Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Acts of War: The war between the United States and Iran is on.

American taxpayer dollars are being used, with the permission of Congress, to fund activities that result in Iranians being killed and wounded, and Iranian property destroyed. This wanton violation of a nation’s sovereignty would not be tolerated if the tables were turned and Americans were being subjected to Iranian-funded covert actions that took the lives of Americans, on American soil, and destroyed American property and livelihood. Many Americans remain unaware of what is transpiring abroad in their name. Many of those who are cognizant of these activities are supportive of them, an outgrowth of misguided sentiment which holds Iran accountable for a list of grievances used by the U.S. government to justify the ongoing global war on terror. Iran, we are told, is not just a nation pursuing nuclear weapons, but is the largest state sponsor of terror in the world today.

Much of the information behind this is being promulgated by Israel, which has a vested interest in seeing Iran neutralized as a potential threat. But Israel is joined by another source, even more puzzling in terms of its broad-based acceptance in the world of American journalism: the Mujahadeen-e Khalk, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group sworn to overthrow the theocracy in Tehran. The CIA today provides material support to the actions of the MEK inside Iran. The recent spate of explosions in Iran, including a particularly devastating “accident” involving a military convoy transporting ammunition in downtown Tehran, appears to be linked to an MEK operation; its agents working inside munitions manufacturing plants deliberately are committing acts of sabotage which lead to such explosions. If CIA money and planning support are behind these actions, the agency’s backing constitutes nothing less than an act of war on the part of the United States against Iran.

The MEK traces its roots back to the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeg. Formed among students and intellectuals, the MEK emerged in the 1960s as a serious threat to the reign of Reza Shah Pahlevi. Facing brutal repression from the Shah’s secret police, the SAVAK, the MEK became expert at blending into Iranian society, forming a cellular organizational structure which made it virtually impossible to eradicate. The MEK membership also became adept at gaining access to positions of sensitivity and authority. When the Shah was overthrown in 1978, the MEK played a major role and for a while worked hand in glove with the Islamic Revolution in crafting a post-Shah Iran. In 1979 the MEK had a central role in orchestrating the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, and holding 55 Americans hostage for 444 days.

However, relations between the MEK and the Islamic regime in Tehran soured, and after the MEK staged a bloody coup attempt in 1981, all ties were severed and the two sides engaged in a violent civil war. Revolutionary Guard members who were active at that time have acknowledged how difficult it was to fight the MEK. In the end, massive acts of arbitrary arrest, torture and executions were required to break the back of mainstream MEK activity in Iran, although even the Revolutionary Guard today admits the MEK remains active and is virtually impossible to completely eradicate.

It is this stubborn ability to survive and operate inside Iran, at a time when no other intelligence service can establish and maintain a meaningful agent network there, which makes the MEK such an asset to nations such as the United States and Israel. The MEK is able to provide some useful intelligence; however, its overall value as an intelligence resource is negatively impacted by the fact that it is the sole source of human intelligence in Iran. As such, the group has taken to exaggerating and fabricating reports to serve its own political agenda. In this way, there is little to differentiate the MEK from another Middle Eastern expatriate opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, or INC, which infamously supplied inaccurate intelligence to the United States and other governments and helped influence the U.S. decision to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein. Today, the MEK sees itself in a similar role, providing sole-sourced intelligence to the United States and Israel in an effort to facilitate American military operations against Iran and, eventually, to overthrow the Islamic regime in Tehran.

The current situation concerning the MEK would be laughable if it were not for the violent reality of that organization’s activities. Upon its arrival in Iraq in 1986, the group was placed under the control of Saddam Hussein’s Mukhabarat, or intelligence service. The MEK was a heavily militarized organization and in 1988 participated in division-size military operations against Iran. The organization represents no state and can be found on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist organizations, yet since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the MEK has been under the protection of the U.S. military. Its fighters are even given “protected status” under the Geneva Conventions. The MEK says its members in Iraq are refugees, not terrorists. And yet one would be hard-pressed to find why the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees should confer refugee status on an active paramilitary organization that uses “refugee camps” inside Iraq as its bases.

The MEK is behind much of the intelligence being used by the International Atomic Energy Agency in building its case that Iran may be pursuing (or did in fact pursue in the past) a nuclear weapons program. The complexity of the MEK-CIA relationship was recently underscored by the agency’s acquisition of a laptop computer allegedly containing numerous secret documents pertaining to an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Much has been made about this computer and its contents. The United States has led the charge against Iran within international diplomatic circles, citing the laptop information as the primary source proving Iran’s ongoing involvement in clandestine nuclear weapons activity. Of course, the information on the computer, being derived from questionable sources (i.e., the MEK and the CIA, both sworn enemies of Iran) is controversial and its veracity is questioned by many, including me.

Now, I have a simple solution to the issue of the laptop computer: Give it the UNSCOM treatment. Assemble a team of CIA, FBI and Defense Department forensic computer analysts and probe the computer, byte by byte. Construct a chronological record of how and when the data on the computer were assembled. Check the “logic” of the data, making sure everything fits together in a manner consistent with the computer’s stated function and use. Tell us when the computer was turned on and logged into and how it was used. Then, with this complex usage template constructed, overlay the various themes which have been derived from the computer’s contents, pertaining to projects, studies and other activities of interest. One should be able to rapidly ascertain whether or not the computer is truly a key piece of intelligence pertaining to Iran’s nuclear programs.

The fact that this computer is acknowledged as coming from the MEK and the fact that a proper forensic investigation would probably demonstrate the fabricated nature of the data contained are why the U.S. government will never agree to such an investigation being done. A prosecutor, when making a case of criminal action, must lay out evidence in a simple, direct manner, allowing not only the judge and jury to see it but also the accused. If the evidence is as strong as the prosecutor maintains, it is usually bad news for the defendant. However, if the defendant is able to demonstrate inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the data being presented, then the prosecution is the one in trouble. And if the defense is able to demonstrate that the entire case is built upon fabricated evidence, the case is generally thrown out. This, in short, is what should be done with the IAEA’s ongoing probe into allegations that Iran has pursued nuclear weapons. The evidence used by the IAEA is unable to withstand even the most rudimentary cross-examination. It is speculative at best, and most probably fabricated. Iran has done the right thing in refusing to legitimize this illegitimate source of information.

A key question that must be asked is why, then, does the IAEA continue to permit Olli Heinonen, the agency’s Finnish deputy director for safeguards and the IAEA official responsible for the ongoing technical inspections in Iran, to wage his one-man campaign on behalf of the United States, Britain and (indirectly) Israel regarding allegations derived from sources of such questionable veracity (the MEK-supplied laptop computer)? Moreover, why is such an official given free rein to discuss such sensitive data with the press, or with politically motivated outside agencies, in a manner that results in questionable allegations appearing in the public arena as unquestioned fact? Under normal circumstances, leaks of the sort that have occurred regarding the ongoing investigation into Iran’s alleged past studies on nuclear weapons would be subjected to a thorough investigation to determine the source and to ensure that appropriate measures are taken to end them. And yet, in Vienna, Heinonen’s repeated transgressions are treated as a giant “non-event,” the 800-pound gorilla in the room that everyone pretends isn’t really there.

Heinonen has become the pro-war yin to the anti-confrontation yang of his boss, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei. Every time ElBaradei releases the results of the IAEA probe of Iran, pointing out that the IAEA can find no evidence of any past or present nuclear weapons program, and that there is a full understanding of Iran’s controversial centrifuge-based enrichment program, Heinonen throws a monkey wrench into the works. Well-publicized briefings are given to IAEA-based diplomats. Mysteriously, leaks from undisclosed sources occur. Heinonen’s Finnish nationality serves as a flimsy cover for neutrality that long ago disappeared. He is no longer serving in the role as unbiased inspector, but rather a front for the active pursuit of an American- and Israeli-inspired disinformation campaign designed to keep alive the flimsy allegations of a nonexistent Iranian nuclear weapons program in order to justify the continued warlike stance taken by the U.S. and Israel against Iran.

The fact that the IAEA is being used as a front to pursue this blatantly anti-Iranian propaganda is a disservice to an organization with a mission of vital world importance. The interjection of not only the unverified (and unverifiable) MEK laptop computer data, side by side with a newly placed emphasis on a document relating to the forming of uranium metal into hemispheres of the kind useful in a nuclear weapon, is an amateurish manipulation of data to achieve a preordained outcome. Calling the Iranian possession of the aforementioned document “alarming,” Heinonen (and the media) skipped past the history of the document, which, of course, has been well explained by Iran previously as something the Pakistani nuclear proliferator A.Q. Khan inserted on his own volition to a delivery of documentation pertaining to centrifuges. Far from being a “top-secret” document protected by Iran’s security services, it was discarded in a file of old material that Iran provided to the IAEA inspectors. When the IAEA found the document, Iran allowed it to be fully examined by the inspectors, and answered every question posed by the IAEA about how the document came to be in Iran. For Heinonen to call the document “alarming,” at this late stage in the game, is not only irresponsible but factually inaccurate, given the definition of the word. The Iranian document in question is neither a cause for alarm, seeing as it is not a source for any “sudden fear brought on by the sense of danger,” nor does it provide any “warning of existing or approaching danger,” unless one is speaking of the danger of military action on the part of the United States derived from Heinonen’s unfortunate actions and choice of words.

Olli Heinonen might as well become a salaried member of the Bush administration, since he is operating in lock step with the U.S. government’s objective of painting Iran as a threat worthy of military action. Shortly after Heinonen’s alarmist briefing in March 2008, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA, Gregory Schulte, emerged to announce, “As today’s briefing showed us, there are strong reasons to suspect that Iran was working covertly and deceitfully, at least until recently, to build a bomb.” Heinonen’s briefing provided nothing of the sort, being derived from an irrelevant document and a laptop computer of questionable provenance. But that did not matter to Schulte, who noted that “Iran has refused to explain or even acknowledge past work on weaponization.” Schulte did not bother to note that it would be difficult for Iran to explain or acknowledge that which it has not done. “This is particularly troubling,” Schulte went on, “when combined with Iran’s determined effort to master the technology to enrich uranium.” Why is this so troubling? Because, as Schulte noted, “Uranium enrichment is not necessary for Iran’s civil program but it is necessary to produce the fissile material that could be weaponized into a bomb.”

This, of course, is the crux of the issue: Iran’s ongoing enrichment program. Not because it is illegal; Iran is permitted to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Not again because Iran’s centrifuge program is operating in an undeclared, unmonitored fashion; the IAEA had stated it has a full understanding of the scope and work of the Iranian centrifuge enrichment program and that all associated nuclear material is accounted for and safeguarded. The problem has never been, and will never be, Iran’s enrichment program. The problem is American policy objectives of regime change in Iran, pushed by a combination of American desires for global hegemony and an activist Israeli agenda which seeks regional security, in perpetuity, through military and economic supremacy. The specter of nuclear enrichment is simply a vehicle for facilitating the larger policy objectives. Olli Heinonen, and those who support and sustain his work, must be aware of the larger geopolitical context of his actions, which makes them all the more puzzling and contemptible.

A major culprit in this entire sordid affair is the mainstream media. Displaying an almost uncanny inability to connect the dots, the editors who run America’s largest newspapers, and the producers who put together America’s biggest television news programs, have collectively facilitated the most simplistic, inane and factually unfounded story lines coming out of the Bush White House. The most recent fairy tale was one of “diplomacy,” on the part of one William Burns, the No. 3 diplomat in the State Department.

I have studied the minutes of meetings involving John McCloy, an American official who served numerous administrations, Democratic and Republican alike, in the decades following the end of the Second World War. His diplomacy with the Soviets, conducted with senior Soviet negotiator Valerein Zorin and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev himself, was real, genuine, direct and designed to resolve differences. The transcripts of the diplomacy conducted between Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho to bring an end to the Vietnam conflict is likewise a study in the give and take required to achieve the status of real diplomacy.

Sending a relatively obscure official like Burns to “observe” a meeting between the European Union and Iran, with instructions not to interact, not to initiate, not to discuss, cannot under any circumstances be construed as diplomacy. Any student of diplomatic history could tell you this. And yet the esteemed editors and news producers used the term diplomacy, without challenge or clarification, to describe Burns’ mission to Geneva on July 19. The decision to send him there was hailed as a “significant concession” on the part of the Bush administration, a step away from war and an indication of a new desire within the White House to resolve the Iranian impasse through diplomacy. How this was going to happen with a diplomat hobbled and muzzled to the degree Burns was apparently skipped the attention of these writers and their bosses. Diplomacy, America was told, was the new policy option of choice for the Bush administration.

Of course, the Geneva talks produced nothing. The United States had made sure Europe, through its foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, had no maneuvering room when it came to the core issue of uranium enrichment: Iran must suspend all enrichment before any movement could be made on any other issue. Furthermore, the American-backed program of investigation concerning the MEK-supplied laptop computer further poisoned the diplomatic waters. Iran, predictably, refused to suspend its enrichment program, and rejected the Heinonen-led investigation into nuclear weaponization, refusing to cooperate further with the IAEA on that matter, noting that it fell outside the scope of the IAEA’s mandate in Iran.

Condoleezza Rice was quick to respond. After a debriefing from Burns, who flew to Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, where Rice was holding closed-door meetings with the foreign ministers of six Arab nations on the issue of Iran, Rice told the media that Iran “was not serious” about resolving the standoff. Having played the diplomacy card, Rice moved on with the real agenda: If Iran did not fully cooperate with the international community (i.e., suspend its enrichment program), then it would face a new round of economic sanctions and undisclosed punitive measures, both unilaterally on the part of the United States and Europe, as well as in the form of even broader sanctions from the United Nations Security Council (although it is doubtful that Russia and China would go along with such a plan).

The issue of unilateral U.S. sanctions is most worrisome. Both the House of Representatives, through HR 362, and the Senate, through SR 580, are preparing legislation that would call for an air, ground and sea blockade of Iran. Back in October 1962, President John F. Kennedy, when considering the imposition of a naval blockade against Cuba in response to the presence of Soviet missiles in that nation, opined that “a blockade is a major military operation, too. It’s an act of war.” Which, of course, it is. The false diplomacy waged by the White House in Geneva simply pre-empted any congressional call for a diplomatic outreach. Now the president can move on with the mission of facilitating a larger war with Iran by legitimizing yet another act of aggression.

One day, in the not-so-distant future, Americans will awake to the reality that American military forces are engaged in a shooting war with Iran. Many will scratch their heads and wonder, “How did that happen?” The answer is simple: We all let it happen. We are at war with Iran right now. We just don’t have the moral courage to admit it.
By: Scott Ritter.

Scott Ritter is a former U.N. weapons inspector and Marine intelligence officer who has written extensively about Iran.

Bush Secret Biowarfare Agenda‏

July 28, 2008

When it comes to observing US and international laws, treaties and norms, the Bush administration is a serial offender. Since 2001, it's:

-- spurned efforts for nuclear disarmament to advance its weapons program and retain current stockpiles;

-- renounced the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and asserted the right to develop and test new weapons;

-- abandoned the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) because it expressly forbids the development, testing and deployment of missile defenses like its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and other programs;

-- refuses to adopt a proposed Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) that would prohibit further weapons-grade uranium and plutonium production and prevent new nuclear weapons to be added to present stockpiles - already dangerously too high;

-- spends more on the military than the rest of the world combined plus multi-billions off-the-books, for secret programs, and for agencies like the CIA;

-- advocates preventive, preemptive and "proactive" wars globally with first-strike nuclear and other weapons under the nihilistic doctrines of "anticipatory self-defense" and remaking the world to be like America;

-- rescinded and subverted the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) to illegally develop new biowarfare weapons; in November 1969 and February 1970, Richard Nixon issued National Security Decision Memoranda (NSDM) 35 and 44; they renounced the use of lethal and other types of biological warfare and ordered existing weapons stockpiles destroyed, save for small amounts for research - a huge exploitable loophole; the Reagan and Clinton administrations took advantage; GHW Bush to a lesser degree;

-- GW Bush went further by renouncing the US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 that prohibits "the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons....;" on May 22, 1990, GHW Bush signed it into law to complete the 1972 Convention's implementation; what the father and Nixon established, GW Bush rendered null and void; "Rebuilding America's Defenses" is his central policy document for unchallengeable US hegemony; among other provisions, it illegally advocates advanced forms of biowarfare that can target specific genotypes - the genetic constitution of individual organisms.

Sunday, July 20, 2008

War on Iran: Keep watch on the hawks

July 18, 2008

US policy on Iran seems to be softening, but the world must stay vigilant to avert the threat of war.

President Bush's decision to send William Burns, his third-ranking diplomat, to observe nuclear negotiations in Geneva with Iran, represents a long-overdue shift in American policy - underlined by plans revealed in yesterday's Guardian to re-establish a diplomatic presence in Tehran. Hitherto, the US had demanded that Iran must concede the main point of negotiations, namely suspension of its uranium enrichment programme, before talks begin. Iran has responded positively to negotiations, but ruled out the US precondition of suspension. The US still states that it will only enter into dialogue with Iran if it halts its enrichment programme.

Iran's nuclear plants are all under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has stressed consistently that there has not been any illicit diversion of declared nuclear material. Despite no evidence of a nuclear weaponisation programme, the US pressured the member states of the governor's board of the IAEA to report Iran's file to the UN security council in February 2006. Three rounds of resolutions and sanctions followed.

The Bush administration's policy towards Iran was inspired initially by its quick success in regime change in Iraq. It has pursued the dual strategy of demonising, isolating and pressuring Iran while trying to destabilise the country by covert operations in order to prepare the ground for a military attack.

However the hawks, led by Dick Cheney, have failed to make any headway. In December 2007, the National Intelligence Estimate reported with high confidence that Iran does not have a military nuclear programme, disarming the principal allegation against it. For a time, a concerted attempt was made to create a casus belli by accusing Iran of arming the militants who are "killing our soldiers" in Iraq. But no real evidence for this charge was ever produced, the Iraqi government refuted it and the allegations have not been trumpeted by the US in recent months.

In Iran itself, the US pressures have backfired and radicalised large sections of the population - including those opposed to the government - in defence of Iran's rights under the non-proliferation treaty. According to public opinion surveys, the overwhelming majority has supported the government in resisting pressure to halt enrichment.

These failures of US policy coincide with the high sensitivity of the price of oil, the background to a recent report by the Rand Corporation for the American air force warning against any military attack or inflaming ethnic tensions and proposing reconciliation with Tehran.

While the positive shift in policy is a setback for them, the hawks are by no means defeated. We have been in this position before. The US and Iran had three rounds of negotiations about stability in Iraq last year, which only led to a new hype in US accusations against Iran. On Monday, Israeli military adviser Amos Gilad said that Israel is preparing to attack Iran if diplomacy fails, and that the US would not veto it. Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has warned of an October surprise - a massive US bombing campaign in Iran - triggered by a "Gulf of Tonkin" incident to boost McCain's electoral chances if Obama maintains his lead in the opinion polls.

In this volatile state, the international peace movement should multiply its efforts to avert war in the remaining six months of Bush's term. The resolution in Congress for what amounts to a naval blockade of Iran is, in effect, an act of war. The EU and the international community should call for the military option to be ruled out, and for the US to drop its precondition and enter into direct, comprehensive negotiations with Iran.

by Abbas Edalat
July 18, 2008
Abbas Edalat is the founder of the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran

Friday, July 18, 2008

Israel ’s War with Iran and The Zionist Power Configuration in America

Zionists and their allies in Congress authored, implemented and enforced sanctions against Iran , which hinder the ambitions of the world’s biggest oil and gas companies. Israeli war exercises and public declarations threatening a massive air assault on Iran has pushed petroleum prices to world records. This spring 2008, the most powerful pro-Israel Jewish Lobby in the US , AIPAC held their annual conference and secured the support and commitment of both major US Presidential candidates and the majority of US members of Congress for an Israeli initiative to impose extreme economic sanctions on Iran with threats of a US/Israeli military attack. In early summer 2008, the AIPAC operatives, who wrote this US Congressional resolution, successfully rounded up Congressional leaders’ support of an air and naval blockade of all critical imports into Iran – a blatant act of war.


Status Report on the Collapse of the U.S Economy

Status Report on the Collapse of the U.S. Economy
Global Research, July 16, 2008

With the economic news of the week of July 14—the continuing crisis among mortgage lenders, the onset of bank failures, the announced downsizing of General Motors, the slide of the Dow-Jones below 11,000—we are seeing the ongoing collapse of the U.S. economy.

Even the super-rich are becoming nervous as cries for an emergency suspension of short selling ring out.

What is really taking place, however, is that the producing economy of working men and women is being crushed by the overall debt burden on households, businesses, and governments that could reach $70 trillion by 2010. The financial system, including mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is bankrupt, as the debts it is based on cannot be repaid.

This is because the producing economy of people who work for a living simply can no longer generate enough purchasing power for people either to pay their debts or allow them to purchase what is being sold in the marketplace. In turn it is the debt burden and the loss of societal purchasing power that are crashing the stock market. Thus the collapse of the financial economy has started to destroy the producing economy as well..

By: Richard Cook.

"Point or Order..Read My Mind"

"Tan Sri Speaker, Point of Order..Read My Mind"

Kiranya LKS merasakan masanya terbuang bila apa yang dikatakannya tidak diambil kira, sepatunya dia juga perlu merasakan bahawa masa orang lain juga terbuang apabila terpaksa mendengar hujahnya yang remeh dan membuang masa.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Israel and Iran; Coming to City Near You

Israel and Iran
Coming to a city near you?

Be very afraid, please

AMERICA and Israel often hint at military action to stop Iran’s suspected nuclear-weapons programme. The latest rumblings, however, may be more serious. The atmosphere has been charged by a combination of factors: Iran’s expanding uranium-enrichment programme, faltering diplomatic efforts to halt it, a dying American administration and a nervous Israel. Throw in the latest war games by Israel, America and Iran—and Iran’s apparent rejection of the latest international incentives to halt its nuclear work—and some reckon the sparks could soon fly.
On July 9th Iranian television showed the test-firing of nine missiles (see picture), a day after an aide to the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, threatened to “burn” Tel Aviv and American ships in the Gulf, and strike at America’s “vital interests around the globe”, if it were attacked. More tests took place on July 10th.

Read More....

Tuesday, July 15, 2008


Energy Independence and the end of the Petrodollar May 31, 2008Posted by positivenergyoutput in Action, Energy Independence, sustainable, vision. Tags: , , , , , , trackback

The War on Terror is the the cover for the real war; The War for the Petrodollar.

We have invaded Iraq because they stopped accepting dollars for oil. Saddam Hussein was toppled in order to set Iraq back on the track of the Petrodollar.

Iran is on the chopping block now because they are not accepting dollars for oil anymore. The nuclear arms scare is a cover for the real threat of destabilizing the American Oil Empire.

The dollar used to be backed by gold. Now the dollar is backed by oil through OPEC. That is why OPEC is allowed to exist, in order to prop up the dollar. If the dollar is not the standard currency for oil purchases, then the dollar will decline into just being a piece of wasted paper. That is what is happening now. Japan now buys oil from Iran with yen, not dollars. This means they can unload the dollars they’ve been holding onto, and a big release of currency will devalue the dollar.

Since America can’t force the whole world to use the dollar to buy oil we will see a decline of the petrodollar. As the dollar declines there will be more incentive for countries to use their own currency to purchase oil. Right now we are in the death throes of the petrodollar, and we will see additional desperate action from our American Empire.

As an American I hate to see any harm come to our economy, but we must face facts and get real. We’ve got to end the Petrodollar on our terms. The way to do it is to first back the dollar with precious metals as is described in our Constitution. Let’s get back to basics and have a real currency, not just funny money.

Also, we need to become energy independent with renewable resources. This way we are not locked into sending money to countries that don’t have good intentions for us. When we buy oil today, some of the money makes it into the hands of terrorists. So we are funding both sides of the war in Iraq. One side is paid by future generation through massive debt, and the other side is paid through the obscene gas prices we pay at the pump.

The rest of the oil money goes to the International Monetary Fund to pay for the debt relief of all the third world nations. We don’t owe the IMF anything. Let’s get off our asses and claim our independence!
Read More.....

Saturday, July 12, 2008


Presiden PKR cum Ketua Pembangkang telahpun mengemukakan niat PR untuk mengemukakan usul undi tidak percaya kepada kepimpinan Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi dan Barisan kabinetnya kepada Speaker, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Haji Mulia @ Pak Amin. Pak Amin kata dia nak balik Kota Belud dulu tengok burung untanya, kerbaunya dan kambingnya. Hari Isnin rakyat Malaysia akan tahu kedudukan usul itu.

Niat PR untuk mengemuka usul itu ditunaikannya. LKS kata usul itu bagi menguji, melihat dan seumpamanya samada sokongan terhadap kepimpinan Pak Lah dan Barisan Kabinetnya masih ada atau sebaliknya. Usul ini bagaikan tidak menekankan unsur pengambil alihan kuasa dari Barisan Nasional oleh Pakatan Rakyat. Ianya juga dilihat sebagai projek amali dan reaksi PR setelah Pak Lah memutuskan bahawa Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak bakal mengambil alih pucuk pimpinan UMNO, BN dan PM Malaysia menjelang Jun 2010. Seolah-olah Pak Lah menyatakan pesanan rengkas bahawa dia masih PM Malaysia menjelang Jun 2010.

PR seakan risau melihat keputusan Pak Lah akan menjadi kenyataan menjelang tarikh itu. Lalu belantan, ujikaji, pancing diguna untuk menghalang rancangan dan gagasan 2010 itu. Kedudukan usul itu terpaksa kita tunggu bersama menjelang Isnin nanti.

Bola di tangan Pak Amin. Belum ada siapa yang berani merampasnya. Dia bengis, pandai silat dan banyak haiwan ternakan untuk dilawat. Beberapa bulan lalu, rusanya terlepas dari kandang. Katanya nantilah dia akan buat keputusan samada ditembak saja atau dibiarkan bebas mereda hutan simpanannya. Tidak pastilah samada dia akan buat keputusan “tembak” Isnin ini juga.

Pak Amin sebuk jaga haiwan ternakan ini dan tak lagi sebok fasal rakyat Tempasuk dan UMNO Bahagian Kota Marudu sebab Musa Aman singkir dia, Salleh Tun Said dan Amir Kahar Tun Mustapha. Namun silat politik Pak Amin susah ditepis. Dia susah dan payah disingkir dari politik sebagai orang yang tidur bermimpi politik, bernafas angin politik, minum air dijampi politik dan serba serbinya pun masih berpolitik. So, hal-hal lain boleh advice dia, soal politik jangan coba-coba!.

Usul Ketua Pembangkang seolah-olah memaklumkan kepada kita bahawa peristiwa 16 September, 2008 diawalkan. Macam pengumuman kenaikan harga minyak yang diumumkan awal, bukan pada Ogos 2008.

Timbul berberapa persoalan apabila kononnya niat usul ini BUKAN menjatuhkan atau menggantikan kerajaan tetapi sekadar menguji bahawa sokongan itu masih ada atau tiada. Alasan Ketua PR disandarkan pada PRU12 yang sudahpun memberikan isyarat bahawa BN hilang 2/3 majoriti; kemenangan 140 kerusi MP oleh BN “main tipu”; system kehakiman tidak ada akauntabiliti dan PM memilih tindakan tidak popular dengan menaikkan harga minyak petrol sehingga 43% dan Diesel sehingga 63% sekalugus membebankan rakyat Malaysia.

Persoalan pokok ialah 16 September 2008 semakin hampir. Kiranya DSAI memiliki “number” itu @ 30+ kerusi MP BN yang menyeberang ke kapal PR, kenapa perlu dan mustahak dilakukan proses “tabung uji”? Bukankah langkah mengunakan kaedah ujikaji @ usul tidak percaya ini bakal memadamkan tarikh 16 September, 2008 dari kalendar dan agenda besar PR? Bukankah ujikaji yang dikemukakan Datin Seri Azizah itu bakal meranapkan impian Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim untuk menjadi Perdana Menteri Malaysia Ke enam menjelang 16 September nanti? Atau memangnya apa yang dikatakan DSAI itu sekadar maya?.

Sebenarnya, usul ini bakal menampakkan kepada rakyat samada kerajaan akan bertukar atau sebaliknya. Ianya dikemukakan tanpa niat tukar kerajaan itu bagaikan sebuah gambaran kepada kita bahawa PR masih kabur menumbangkan BN. Agaknya nawaitunya kurang tepat!

kami tak sabar menunggu arahan tembak rusa dari Pak Amin. Debaran kami dan rakyat lebih menanti Isnin bilamana Pak Amin melepaskan bola di tangannya. Isnin ini bakal menentukan masa depan Malaysia. Masihkah ada Harapan Baru untuk Malaysia atau tak ada harapan lagi?

Saya juga nak ajak SAPP memburu kiranya Pak Amin buat keputusan untuk rusanya ditembak!.

Friday, July 11, 2008

Wallahi Wabilahi Watallahi. Mulai sekarang Anwar dan PR shut up mengenai soal Altantuya dan Najib?.

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Bila Pak Najib bersumpah "‘ Wallahi Wabilahi Watallahi ’ " bahawa beliau tidak mengenali Altantuya, tiada memperkenalkan Altantuya kepada Abdul Razak Banginda di Temasik, tiada dinner di Paris dengan Altantuya maka Pak Nuar perlu "shut up" dengan isu ini. Pak Nuar perlu arah orang-orang PR supaya juga "shut-up" mengenai isu ini. Jangan jadi orang-orangan. Nanti Tok Guru Nik Aziz nanti komen yang berat-berat lagi. Orang PAS bisa pandang serong pada PR. Jadi PR bisa jadi "pertengkaran rakyat". Jangan sekali-kali wabak "hearsay" menjadi epidemik mengila dan menjila-jila macam api di California atau yang membakar rumah para marahen di Tanjung Labian,Lahad Datu, Sabah oleh para agen Jabatan Hutan Negeri Sabah.

Sudah pasti pandangan rakyat kini menghala ke Pak Nuar. Apakah beliau juga berani bersumpah, dan sesungguhnya bersumpah "‘ Wallahi Wabilahi Watallahi " mengenai isunya dengan Saiful? Bahawa Saiful bukan Setiausaha Peribadinya yang dilantiknya tanpa surat perlantikan resmi, tak pernah bersamanya di luar negara dan liwat itu tak pernah berlaku.

Sesungguhnya "surat sumpah" sejak akhir-ahkir ini, bagai menjadi "surat sampah". Sumpah " Wallahi Wabilahi Watallahi" bukan "surat sumpah". Namun, sumpah "Wallahi Wabilahi Watallahi" dicatit para malaikat, tidak bisa dialter oleh para hakim dan terus tidak akan terpadam. Samada di dunia atau di akhirat "ganjarannya" pasti ada. Terseleweng aqidah buruk padahnya. Amalan sepanjang zaman bisa zumud.

Ingatlah "pemberian manusia tidak seindah pemberian Allah SWT. Hukuman Allah tidak terelak seperti hukuman manusia dan hukuman para hakim yang zalim.

Wednesday, July 9, 2008



CASH Sabah dan Wilayah Persekutuan Labuan wajib menjadikan isu keselamatan dan kesihatan pengguna sebagai agenda utama mereka, BUKAN sekadar sensitif, lebih peka terhadap isu politik dan isu kenaikan harga minyak sahaja.

CASH perlu turun padang melihat sendiri timbunan sayur yang diperkatakan penulis tersebut mengenai tahap keselamatan barangan pengguna terutama sayur-sayuran buah-buahan, Ikan Basah, Daging dan ayam. Kerjasama secara bersepadu dengan pihak berkuasa tempatan dan Nasional seperti Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia hendaklah di"rapatkan" demi menepati posisi CASH sebagai badan resmi pengguna di Sabah dan W.P Labuan.

CASH mesti berganding bahu dengan golongan professional mengenai perkara hak pengguna terutama yang menyentuh keselamatan dan kesihatan mereka. CASH tidak boleh membiarkan rakyat negeri ini yang kini terdesak membayar harga yang tinggi kesan dari inflasi. Dalam masa yang sama mereka membayar pula untuk meracuni tubuh badan mereka tanpa mereka sedari!.

CASH mesti melihat dan mendapat maklumat teratur tahap penggunaan racun serangga dan keracunan sayur-sayuran, penggunaan bahan terlarang sebagai perservatif, "formaline", yang digunakan ke atas ikan-ikan di pasar, terutama di Pasar Malam dekat laut yang dibawa masuk dari negara jiran. CASH mesti menuntut kerjasama dan komitment jabatan-jabatan dan agensi-agensi berwajib untuk membantu mereka agar CASH dilihat sebagai badan yang "releven" kepada pengguna atau sebaliknya. Sedarkan mereka mengenai tanggungjawab mereka terharap rakyat dan keluarga mereka. cash JUGA JANGAN LUPA alat timbang sukat di pasar ikan di pasar malam itu. Tanya lah 10 orang pengguna secara rambang mengenai alat itu. Berapa ramai yang mereka akan kata "timbangan di situ tak betul"!!?

Tuesday, July 8, 2008


Commander Mohsen Rezaei, The EC Secretary.

EC secretary: US attempts to hinder Iran's nuclear progress doomed to failure
Tehran, July 7, IRNA

Iran-US-Nuclear Secretary of the Expediency Council (EC) and former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei said here Monday that the US efforts to throw obstacles on way of Iran's nuclear advancement are doomed to failure.

Speaking on the sidelines of a conference of veteran IRGC members of artillery and missile launcher units, he said "If the US changes its hostile approach and adopts a reconciliatory policy in the region it will benefit the American nation, the whole region and the entire world." "If the Americans choose to take other approach, there is no doubt that they will be the real loser and they will have to leave the region empty-handed," he said.

On recent military threats made by the Zionist regime against Iran, he said since new horizons for continued talks between Iran and Europe emerged, the US and the Zionist regime have become very upset and at this sensitive juncture Iran and Europe should not pay any attention to such threats.

Iran and Europe should continue their own reconciliatory and rational approach as before and to seriously start negotiations to resolve remaining issues, he said.

The noble Iranian nation has always lived in peace and it has only one message for the region and the world which is a message of peace, freedom and justice, Rezaei said.

Iran is ready to give a crushing response to any attacks but it will never initiate such an attack, he underlined.

Friday, July 4, 2008


Seorang tuan guru dalam tazkirah pada satu majlis yang diikuti penulis baru-baru ini, mengingatkan hadirin dengan amaran menakutkan; dua daripada tiga hakim akan masuk nereka; manakala pemimpin (imam) zalim tidak akan dipandang langsung oleh Allah SWT pada hari akhirat kelak.

Siapakah pemimpin yang zalim itu? Mereka adalah orang yang tidak berhukum dengan hukum Allah. Mereka memerintah ikut nafsu dan syahwat. Mereka menangkan kroni. Mereka makan suap. Mereka mengamalkan undang-undang rimba. Menghumban manusia dalam penjara tanpa bicara. Inilah manusia yang paling dimurkai Allah SWT. Mereka paling jauh daripada rahmat Allah SWT.

Sementara itu peniaga yang jujur, hakim serta pemerintah yang adil, kedudukan mereka adalah di bawah Nabi-Nabi dan begitu hampir dengan Allah SWT, demikian kata tuan guru itu.

Jika semua orang termasuk pemimpin ada harga diri, harga barang akan berada pada paras dimampui orang awam kerana negara dibarakahi Allah SWT. Insya-Allah jika harga diri naik, harga barangan akan jatuh!
Read more......


Kebingungan seperti ini sukar mendapat jawaban. (gambar hiasan).

Bala tarik balik akuan berkanun
Jul 4, 08 11:18am

Penyiasat persendirian, P Balasubramaniam membuat kejutan lagi apabila menarik balik akuan berkanunnya yang mengaitkan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak dengan Altantuya Shaariibuu.

Dalam akuan berkanunnya itu, Balasubramaniam mendakwa Najib mempunya hubungan seksual dengan Altantuya. Najib juga didakwa memperkenalkan Altantuya kepada Abdul Razak Baginda. Balasubramaniam berkata, beliau telah dipaksa membuat akuan berkanun tersebut. Dalam satu sidang akhbar di sebuah hotel di Kuala Lulmpu pagi ini, Balasubramaniam membuat akuan berkanun yang baru.

Akuan berkanun yang baru itu tanpa rujukan Najib mempunyai hubungan seksual dengan Altantuya ataupun Najib yang memperkenalkan Abdul Razak baginda kepada wanita Mongolia tersebut.

Balasubramaniam juga mempunyai peguam yang baru. Peguam Americk Sidhu, yang bersamanya semalam, juga tidak tahu apa yang sedang berlaku. Sidang akhbar Balasubramaniam masih berjalan.

Semalam, Balasubramaniam membuat pendedahan yang menggemparkan bahawa beliau telah mendengar dari Abdul Razak mengenai hubungan Najib dengan Altantuya.Tetapi hari ini beliau berkata, beliau mahu menarik balik akuan berkanunnya pertama, yang difailnya pada 1 Julai, dan menggantikannya dengan yang baru, yang diumumkannya hari ini.

"Saya mahu menarik balik akuan berkanun yang pertama," katanya sambil menambah, beliau dipaksa membuat akuan berkanun tersebut.

Balasubramaniam telah diupah oleh Abdul Razak untuk menguruskan Altantuya pada 2006 yang mengganggu Abdul Razak, yang juga rapat dengan Najib.

Mass media telahpun melapurkan penyataan yang dipertikaikan. "Telajak perahu boleh diundur, terlajak kata buruk padahnya"; apatah lagi penyataan itu "penyataan bersumpah". Bagi saya, Mr. Bala benar-benar "berdiri di atas pagar yang licin". Beliau hendaknya lebih berhati-hati kerana di kiri dan di kanannya ada ranjau yang panjang. Kebertanggungjawaban sebagai rakyat Malaysia amat perlu diutamakan.


Thursday, July 3, 2008



SAPP menegaskan bahawa “window of opportunity will close by August....” tahun 2008. Pada bulan itu, menurut kepimpinan SAPP, Kongress MCA, Perhimpunan Agung UMNO, Ramadhan dan Aidil fitri dan demam peperiksaan sekolah akan berlangsung. Pucuk kepimpinan BN akan terlalu sibok, alpa dan lupa Sabah, kononnya. Samada SAPP lupa pada 31, Ogos juga akan berlangsung Hari Kebangsaan Malaysia, saya kurang pasti.

Bagaimanapun, saya tahu pasti bahawa SAPP mesti masih ingat bahawa mereka telah memberi amaran bersyarat kepada pucuk pimpinan BN bahawa andainya permintaan SAPP yang “14 menjadi 8” tidak dipenuhi menjelang Ogos, maka SAPP tidak boleh dipersalahkan bilamana mereka bertindak meninggalkan BN. Samada pada satu tarikh pada bulan Ogos 2008 ““window of opportunity” kepada SAPP berada dalam BN juga tertutup, perlu kita tunggu dan lihat barisan kepimpinan sebuah parti, SAPP, mengenggam keunggulan wibawa dan prinsipnya. Mungkin pada saat itu isu surat tunjuk sebab hanya membajir kertas.

Kalau ikut teori SAPP, selepas Ogos kita perlu “mengusai” pancing dan lukah kecil yang boleh dipinda-pinda. Kita akan bakal memancing dan memasang lukah ikan puyuh di jalan-jalan raya kerana ianya bakal berlubang-lubang dan menjadi tempat ikan puyuh itu berhijrah dan membiak. Peluang untuk mendapat peruntukan bagi maksud penyelenggaraan jalan raya itu sudah tertutup.

Pada saat BN memerlukan setiap unsur kesetiaan untuk bangun dan menilai segala sesuatu unsur kekurangan, kekhilafan dan kelemahan lampau, BN diuji dan dicabar.

Tatkala sang puteri ayu menahan pedih hatinya yang luka, mendambakan cinta sejati, Sang Puteri hanya dibisikkan kata-kata sindirian yang menambah luka hatinya... bahawa cintanya semakin layu dan bakal penggantinya tercegat nun di hujung sudut tidak jauh ditempatnya bersimpuh sedang airmatanya masih bengenang di kelopak matanya. Lukanya dilukai lagi.

Kepimpinan BN harus tegas dan bertegas bahawa BN bukan "parti tabung uji". Minggu lepas Eric Mojimbun (EM) membidas Ketua Menteri Melaka cum Naib Presiden UMNO, Datuk Wira Mohd Ali Rustam kerana menyokong demonstrasi keluarga BN di Tawau. Demonstrasi itu mengecam tindakan MP SAPP, Chua Soon Bui yang menyatakan pendirian akan menyokong usul undi tidak percaya terhadap PM cum Presiden UMNO cum Pengerusi BN Malaysia. Demonstrasi juga diadakan di Sepanggar menyatakan keluarga BN Sepanggar hilang kpercayaan terhadap EM.

EM mahu "sogit" Ali Rustam kerana menyokong demonstrasi di Tawau. Demonstrasi di Sepanggar yang menyatakan hilang kepercayaan terhadap kepimpinan EM tidak dinyatakan akan kena "sogit" andainya EM masih KAN. Kenapa EM lupa sogit @ adili diri sendiri kerana budaya melanggar whip system yang BUKAN amalan dan budaya BN?. Kenapa EM tidak saja mendesak partinya keluar BN bila tindak tanduknya melanggar tatasusila dan budaya BN dan hilang keyakinan terhadap pucuk pimpinan BN?. Cukupkah hanya sekadar membayar "sogit" dengan membuat penyataan akan menyokong usul tidak percaya pada PM cum Pengerusi BN Malaysia? Apakah EM akan menyokong usul "sogit" memadahi bagi kes rogol kiranya ada motion seperti ini?
Dana D8 habis menjelang "window of oppurtunity" tertutup menjelang Ogos.

About This Blog

Dan adapun orang-orang yang takut kepada kebesaran Tuhannya dan menahan diri dari keinginan hawa nafsunya. Maka sesungguhnya syurgalah tempat tinggalnya. (al-Naziat ayat 40-41)

"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes...known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
- James Madison, Political Observations, 1795

santapan rohani ii

Al-hadith :ثلاثةٌ قد حَرّمَ اللهُ - تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى - عليهم الجنةَ : مُدْمِنُ الخمر ، والعاقّ ، والدّيّوثُ الذييُقِرُّ في أَهْلِهِ الخُبْثَ . رواه أحمد والنسائيErtinya : "Tiga yang telah Allah haramkan baginya Syurga : orang yang ketagih arak, si penderhaka kepada ibu bapa dan Si Dayus yang membiarkan maksiat dilakukan oleh ahli keluarganya" ( Riwayat Ahmad )


Ingatlah firman Allah Taala:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا بِطَانَةً مِنْ دُونِكُمْ لَا يَأْلُونَكُمْ خَبَالًا وَدُّوا مَا عَنِتُّمْ قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاءُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ قَدْ بَيَّنَّا لَكُمُ الْآيَاتِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ (118) هَا أَنْتُمْ أُولَاءِ تُحِبُّونَهُمْ وَلَا يُحِبُّونَكُمْ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِالْكِتَابِ كُلِّهِ وَإِذَا لَقُوكُمْ قَالُوا آمَنَّا وَإِذَا خَلَوْا عَضُّوا عَلَيْكُمُ الْأَنَامِلَ مِنَ الْغَيْظِ قُلْ مُوتُوا بِغَيْظِكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ بِذَاتِ الصُّدُورِ (119)

Maksudnya: “Wahai orang-orang yang beriman! janganlah kamu mengambil orang-orang yang bukan dari kalangan kamu menjadi “orang dalam” (yang dipercayai). mereka tidak akan berhenti-henti berusaha mendatangkan bencana kepada kamu. mereka sukakan apa yang menyusahkan kamu. telahpun nyata (tanda) kebencian mereka pada pertuturan mulutnya, dan apa yang disembunyikan oleh hati mereka lebih besar lagi. Sesungguhnya telah Kami jelaskan kepada kamu keterangan-keterangan itu jika kamu (mahu) memahaminya. Awaslah! kamu ini adalah orang-orang (yang melanggar larangan), kamu sahajalah yang suka (dan percayakan mereka, sedang mereka tidak suka kepada kamu. kamu juga beriman kepada Segala Kitab Allah (sedang mereka tidak beriman kepada Al-Quran). dan apabila mereka bertemu dengan kamu mereka berkata: “Kami beriman”, tetapi apabila mereka berkumpul sesama sendiri, mereka menggigit hujung jari kerana geram marah (kepada kamu), Katakanlah (Wahai Muhammad): “Matilah kamu Dengan kemarahan kamu itu”. Sesungguhnya Allah sentiasa mengetahui akan Segala (isi hati) yang ada di dalam dada.” [Ali Imran: 118 & 119]
تُولِجُ اللَّيْلَ فِي النَّهَارِ وَتُولِجُ النَّهَارَ فِي اللَّيْلِ وَتُخْرِجُ الْحَيَّ مِنَ الْمَيِّتِ وَتُخْرِجُ الْمَيِّتَ مِنَ الْحَيِّ وَتَرْزُقُ مَنْ تَشَاءُ بِغَيْرِ حِسَابٍآل عمران : 27

"Engkaulah (Wahai Tuhan) yang memasukkan waktu malam ke dalam waktu siang, dan Engkaulah yang memasukkan waktu siang ke dalam waktu malam. Engkaulah juga yang mengeluarkan sesuatu yang hidup dari benda yang mati, dan Engkaulah yang mengeluarkan benda yang mati dari sesuatu yang hidup. Engkau jualah yang memberi rezeki kepada sesiapa yang Engkau kehendaki, dengan tiada hitungan hisabnya".


“Siapa yang membantahmu tentang kisah Isa-Setelah engkau beroleh pengetahuan yang meyakinkan tentang hal itu, maka katakanlah kepada mereka : Marilah kita panggil (kumpulan) anak-anak kami dan anak-anak kalian, isteri-isteri kami, dan isteri-isteri kalian, diri-diri kami dan diri-diri kalian, kemudian kita bermubahalah kepada Allah, mohon agar Allah menjatuhkan laknat-Nya kepada pihak yang berdusta.” (Ali Imran : 61)