rolled out and the Minister of National Defence was clearly out of the loop. I think he would have wanted to have seen a little more probing into this.
    It is clear that Canadians have a government that is simply sleepwalking into yet another conundrum, as we initially saw when we walked into Kandahar back in 2005-06.
   (1650)  

    That is sad because clearly the war in Afghanistan is a war where things are deteriorating on the ground. We have the insistence of the government to put a focus on military training. Let us go over the numbers. According to the Pentagon and to NATO, we will have trained 171,500 troops as of next spring. We have already surpassed the goals that NATO had to train troops for this year.
    I should not have to tell anyone in the House that that has not been the case when we look at other goals. When we look at the focus of ending the war, the focus that should be on diplomacy, where is the regional approach from the government? It talks about border exchanges in Pakistan. This is a war that affects the whole neighbourhood. We need a regional approach, yes with Pakistan but also with all countries in the neighbourhood. That is where Canada should be focused and that is where we should be putting our resources.
    Sadly, as of last week, we have a government that walked away from that approach. It should simply look at the numbers that we now have in front of us: initially $550 million for a civilian-only mission.
    Mr. Speaker, I should have said at the beginning that I will be splitting my time with the member for Thunder Bay—Rainy River.
    We have gone from investing $550 million for a civilian-only mission to $100 million a year for we do not even know what yet. When we ask the government how much it will spend on diplomacy, it cannot give us an answer. We know we are cutting severely. We know the number is $1.6 billion for military, which is after, as I have already mentioned, we have met the goals for the military training.
    Why did we decide that we would forgo the civilian mission, which our public servants had been working on for two years to focus on aid, development and transitional justice, particularly important for women and human rights protection? Why did we abandon that in favour a huge investment of $1.6 billion for military training where we have already met our goals?
    I will tell the House what many people think is the reason. It is that we decided that it was more important that we satisfy NATO's desires than the Afghan people's desires. It is evidently clear after the Lisbon conference. If we look at the Lisbon document before we went, we had said that while Canada's military mission will end in 2011, Canada will continue to have a development and diplomatic relationship with Afghanistan through the Canadian embassy in Kabul.
    Guess what? This document that went to Lisbon was actually a false promise. We knew when we flew to Lisbon that we had no intention of backing that up. The difference is that we forgot to tell Canadians and Parliament that was what we were going to do. For that, Canadians are angry. Even those who might support this mission, they were angry because we had a Prime Minister for the last couple of years who said, of military mission, that all the military would return and we would focus on a civilian mission.
    The only assessment we can come up with after that is that we have a government that turned its back. not only on Canadians, on Parliament and on its word, but, at the end of the day, on the Afghan people.
    When we look back to this day where we debated what the choices were, let it be clear that the choices that we had in front of us were ignored by the government because the government decided to continue with more of the same at a time when we needed to change directions and support a civilian mission.
    I regret that this is the case. I regret that we will not have had a more fulsome debate. I regret that we will not have had a vote that the government would have been bound to. On Tuesday, when we vote, we will not have all members in the House voting their conscience. What we will have are two parties deciding to take an issue and throw it off the table. That is sad indeed.
   (1655)  

[Translation]

    [Table of Contents]
Mr. Luc Malo (Verchères—Les Patriotes, BQ):  
    Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that the Prime Minister said many times that Canadian soldiers would be leaving Afghanistan in 2011, the Conservative government has made an agreement with the Liberals behind closed doors to maintain a military presence in Afghanistan beyond that deadline.
    That is what is at the heart of this debate. Neither party believes that a debate, a vote in this House is necessary. This is another example of the fact that the Liberals and the Conservatives, despite being two distinct parties, share the same vision, which offends Quebeckers' values.
    What does the hon. member think about this attitude of the Liberals and the Conservatives?
[English]

    [Table of Contents]
Mr. Paul Dewar:  
    Mr. Speaker, it underlines what we have seen on this issue before.
    I thought we were going to change the channel on this. Until a couple of weeks ago, I thought that the government was going to honour its word. I thought that the government was going to come forward with the plan that I have right here in my hand, a civilian-only mission without military involvement that would have put the emphasis on diplomacy, development, transitional justice, and human rights support.
    Instead, what we have is a deal that has been done between those two parties to take that focus off the table, and put the focus on military training when it is not needed. That is a sad, sad, sad day for Canada, but most important, it is unfortunate for the people of Afghanistan.
    [Table of Contents]
Mr. Deepak Obhrai (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and to the Minister of International Cooperation, CPC):  
    Mr. Speaker, I do agree with the member that it is a sad, sad, sad day for Canada when members of that party get up and consistently oppose everything.
    Let us not forget it was that party that opposed the 2008 parliamentary resolution that was passed in this House. Every time there is something, members of that party will vote against it and say no. Then they pick up these things and ask how we can do development when there is no security. Only he knows.
    Let me also say that the member shows up once in a while at the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan. He does not talk to the other members who know exactly how the mission is being run, how the mission is going, not that member. The member will stand here and say that members of his party want a civilian mission and all these other things.
    Did the member not listen to our speeches? We are saying that with the extension we will be doing exactly what he is talking about: diplomacy, development, everything. Also, there is the important element of building the state and security services. Yet the member's party will not recognize that.
    That is why it is a sad day for Canada. That party is totally out of touch with what Canadians want.
   (1700)  

    [Table of Contents]
Mr. Paul Dewar:  
    Mr. Speaker, that was a very measured question, indeed.
    [W]e will not be undertaking any activities that require any kind of military presence, other than the odd guard guarding an embassy. We will not be undertaking any kind of activity that requires a significant military force protection, so it will become a strictly civilian mission.
    Who said that? It was the Prime Minister. I do not think I have to say anything else.
    What I will say, though, with regard to that is that we did have $550 million going to Treasury Board for a civilian-only mission. I have been saying for years that we would support that. We would have supported that. The only problem was that the government broke its promise and walked away from that commitment.
    As to my attendance at the Afghan committee, I have been there more than the parliamentary secretary has, so I need not take advice from him. I actually pay attention when I am there.
     At the last committee meeting, we heard interventions from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence. He said that I was wrong, that the government is not cutting down to $100 million a year, aid and development in Afghanistan post-2011, that there is going to be $300 million and it is going to be in Kandahar.
    Guess what? The member has already apologized to me, because he did not even have his numbers right and yet he had the audacity to intervene and try to correct me.
    Maybe he could talk to his colleague, the parliamentary secretary, and maybe he could get his Coles notes up to date, because clearly they are out of date and so is he.

Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP):  
    Mr. Speaker, I am a little reluctant to stand. I was enjoying the back and forth between the members. I hope there will be time for questions for me.
    I am happy to rise on this occasion to talk about this issue. I listened to my hon. colleague's speech and he is absolutely right. If I end up repeating some of the things he said, it is because they are important.
    Before I start reading some quotes and talking about aid, et cetera in Afghanistan, I would like to remind Canadians that if they are not fully engaged in this issue, they might care about the economics of it. As of Christmas this year, taxpayers will have spent $18 billion. With the extension the Liberals and Conservatives are talking about, it will cost another $2.1 billion, give or take. It may even be more than that. If they are not too worried about the whole concept of Afghanistan, perhaps people listening or watching are concerned about the actual cost to taxpayers.
    One thing that has been very clear throughout the day is the concern in the House and across Canada as to when this mission will end. It is not clear. I have a couple of quotes that I would like to share with the House.
    In 2006, when the Prime Minister presented his motion to extend the war until 2009, he stated:
    This mission extension, if the motion is passed, will cover the period from February 2007 to 2009 when we expect a transition of power in Afghanistan itself.
    I bring forward this particular comment because it seems to me that people who think this mission will never end perhaps have some good grounds to think that way.
    On May 29, 2006, the Liberal critic for foreign affairs was talking about the Prime Minister's decision to extend our presence in Afghanistan at that time and stated, “If I had been in the House, I would have voted against it”.
    Mr. Pat Martin: Where was he?
    Mr. John Rafferty: I don't know where he was.
    On February 13, 2008, to get a little more current, the Liberal Party's position on Afghanistan was clear. The leader of the Liberal Party stated, “We say there is no military solution in Afghanistan”. That was in 2008. If Canadians are concerned and members in this place are concerned, it is with good reason. When will it end?
    My hon. colleague was kind enough to point out that very shortly the NATO forces will have been in Afghanistan longer than the Russians were. The Russians knew it would never end and they got out.
    I have a couple of rhetorical questions which do not require answers. Perhaps if there is time, we could get an answer or two.
    While Canada's military role has been extended for three more years, possibly more, who knows, our aid commitments have been abandoned. That is important to note. They have not been abandoned entirely, to be fair, but they have been cut by more than half, from around $205 million to about $100 million.
    We know that the Liberal leadership has recommended the three-year extension of the military role, even though the caucus members were not consulted on the issue. Perhaps I could get an answer from one of the Liberal members later. Was it the Liberal leader's idea to also cut aid to Afghanistan? Was that part of the deal?
    We know the member for Toronto Centre was fully briefed on the details of the military extension when he and the Liberal leader were putting on a show in the House and asking the government things to which they already had the answers. Why did he not raise any objection about the deep cuts to Canada's aid budget in Afghanistan?
   (1705)  

    With whom does the Liberal caucus agree? Does it agree with the Liberal Party leader who said in 2008, “The Liberal Party is opposed to renewing the mission beyond 2011”, or does it agree with the Liberal Party leader now?
    I think those are all legitimate questions. Not to leave the Conservatives out, I have a couple of questions for them also.
    The Prime Minister came to office after campaigning on accountability, promising to bring decisions on military engagements to Parliament and a vote. Time and time again the Prime Minister has assured this House and Canadians that our soldiers would be out of Afghanistan by 2011. Of course, these promises, these principles, are completely out the window.
    Why is the government breaking its promise to bring our soldiers home in 2011? Why is it breaking its promise on such a serious and important matter and not bringing it to a vote?
    Among all the promises we have heard this week, and promises we have always heard, the most devastating for Afghans was the Conservatives' cutting of development commitments to the people of Kandahar. The Conservatives promised to build 50 schools, but only 19 have been built. They promised to train 3,000 teachers, but we have not even reached half that target. Many of those schools are schools for girls. That was a definite commitment the Conservatives made.
    What else are we talking about when we talk about cutting aid? It is not just about schools or training teachers, it is about agriculture, political reform, judicial reform, a number of things. I wonder if the Conservatives could explain to the people of Canada why they broke their word. Perhaps more importantly, why did the Conservatives break their word to the people of Afghanistan?
    In spite of all the rhetoric we heard today, the Prime Minister did make a promise, a sincere commitment, to allow parliamentarians to vote on these sorts of issues. That is important for people to remember as we carry on.
    Moving on to aid, the $205 million in aid is down to approximately $100 million. We have not met our other commitments. The Minister of International Cooperation has been very clear. Everyone is going to be behind the wire I guess. I do not know what that means for aid commitments. Are we abandoning them?
    The deep cut in aid is a serious issue. I am having trouble understanding the math. There is $100 million left to be spent on aid. It has been more than cut in half. We have a signature project, the Dahla Dam that everybody has heard of, but it is far from finished. I assume some money will go to that signature project. Half of Canada's aid, which is more than now is committed over the next three years, now goes to Kandahar. I am not sure what is going to happen to that. How is that going to be spread out across the country?
    Aid is reduced by half and there are still some signature projects which the reconstruction team is working on, not to mention the eradication of polio.
    Polio is still a problem. Having worked and lived overseas for a number of years in Africa, I understand the problems with that. We did not expect the polio situation to be finished by 2009. It is probably close to 97% or 98% done, but how can we get it done 100%? We will still have to spend money on that. That is the second--
   (1710)  

    [Table of Contents]
The Deputy Speaker:  
    Order, please. I will have to stop the member there. His time has expired for his speech.
    We have enough time to have one question or comment. The hon. member for Crowfoot.
    [Table of Contents]
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, CPC):  
    Mr. Speaker, I certainly enjoyed the debate today. I have had the privilege of serving as chair of the special committee on Afghanistan. I want to personally thank our government for taking a responsible approach to the withdrawal from Afghanistan. I say “responsible” because of what it will do for Afghanistan.
    First, allowing Afghans to secure their own country means that the Afghan forces will be able to not only secure their country, but will also allow much of the development that Canada wants to be involved in to go ahead. It allows the building of roads, hospitals and schools to continue.
    What we have done is a responsible approach because of what it allows us to do within NATO. NATO has made this request and we have taken the responsible way of an eventual withdrawal from Afghanistan.
    I do not believe the Soviet Union pulled out in the 1980s in a responsible way. It left nothing there when its troops went home. In fact, I would perhaps go a step further and say that not many of the other countries were very responsible at the time either. They did not, in a good effort, step up and help build that country.
    How would the member have it? Would it be let us just go home? He knows the development cannot continue in that country if we do not have the security to do it. Does he want to piggyback on all the other countries?
    [Table of Contents]
Mr. John Rafferty:  
    Mr. Speaker, I welcome the question from my colleague. He is a great chair. I have had the opportunity to be in committee with him.
    Let me answer this way. It is not that we are against the aid given to Afghanistan. I personally have a problem right now with two things. One is the cutting of the aid in half. That is disastrous. Second, he says that the security has to be there. The government has promised it will be behind the wire and that is where the security will be.
   (1715)  

    [Table of Contents]
The Deputy Speaker:  
    It being 5:13 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the opposition motion are deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred until Tuesday, November 30, at the expiry of the time provided for government orders.