Banner Advertiser

Saturday, April 30, 2011

[ALOCHONA] Book, film greeted with fury among Bengalis



Book, film greeted with fury among Bengalis


A recent film and book has caused outrage among Bengalis, due to their downplaying of atrocities committed by the Pakistani military during East Pakistan's struggle for independence in 1971 [GALLO/GETTY]
A new book and film recently released downplaying Pakistani atrocities in Bangladesh have caused outrage among Bengalis.

Two Bengali women  one from India, the other from Bangladesh are now embroiled in a fierce controversy across the two countries for writing a book and producing a film that has upset Bengali nationalists and Indian officials, but given some cause of relief to the Pakistani military.

Dead Reckoning, written by Indian researcher Sarmila Bose, questions the historical narratives of the 1971 civil war that broke up Pakistan, but Bengali nationalist groups describe her as "an apologist for Pakistan's brutal military".

Meherjaan, directed by Bangladeshi film-maker Rubaiyat Hossain, is about the love of a Bengali woman for a Pakistani Baloch soldier in the backdrop of the 1971 war  but feminist groups in Bangladesh allege that the film "distorts the historical context of the liberation war".   

Challenging narratives

Both the book and the film have hit the market at a time when Bangladesh's Awami League-led government has set up special tribunals for trying the "war criminals" of 1971.

The Awami League led Bangladesh's struggle for secession from Pakistan after the Pakistani military regime refused to hand over power to it even after it won a majority in Pakistan national assembly elections in 1970.

Shamsul Arefin, a war crimes trial official, told this writer that though Bengalis who collaborated with the Pakistan army are the ones to be actually tried, names of Pakistani soldiers and officers are likely to crop up with regard to massacres, mass rapes and arson during the trial.

"That will expose the real character of the Pakistani army which is now seen in the West as a key ally in the war against terror. So Pakistan's intelligence is desperate to scuttle the war crimes trials in Bangladesh," says Arefin, who served in the Pakistan army, then joined the Bengali Mukti Fauj (Freedom Force) during the civil war and finally served in the Bangladesh army.

"We have reasons to believe that there is a concerted campaign by Pakistani intelligence to disrupt and dilute our War Crimes Trial. I will not be surprised if they are commissioning projects to distort the realities of our liberation war," Arefin told this writer.

That's a rather strong charge but Sarmila Bose promptly dismisses."I am only trying to question the existing narratives of the 1971 war in view of data I have gathered while working for the book," Sarmila Bose told the audience at the Woodrow Wilson Centre in US, where the book was launched.The entire book launch programme is available on the Internet.

Suspect data

Bose, a Bengali herself, is a grand daughter of India's independence war hero Subhas Chandra Bose, and is a senior research fellow at Oxford.Her brothers, Sugato and Sumantra Bose, teach history and politics at Harvard and London School of Economics.

"I am only pointing to obvious exaggerations about the number of people killed or number of women raped by the Pakistan army. A war narrative is always the narrative of the victors, and 1971 was no different," Sarmila Bose said at the launch.

But some of her data is clearly suspect.Dead Reckoning suggests there were only 20,000 Pakistani troops at the beginning of the civil war in East Pakistan, and that rose to 34,000 towards the end of the war.

"Bangladeshi narratives claim 400,000 women were raped by Pakistani troops during the civil war between March and December 1971, but how can 34,000 soldiers rape so many women in eight months," contends Sarmila Bose.

Indian historian Jayanta Ray, whose 1968 book Nationalism on Trial predicted the breakup of Pakistan, is furious at how an Oxford researcher like Bose could get basic facts wrong.

"Records indicate that just over 93,000 Pakistani soldiers surrendered to the Indian army in December 1971. They were all handed back to Pakistan. That's thrice the number Bose suggests, so is she fudging figures deliberately to prove that the number of rapes were much lower than suggested?" Professor Ray told this writer.

Bangladesh's anti-fundamentalist campaigner Shahriyar Kabir says that Red Cross officials in 1971 testified to treating nearly 200,000 rape victims."Many more women did not report for treatment out of shame and embarrassment," Kabir told this writer. "They bore their indignities silently."

A Calcutta-based Bengali channel, Mahua TV, ran a full hour discussion on the book, bringing together Bengalis from India and Bangladesh last Sunday.Hundreds of listeners from both sides of the border called in to join the author-bashing.The channel's executive editor, Subir Chakroborty, says Sarmila Bose's mother, Krishna Bose, a former member of Indian parliament, refused to join the panel."She told us her views on the liberation war were already known to everybody, so we put up in front of our cameras her newspaper article on the Bangladesh war. That was very sympathetic to the victims of 1971," Chakroborty said.

Allegations of bias

While Bangladeshis and Indian Bengalis are upset with Bose for "playing down the Pakistani atrocities", Indian officials are angry with her contention that "India was the only aggressor in 1971"."We intervened militarily only after all possibilities of stopping the bloodbath failed. And when our forces entered East Pakistan, the Bengalis complained why we have been so late," says former chief of India's eastern fleet, Vice-Admiral Bimalendu Guha.

"How can she call us an aggressor," fumes Guha. "The Bengalis actually wanted us to intervene earlier to save themselves."

Former chief-of-staff of India's eastern army, Lieutenant General J.R. Mukherjee, goes a step further, who said:

She has very good reasons to defend the honour of the Pakistan army, which she describes as a professional and a brave force. Can I ask her why these brave soldiers surrendered to India in such a huge number? Even now, Pakistani troops keep surrendering to Taliban and other militants. Can you show one Indian soldier who has ever surrendered to a militant?

Professor Ray alleges that Bose is biased in use of sources."Her sources are primarily Pakistani. She has interviewed many Pakistani officers, but not those who were fighting them," says Professor Ray.

Particularly upset with Sarmila Bose are Bangladesh's vast numbers of "freedom fighters" men from various walks of life who joined the "Mukti Fauj" to fight the Pakistanis in 1971.

"How can a Bengali, and that too from the family of one of our greatest leader like Subhas Bose, write such a horrible account that tries to defend Pakistan's brutal army. This is simply unacceptable," said Haroon Habib, a "freedom fighter" who later rose to head the country's government-sponsored news agency, Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha (BSS).No bookseller has so far put Dead Reckoning on their shelves in Bangladesh.Even in Calcutta and other Bengali-dominated cities in India, the book is not to be seen.

"Bengalis across the border will only have hate for her," says Bimal Pramanik, a "freedom fighter" who now lives in India and runs a centre for research on India-Bangladesh relations. "She is untruthful and with a purpose."Sarmila Bose denies all charges flung at her and says she has only "tried to correct the course of contemporary history".  A claim few will endorse in Bangladesh or Indian Bengal.

Stereotypes versus truth

Rubaiyat Hossain's Meherjaan is innocuous by comparison, but it has generated as much angst in a country which prides its Bengali heritage and where the atrocities of the Pakistan army is still recent memory.

Bangladesh's official history says nearly three million Bengalis Hindus, Muslims and Christians died in the 1971 civil war, and nearly half a million women were raped.

"I liked the movie, but since I am a freedom fighter and scores of my friends disliked the film, I decided to withdraw it from cinema halls in Bangladesh," says Habibur Rehman Khan, the distributor of Meherjaan.That means the film will make no money, despite a a cast of stars from India, like Jaya Bachan and Victor Banerji  both Bengalis, but big in Bollywood.

Bangladeshi feminist groups say the film trivialises the atrocities on women by the Pakistani army when it runs the story of Meher, a Bengali girl who falls in love with a Pakistani soldier, and is then humiliated by her family when this is discovered."I was raped several times by Pakistani soldiers, and I cannot stand this soft corner for Pakistanis in the film," said sculptor Ferdous Priyabashini.

Rubaiyat Hossain is candid about her woes."I tried to break out of the stereotype of the Bengali hero versus Pakistani brute in the backdrop of the 1971 war, and that is what my countrymen are so upset with," she said.

"What she thinks is stereotype is actually the truth. The Pakistanis killed us like flies and raped our women like beasts. They even massacred our intellectuals just before they surrendered," said Awami League's minister Jehangir Kabir Nanak.Unlike Japan or Germany apologising for their military excesses during the Second World War, Pakistan has not apologised for the atrocities of its army in 1971.

Many liberal Pakistanis, including cricket hero Imran Khan, want Islamabad to do so and bury the bad blood of 1971.But the Pakistan army top brass refuses to oblige.Until that happens, neither Dead Reckoning nor Meherjaan will find admirers in Bangladesh or in Indian Bengal.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/04/2011429174141565122.html



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] The wretched Great Game



The wretched Great Game

 

Humayun Gauhar


Cut to the chase.

The core issue: To establish hegemony over Afghanistan without endangering US troops.


America's problem: "How does it get its troops safely out of Afghanistan?"


America's intent: Not to quit Afghanistan altogether, only to withdraw its soldiers from the firing line. Do you really think that they went to all the trouble of occupying Afghanistan only to "Bring Osama Bin Laden to justice" or topple Mullah Omar? They occupied it for its geostrategic importance as the land of future gas pipeline routes, its significant mineral deposits and as a listening and rapid deployment post in the region from China and Russia to the Central Asian Republics, the Middle East and South Asia. And that is where they intend to remain until they are thrown out. Yes, it is the wretched, never-ending Great Game. Everyone has lost playing it – now its America's turn.


The reason: The Taliban have defeated America.


The irony: America morphed from freedom fighter to occupier.


The moral: An occupier can occupy for a time but is eventually defeated because the human spirit can never be permanently occupied.


What America needs: Withdrawal from a drug more potent than Afghan heroin. It's called 'Hegemony'.


Who are the Taliban: For one thing they are plural – 'Taliban' is the plural of 'Talib', which means 'student' or, literally, 'seeker of knowledge'. They are the old Mujahideen and their sons that defeated the Soviets with American and Pakistani help.


How did the Mujahideen morph into the Taliban: America abandoned them (and Pakistan) after victory and fell into deep hubris with the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet empire.


The mockery: Once America fought shoulder-to-shoulder with the Mujahideen-Taliban whom it then likened to its great founding fathers – Osama Bin Laden, Jalaluddin Haqqani et al – to evict the Soviet occupier from Afghanistan. Now it has replaced the Soviet occupier and become occupier itself, fighting against its founding father clones who want to evict America from Afghanistan. Again, the Taliban have won, as they did against the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union.


The question: Do morality and principle change with occupier? Are there good occupiers and bad occupiers? Stupid question.


America wishes to take its secret talks with the Afghan Taliban to a higher plane to ensure the safe withdrawal of its troops. Good, even if sense descends later rather than never. Not dignified, escaping from the roof of one's embassy hanging from helicopters. America would do well to appoint the former bosses of the Soviet Union as 'Consultants in Withdrawal'.

A TV anchor asked me about the "significance" of the recent meeting between Karzai and Prime Minister Gillani. "Gillani even took the army and ISI chiefs along."


"Actually," said I, "it is the army and ISI chiefs who have to find a formula for America's safe withdrawal. It is they who took Gillani and his assorted ministers along for protocol."


What could the significance of a meeting with an American satrap be? What between two proxies? Our prime minister is a proxy of a proxy; Manmohan Singh is a proxy of Sonia Gandhi. Both Zardari and Sonia are proxies of their sons.

Problem is to get Mullah Omar's blessings. He must be brought on board. We might be in contact with him, or know where he might be, but if America thinks that we can order him around they've learned nothing. They're also convinced that the 'Haqqani Network' is in our pocket and want us to shed it. The 'Network' regards Mullah Omar as not just its overarching leader, but akin to a father. It one of the 'Made in USA' products, as are the Mujahideen and Al Qaeda, all now dumped on us. Interesting how roles change and how conveniently history is forgotten.


Since Karzai is barren and cannot deliver, the Taliban are more suspicious of him than of us. So it has befallen Pakistan to rope them in. As victors – the very fact that the US wishes to talk to them means defeat – they will want their pound of flesh. They were in power before America overthrew them and will settle for nothing less than being in power again. The Taliban are a fact of life made larger-than-life by defeating America. Like it or not, without them any 'deal' will have a shelf life of not more than one second.


Yet while wanting us to help it, America wants to put the blame for its usual defeat on Pakistan – as usual too – which is why it has leaked selected cables of 'guidelines' given to its interrogators and torturers in its Gulag in Guantanamo that classify our ISI as a 'terrorist organization', equating it with Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah. If they hate the ISI so it must be a very good organization. (We don't hate their CIA; we find it comical – look at that blundering moron 'Raymond Davis'). America forgets that all non-state terrorism is a product of state terrorism and it is the leading state terrorist. Look at the pot (without a Muslim shower alongside) trying to make us out to be the kettle. The best thing I heard – though our Foreign Office denies it – is that we advised Karzai not to throw all his lot in with America and get the Chinese in his corner too.


As to the two-tier Reconciliation Commission between Pakistan and Afghanistan, while there is much to reconcile, the question arises: reconciliation with whom? An American satrap who doesn't really represent the will of his people? Hamid Karzai was one of the many millions of Afghan refugees in Pakistan for more than two decades. The occupying Americans made him president of Afghanistan and there he remains under the cloak of shambolic elections tailored to make him win. He will not be recognized as the true representative of his country unless he wins elections against Mullah Omar. That is not to say that the Taliban in power were not a total disgrace to humanity and to the religion that they claim to be the authentic voice of. Theirs is a self-serving interpretation of Islam. In power, they meted out cruelty and peddled stupidity on a mind-numbing scale. By their actions they pushed their country to rubble. American bombing turned the rubble to powder.


Pakistan and Afghanistan have to be on good terms because they need each other because of their geographic proximity, tribal overlap and our transit routes for landlocked Afghanistan. America needs Pakistan for exactly the same reason, and many others – without transit through Pakistan NATO troops would be starved and defenseless.

humayun.gauhar786@gmail.com



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Self-determination for Assam and regional conflicts



Self-determination for Assam and regional conflicts





http://www.chintaa.com/index.php/campaigndetails/showAerticle/3/19/bangla
http://www.chintaa.com/index.php/campaigndetails/showAerticle/3/20/bangla
http://www.chintaa.com/index.php/campaigndetails/showAerticle/3/21/bangla
http://www.chintaa.com/index.php/campaigndetails/showAerticle/3/36/bangla



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Syria: Intervention Inevitable



Syria: Intervention Inevitable

by Tony Cartalucci

Regime change in Syria was a foregone conclusion as early as 1991. General Wesley Clark in a 2007 speech in California relayed a 1991 conversation between himself and then Under Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz indicated that America had 5-10 years to clean up old Soviet "client regimes," namely Syria, Iran, and Iraq, before the next super power rose up to challenge western hegemony. The "next super power" includes ironically Russia, recovering from the treasonous attempted sellout by oligarchs like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and of course a rising China.

Setting the Stage

The entire "Arab Spring" was a preplanned, meticulously engineered foreign-funded operation that began as early as 2008, with the West's imperial network of "civil society" and NGOs in place for decades. The New York Times has recently admitted as much in their article, "US Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprising," implicating the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the National Endowment for Democracy, Movements.org, and Freedom House for their roles in recruiting, training, and supporting the unrest.

As this plot unfolds, we see in hindsight that each destabilization was triggered and nurtured with a specific order in mind. Tunisia and Egypt were collapsed on either side of Libya while the tremors of destabilization shook the entire region in general, including in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The newly "reordered" Middle East would be extorted into backing Western military intervention in Libya, which was targeted next. The vulnerable governments of Tunisia and Egypt began serving as conduits for weapons and supplies to reach US-backed rebels in their bid to oust Qaddafi. Likewise, the grand prize in the Middle East being Iran, Syria is being systematically picked apart first to further weaken and isolate Tehran.

Iran itself has been under siege for years by covert operations including US special forces and intelligence operating inside Iran, training, arming and supporting terrorist organizations in activity against the government of Iran, as well as assassinations and sabotage of Iranian infrastructure. All of this has been meticulously documented, planned, and prepared amongst the pages of Brookings Institute's "Which Path to Persia?" report.

The corporate-financier funded think-tanks have reached the general consensus that their unipolar world order of "international law," and "international institutions" have primacy over national sovereignty and the time has come to assert such primacy or lose it. This was stated quite clearly within the corporate lined Brookings Institute report titled, " "Libya's Test of the New International Order" back in February 2011. In it they overtly state that intervening in Libya "is a test that the international community has to pass. Failure would shake further the faith of the people's region in the emerging international order and the primacy of international law."

The globalist International Crisis Group, whose trustee Mohamed ElBaradei played a direct, hands-on role in overthrowing the government of Egypt on behalf of foreign interests, recently reiterated Brookings' sentiments in an article titled, "The Rise and Fall of International Human Rights," where once again "international law" and "international citizenship" is held above national sovereignty. The "responsibility to protect (R2P)" is cited as the impetus to assert such "international law." Considering that R2P is called on after foreign-funded sedition and violence is created within a target nation, we can see "international law" as the poorly dressed euphemism for imperial invasion that it is. The term "international" in fact describes the evolution of the Anglo-American empire as it absorbs and dismantles nation-states across the globe.

The Syrian port of Tartus (highlighted in orange) is set to
serve as a Russian naval base, upgraded this year and to
host Russian warships by 2012. This will allow Russia to
counteract NATO's aggressive encirclement of its borders.


The Build-up Against Syria

Syria is not only a defiant nation unwilling to participate in "globalization," it is also an integral part of both Iran's and Russia's growing counterbalance throughout the region, in direct contrast to Western hegemony. The Syrian port city of Tartus is being renovated and is set to host heavy Russian warships in a bid to establish a significant presence in the Mediterranean. This would counteract NATO's expansion along Russia's borders as well as keep in check Western fleets north of the Suez.

Syria has long served this purpose, with the Tartus facility having originally been opened in 1971 through an agreement with the Soviets. When Paul Wolfowitz was referring to Soviet "client regimes" in his 1991 conversation with Wesley Clark, this sort of challenge to Western hegemony was what he was referring to.

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Clark was again passed plans drawn to implement regime change throughout the Middle East, specifically to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya. In 2002, then US Under Secretary of State John Bolton, would add Syria to the growing "Axis of Evil."

In a recent CNN article, acting State Department spokesman Mark Toner stated, "We're not working to undermine that [Syrian] government. What we are trying to do in Syria, through our civil society support, is to build the kind of democratic institutions, frankly, that we're trying to do in countries around the globe. What's different, I think, in this situation is that the Syrian government perceives this kind of assistance as a threat to its control over the Syrian people."

Toner's remarks come after the Washington Post released cables indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 under the Bush administration and was continued under Obama. As we can see, the campaign against Syria transcended presidential administrations for nearly two decades.

In a recent AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated that the "US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments." The report went on to explain that the US "organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there." Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect.":

http://www.youtube.com/embed/SiTf0XKSA50
Lieberman on Syrian intervention.

The ripple effect of course are the uprisings themselves, facilitated by yet more aid, equipment, and the complicity of the corporate owned media, disingenuously portraying the events as "spontaneous," "genuine," and "indigenous." Recent calls have been made by US Senators Mark Kirk and Richard Blumenthal for a "non-military intervention" in Syria, while warmongering puppets Nicolas Sarkozy of France and US Senator Joe Lieberman used Libya's bombardment as a warning aimed specifically at Assad of Syria.

The Intervention Is Beginning

Now, in calls that echo the build-up to Libya's bombardment, US Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Joe Lieberman have made a joint statement that Assad has "lost the legitimacy to remain in power in Syria." They continued by stating, "Rather than hedging our bets or making excuses for the Assad regime, it is time for the United States, together with our allies in Europe and around the world, to align ourselves unequivocally with the Syrian people in their peaceful demand for a democratic government."

The level of deception behind these comments is almost unimaginable, after the US State Department openly admitted to funding, training, organizing, and supporting this unrest to begin with. Compounding the intellectual dishonesty from which these three senators have made their treasonous comments from is the fact that each of them, in addition to their role as "elected representatives," are members of unelected, shadowy organizations that receive funding directly from US tax payers as well as corporate-financier interests to undermine and destroy foreign governments. McCain and Graham are both members of the International Republican Institute, openly implicated by the New York Times for their role in funding the "Arab Spring." Lieberman is a member of the Neo-Conservative war profiteering lobbying firm deceptively named, the "Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)."

FDD features many Project for a New American Century (PNAC) signatories including William Kristol, Richard Perle, James Woolsey, and Paula Dobriansky, as well as CFR members Newt Gingrich and Charles Krauthammer, along with the disingenuous "War on Terror" paid propagandist Bill Roggio of the "Long War Journal." Shockingly, this cabal of warmongering liars, many of whom are responsible for reckless and disingenuous war propaganda films such as "Iranium" openly admits to being funded in part by the US State Department. It is amongst unelected, unaccountable organizations like the IRI and FDD that US foreign policy reaches foregone conclusions, with propaganda like "Iranium" left to sell these conclusions to an unwitting, immensely ignorant public.

The chatter amongst the corporate funded think-tanks such as the Brookings Institute has reached a crescendo in their calls for Assad to step down. As in Libya, the calls are based on unverified, purposefully ambiguous reports of violence squarely blamed on the ruling regime. Regardless of reports of armed groups working amongst the protesters, the corporate owned media and the think-tanks that hand them their talking points maintain that the protests are peaceful and that crackdowns are "repressive."

In Brookings' latest piece, "In Syria, Assad Must Exit the Stage" the cycle of violence initiated by "mysterious gunmen" targeting funerals is cited as the line Assad had crossed which now requires his departure from power. The article states, "With the cycle of ever-increasing protests met by regime violence and then more funerals intensifying in all areas of the country, it is time for Assad, the "Hamlet" of the Arab world, to consider his future. It is time for him and those who influence him abroad to search for a swift and orderly exit." As evidence begins to trickle out confirming Assad's accusations of armed elements amongst the protesters, as well as possible foreign gunmen being employed to create broader unrest, just as in Libya, the West rushes forward to initiate irreversible intervention.

The Greater World War

With the broad level of openly engineered destabilization aimed not only at the Middle East but at Moscow, Beijing and their peripheries as well, there is little chance the West will call off their gambit now. There is no retreat or return to normalcy for a world now locked in increasingly aggressive confrontation between the Anglo-American empire and the remaining nation-states. It is an all or nothing gambit being executed by a financially and strategically precarious West rushing to complete an agenda at least 2 decades in the making. Syria and ultimately Iran will not escape this campaign without confronting and confounding the real force behind the destabilization.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/Rc7i0wCFf8g
World government is most certainly a conspiracy, but by no means
merely a theory. Here Bush calls for a "New World Order."

This is not an isolated, regional conflict, this is the first step toward greater world war. The destabilization extends from Tunisia to Thailand, from Belarus to Beijing. There are rumblings of confrontation and the positioning of strategic pieces well beyond the current "Arab Spring."

The rest of the world, including the people of the West who will bear the brunt of the West's failure or success with equal destitution, must recognize and reject this megalomania-fueled self-serving campaign. We must begin generating a new consensus based on individual and national sovereignty, reclaim the responsibilities we have pawned off to these mega-corporate-financier interests along with the terrible power they now wield because of our continued complicity, apathy, and ignorance. After Syria and Iran, comes Moscow and Beijing. It is unlikely such conflicts will remain confined to far off regions of the world pictured on our TV screens - just as unlikely those that initiated this confrontation will pay with their own blood and treasure before we the people are all thrown into the crucible of war and consumed entirely.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/04/syria-intervention-inevitable.html



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___