E-book - Charlegmagne, Muhammad, and the Arab Roots of Capitalism

A great read... review in Arabic HERE 
Charlemagne, Muhammad & the Arab Roots of Capitalism

John Walker Lindh - Abu Sulayman al Irlandi - pens three poems for cageprisoners.com

others available here

It’s said that black death spread by fleas

On backs of rats they rode

One fateful autumn thus they came

With vengeance as their code

Like blight they spread from crags to plains

To hilly dusty turf

To rocky lunar landscapes ‘neath

The rooftop of the earth

 

They hid behind the highest clouds

To fly as swift as sound

With daisy cutters cluster bombs

And spies upon the ground

 

Their leader stepped out swaggering

Declaring a crusade

He called the world to follow him

And most of them obeyed

 

For wolves may foam and bark and bite

And gnash and gnaw and hiss

But if a sheep should dare bite back

He’d be a terrorist

 

The knights of Malta raised their spears

The knights Templars came next

The rabble cheered them in the streets

Priests quoted Bible texts

 

Their quislings all crawled out to them

Each kneeled to give his oath

They squealed and cried “Islam is peace”

But disbelieved in both

 

They ushered ashen donkeys forth

Jackasses bearing scrolls

They brayed in fervent fever pitch

For dollar bills in rolls

 

The words they spoke those days were such

That had he known their name

Old Abdullah Ibnu Ubayy

Would cringe and blush in shame

 

*

 

They send their drones to level homes

And blow up wedding feasts

They heap more arms in warlords’ hands

To spread democracy

 

They roam at night to break down doors

To search and strip and rape

To bind and kidnap anyone

To shoot those who escape

 

With muzzles full of lofty talk

Free speech and human rights

They drive out millions from their land

And say it’s worth the price

  

An aid worker clerk or farmer

Sold like a modern slave

Gets beaten by their boots and guns

And thrown into a cage

 

He’s sat upon and spat upon

Broke by the brave and free

By brave crusaders brave and bold

As brave as brave can be

 

If they but knew that with each act

Of torture and abuse

Around the neck of Uncle Sam

They tighten up the noose

 

Mirages in the distance glow

Lads line up in the queue

As one more body bag comes back

Hid from the public view

 

A blistered bloated jarhead face

Deep purple findernails

A smell seeps out that’s foul enough

To cleanse a man’s entrails

 

Their rulers lurch and boast and strut

But keep far from the fray

They swoon and quake from fear to tread

Where lurking lions lay

  

As tawheed’s caravan moves on

And marches in the dusk

The crimson wound of one of them

Emits the scent of musk

 

To rule God’s earth by God’s own law

They sacrifice their lives

They spill their lifeblood willingly

Until God’s help arrives

 

Although victory entices them

What soothes them even more

Is hope to enter gardens lush

With honey milk and hur

  

Where stars and stripes and Union Jacks

And NATO flags once flew

Black banners rise in Khurasan

In hands of every hue

 

Just as how warsteeds’ coats are cleaned

And purged of lice and fleas

The cavalcade of martyrs fights

An empire to its knees

 

All praise and thanks are due to God

To Him alone they bowed

And peace be on His messenger

Whose face beams in his shroud

 

Abu Sulayman al-Irlandi

Detainee #001

Ramadan 1431

THE CORPORATION

The modern day corporation is the most powerful economic institution in the world. Able to influence and dictate the social and economic policies of governments around the world. But how did this situation arise and what is the fundamental nature of the corporation? In this documentary the Canadian law professor and legal theorist Joel Bakan analyzes and dissects the 150 year legal construct of the corporation as a 'person'. The corporation is not a normal 'person', it is a 'person' devoid of any moral or ethical considerations, devoid of any empathy or mercy for its victims. It is person geared towards the pursuit of one objective, the bottom line.
The modern day corporation has all the legal rights of a real person but cannot be held liable in the same way. As Baron Thurlow put it ''They have no soul to save, and they have no body to incarcerate''

Some quotes from the documentary:

'all publicly traded corporations have been structured through a series of legal decisions to have a peculiar and disturbing characteristic. They are required by law to place the financial interests of their owners above competing interests. In fact the corporation is legally bound to put it’s bottom line ahead of everything else. Even the public good. '

'One day we found a big pile of Nike’s internal pricing documents. Nike assigns a time frame to each operation. The don’t talk about minutes. They break the time frame into ten thousandths of a second. You get to the bottom of all 22 operations to give the workers 6.6 minutes to make the shirt. It’s 70 cents an hour in the Dominican Republic that 6.6 minutes equals 8 cents. These are Nike’s documents..that means the wages come to 3 tenths of 1 percent of retail price. This is the reality. It’s the science of exploitation'

'..the corporation remains as it was at the time of its origins, as a mad business institution in the middle of the nineteenth century, and legally designated “person” designed to valorize self interest and invalidate moral concern. Most people would find its “personality” abnormal, even psychopathic, in a human being, yet curiously we accept it in society’s most powerful institutions.'







The link to the rest of the documentary: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=FA50FBC214A6CE87

Manfred Max Neef describes Useful Economists versus Speculative Mathematicians (an important distinction indeed)

AMY GOODMAN: What do you think we need to change?
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: Oh, almost everything. We are simply, dramatically stupid. We act systematically against the evidences we have. We know everything that should not be done. There’s nobody that doesn’t know that. Particularly the big politicians know exactly what should not be done. Yet they do it. After what happened since October 2008, I mean, elementally, you would think what? That now they’re going to change. I mean, they see that the model is not working. The model is even poisonous, you know? Dramatically poisonous. And what is the result, and what happened in the last meeting of the European Union? They are more fundamentalist now than before. So, the only thing you know that you can be sure of, that the next crisis is coming, and it will be twice as much as this one. And for that one, there won’t be enough money anymore. So that will be it. And that is the consequence of systematical human stupidity. 
AMY GOODMAN: So, to avoid another catastrophe, collision, if you were in charge, what would you say has to happen? 
MANFRED MAX-NEEF: First of all, we need cultured economists again, who know the history, where they come from, how the ideas originated, who did what, and so on and so on; second, an economics now that understands itself very clearly as a subsystem of a larger system that is finite, the biosphere, hence economic growth as an impossibility; and third, a system that understands that it cannot function without the seriousness of ecosystems. And economists know nothing about ecosystems. They don’t know nothing about thermodynamics, you know, nothing about biodiversity or anything. I mean, they are totally ignorant in that respect. And I don’t see what harm it would do, you know, to an economist to know that if the beasts would disappear, he would disappear as well, because there wouldn’t be food anymore. But he doesn’t know that, you know, that we depend absolutely from nature. But for these economists we have, nature is a subsystem of the economy. I mean, it’s absolutely crazy

CIA drones killed U.S. citizens in Pakistan, book says

This article from the Washington Post discusses Bob Woodward's new book and reveals more about the reality that sovereignty no longer matters to the U.S. Empire anyway.  Check out the quote attributed to President Zardari of Pakistan below.... now that is the type of puppet the U.S. just loves to promote, such a bastion of democracy???
Source

CIA drones killed “many Westerners, including some U.S. passport holders” in Pakistan’s tribal area during the George W. Bush administration, the new book by Bob Woodward says.

Woodward,a longtime Washington Post journalist, writes in "Obama's Wars" that then-CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden disclosed the killings to Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari during a meeting in New York on Nov. 12, 2008. Hayden was succeeded by Leon J. Panetta in 2009.

Hayden and his deputy, Stephen Kappes, had gone to meet with Zardari, elected only two months earlier, to gauge his reaction to the drone strikes, which were generating widespread protests in Pakistan.

According to Woodward’s unattributed account of the meeting, Zardari said, “Kill the seniors. Collateral damage worries you Americans. It does not worry me.”

Hayden had told Zardari that “many Westerners, including some U.S. passport holders, had been killed five days earlier on the Kam Sham training camp in the tribal area of North Warziristan,” Woodward writes. “But the CIA would not reveal the particulars due to the implications under American law.”

“A top secret CIA map detailing the attacks had been given to the Pakistanis,” Woodward continues. “Missing from it was the alarming fact about the American deaths … The CIA was not going to elaborate.”

The CIA declined to comment for the record or make Kappes, who resigned in April, available for comment. Hayden did not respond to requests for comment.

On Friday the Justice Department faces a deadline to respond to a suit by two human rights groups challenging the Obama administration’s right to kill U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical proselytizer based in Yemen.

Have the International Financiers Decided to Rule Out an Attack on Iran?

Promulagating Manmade Laws - By Shaykh Uthaymeen

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:
Promulgating man-made laws that are contrary to the rulings of Allah and His Messenger concerning matters of blood, honour and wealth, is an act of major kufr which puts one beyond the pale of Islam. There is no doubt whatsoever concerning that, and there is no difference of opinion concerning it among the Muslim scholars. Promulgating such laws is competing with Allah, may He be exalted, in His rule and is going against Him in His laws. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?” [al-Shoora 42:21].

And Allah says concerning obedience to one who permits dead meat (interpretation of the meaning):

“Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah). And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al‑Maytah (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikoon (polytheists); [because they (devils and their friends) made lawful to you to eat that which Allaah has made unlawful to eat and you obeyed them by considering it lawful to eat, and by doing so you worshipped them; and to worship others besides Allaah is polytheism]”

[al-An‘aam 6:121].

And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Have you not seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray.

61. And when it is said to them: ‘Come to what Allaah has sent down and to the Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم),’ you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) see the hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) with aversion”

[al-Nisa’ 4:60-61].

If this is the ruling of Allah concerning the one who wants to refer for judgement to false judges, then how about the false judge himself who promulgates laws instead of Allah.

How can legislation that is contrary to the laws of Allah not be kufr, when it inevitably implies permitting that which is forbidden and forbidding that which is permitted, or giving the legislators the right to do that, so they have the right to permit whatever they want and to forbid whatever they want; whatever the majority agrees upon must be carried out and the one who goes against it is punished and criminalised. This is the ultimate kufr.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If a person regards as permissible that on which there is scholarly consensus that it is forbidden, or regards as forbidden that on which there is scholarly consensus that it is permitted, or he alters a law on which there is consensus, then he is a kaafir and apostate, according to the consensus of the fuqaha’.

End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 3/267

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The one who forsakes the law that was revealed to Muhammad ibn ‘Abd-Allah, the Seal of the Prophets (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and refers for judgement to any other law that has been abrogated, has committed an act of kufr, so how about the one who refers for judgement to al-Yaasa and gives it precedence? The one who does that is a kaafir according to the consensus of the Muslims.

End quote from al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah, 13/139.

Al-Yaasa (also known as al-Yaasiq) refers to the laws of the Tatar Genghis Khan, who forced the people to refer to them for judgement.

Undoubtedly the one who promulgates laws himself commits a greater act of kufr and is more misguided than one who refers to them for judgement.

Al-‘Allaamah Muhammad al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: From verses such as that in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning) “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26], it may be understood that the followers of those who promulgate laws other than those which Allah has ordained are associating others with Allah (shirk). This understanding is explained clearly in other verses, such as the verse which speaks of those who follow the laws of the Shaytaan in permitting dead meat, claiming that it has been killed by Allah [and thus should be permitted]:

“Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah). And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al‑Maytah (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikoon (polytheists)”

[al-An‘aam 6:121].

Here Allah clearly states that they would be mushrikoon by obeying them. This is associating others with Allah in terms of obedience and following laws that are contrary to that which Allah has ordained -- which is what is meant by worshipping the Shaytaan in the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Did I not command you, O Children of Adam, that you should not worship Shaytaan (Satan). Verily, he is a plain enemy to you.

61. And that you should worship Me [Alone Islamic Monotheism, and set up not rivals, associate‑gods with Me]. That is the Straight Path”

[Ya-Seen 36:60-61].

And Allah tells us that His Prophet Ibraaheem said (interpretation of the meaning):

“ ‘O my father! Worship not Shaitân (Satan). Verily, Shaitân (Satan) has been a rebel against the Most Gracious (Allaah)’”

[Maryam 19:44].

And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“They (all those who worship others than Allaah) invoke nothing but female deities besides Him (Allaah), and they invoke nothing but Shaytaan (Satan), a persistent rebel!”

[al-Nisa’ 4:117], i.e., they do not worship anything but a devil, i.e., by following his laws. Hence Allah calls those whom they obey in the sins that they made attractive to them “partners”, as in the verse (interpretation of the meaning) “And so to many of the Mushrikoon (polytheists) their (Allaah’s so‑called) ‘partners’ have made fair-seeming the killing of their children, in order to lead them to their own destruction and cause confusion in their religion” [al-An ‘am 6:137]. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) explained this to ‘Adiyy ibn Haatim (may Allah be pleased with him) when he asked him about the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah” [al-Tawbah 9:31]. He explained that they permitted to them that which Allah has forbidden and they forbade to them that which Allah has permitted, and they [the people] followed them in that; that is how they took them as lords.

One of the clearest proofs concerning that is the fact that in Soorat al-Nisa’, Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, mentioned those who want to refer for judgement to something other than the laws prescribed by Him and wonders at their claim to be believers, because their claim to be believers even though they want to refer for judgement to false judges shows that they have reached a level of lying which is astounding. That is what Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Have you not seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to lead them far astray”

[al-Nisa’ 4:60].

From the divinely revealed texts that we have quoted, it becomes very clear to everyone that with regard to those who follow man-made laws promulgated by the Shaytaan on the lips of his supporters which are contrary to that which Allah has prescribed on the lips of His Messengers (blessings and peace of Allah be upon them), there is no doubt that they are kaafirs and mushriks, except for the one whom Allah has blinded to the light of Revelation and left to go astray.

And he said:

As for the legal system that is contrary to the laws prescribed by the Creator of heaven and earth, ruling according to it constitutes disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth, such as the claim that giving precedence to the male over the female in inheritance is not fair and it is necessary to make them equal in inheritance, and the claim that plural marriage is unjust, or that divorce is unfair to the woman, and that stoning, cutting off the hand and so on are barbaric acts that should not be done to people, and so on.

Making this kind of system rule the lives of people in society and their wealth, honour, lineage, reason and religion, is disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth and a transgression against the divine system prescribed by the One Who created all things and Who knows best what is in their best interests; may He be glorified and exalted far above having any lawgiver besides Him.

“Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?”

[al-Shoora 42:21]

“Say (O Muhammad to these polytheists): ‘Tell me, what provision Allaah has sent down to you! And you have made of it lawful and unlawful.’ Say (O Muhammad): ‘Has Allaah permitted you (to do so), or do you invent a lie against Allaah?’”

[Yoonus 10:59]

“Say: ‘Verily, those who invent a lie against Allaah will never be successful’”

[Yoonus 10:69].

End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan, commentary on the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26].

End quote from Majma‘ al-Fatawa wa Rasaa’il al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 6/161.

"A Decade of Insanity"

Bob Prechter is a consumate "Bear" but the statistical tool he uses here, namely analyzing opinions and sentiment with regard to the futures markets, documents a scary economic reality. In fact, while in the short term free money from the Fed and stimulus may produce profits and prevent catastrophe, it looks like everyone has very bearish perspectives when it comes to the long term and that is across assett class. It is an important argument to understand as economics becomes more and more about perception and less abuot fundamentals.  Someday, fundamentals bite and we are witnessing the bankruptcy of the global economy overtime.  Unless we build an alternaitve and mobilize now, when gradual declien culminates in crescendo and becomes cataclysim, saying "I told you so" will mean absolutely nothing.

Sweden's Far Right Gains Seat in Parliament

Voters in Sweden’s Parliamentary Elections yesterday gave 5.7 percent of the vote to Sweden's Far Right Social Democratic Party.  This will give the party 20 seats in Sweden's Parliament. The political platform they ran on was largely anti-immigration and especially addressed the issue of Muslim immigrants.  Below is a commercial run in order to call attention to Burqa-clad social service recipients taking from grandma's pension. It is with near certainty, that the future will see a rise in right-wing political representation in nearly all Western European nations. Part of this rise will certainly be associated with rising Muslim populations and economic decline.  In global conditions, that are becoming eerily reminiscent of the World War II era, one must wonder if the path is being paved in the West for a return to old fashioned fascism. 

Niall Ferguson - Will Debt Trigger the Collapse of the Anglo-American Empire?

Niall Ferguson discusses the end of empires and the economics of debt repayment overtaking defense spending as a potential cause of withdrawal for imperialist exercise of power. He goes through a nice history here of imperialist practice and then discusses the implications of this point that are starting to face the U.S. today.

As we see the impossibility of a world dominated by America with everybody either falling into line with policies that serve U.S. national interests or getting obliterated by the military might that backs the American Empire's soft power, we must recognize that empires have never recognized that it is no longer feasible to maintain empire, contrary to what many scholars of international relations would have us believe. Historians like Chalmers Johnson may cite the British as an example for the U.S., an example of an empire that accepted it could no longer maintain its overseas operations and colonialism and withdrew peacefully into a sovereign nation state. However, this concept of the history of British Empire is in many ways false.

The two World Wars were initiated largely as a result of the necessary manipulations that must occur in international relations when there is an imperialist power. Germany's rise prior to WWI initiated heavy behind-the-scenes manipulations largely influenced by the British power and WWII witnessed fascism backed by international financier and corporate Anglo-powers built in order to take on the Russian threat turn unpredictably towards Western Europe. It was perhaps this strategic blunder that ended British imperialist divide-and-conquer rulership, but with the rise of American power in the post World War II era the industrial and military might of America was to be used in order to protect the speculative financial power of the City of London and its creation within America on Wall Street. Thus the British Empire never ended, it became the Anglo-American Empire.

Out of the ashes of World War II rose a neo-imperialism that has used indigenous rather than foreign colonial masters, international financial institutions, and American military intervention to create a world that still sees the majority of the southern hemispheres natural resources go to the Western Europe and America. The machinations for another World War are being set forth before our eyes as a result of the collapse of the financialized, imperialist order and even as the sovereign nation state status of America is destroyed we must know that the real enemy of humanity is a set of principles and actors that embody and encompass them, not the American nation state.

We must rightfully enter a war with the ideology that is imperialism, the economics of Pharaoh; where religion is wealth, power and satanic passion for the life of this world. In failing to recognize that Niall Ferguson, as a realist and Harvard/Oxford defender of “benefit of empire” (as if there is such a thing), fails to grasp that the world today can only be understood by looking at ideology. Seeing the world through a lens of nation states that serve their own interests prevents one from truly understanding that the American Empire is not one country's arrogance forced on the world through a series of private influences that span the globe. The American Empire is a truly global endeavor. While the bankruptcy of its military means it may not continue in long protracted wars that does not rule out the possibility of creating World War III in order to preserve Western civilization’s domination. Therefore, this lecture and the lecturer are important to listen to, but only in so far as they help to create an antithetical Islamic solution for the global empire today will the world be able to work its way from underneath the shackles of imperialist control.

For an important historical breakdown of the efforts of the British Empire to maintain their imperialism even after realizing that British might was no longer suitable for their cause please read Carol Quigley's book published posthumously in 1981.... the book was written in the 1940's but captured a pretty good snapshot of the mechanisms for power and control that went on to infiltrate America and create the conditions for indigenous imperialism there today. The pdf is below, and these themes will become all the important at islampolicy.com as we build our delivery capacities and develop increased conversations here over time. Please take time to watch, listen and read to the material on this site in the meantime as we prepare to initiate the discourse that will contribute to Islamic resistance to the satanic imperialist mechanisms that govern the world today and substitute them with divine laws and liberation based on obedience and understanding in submission to Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (saws).

Carol Quiqley Anglo-American Establishment 285p

Crisis group report: Drums of War, Israel and the "Axis of Resistance"

The following is a report by Crisis group. The report (read HERE) looks at the geopolitical interplay between Israel,Syria, Iran, the Lebanese state, Hezbollah and other regional actors.

One important highlight is that the report points out that any future war between Israel and Hezbollah is likely to be more intense, with greater numbers of civilian casualties and greater possibility of regionalisation.

"Four years after the last war, the situation in the Levant is
paradoxical. It is exceptionally quiet and uniquely dangerous,
both for the same reason. The build-up in military
forces and threats of an all-out war that would spare neither
civilians nor civilian infrastructure, together with the
worrisome prospect of its regionalisation, are effectively
deterring all sides. Today, none of the parties can soberly
contemplate the prospect of a conflict that would be uncontrolled,
unprecedented and unscripted."

Dahiya doctrine

In the aftermath of the 2006 war the Israeli Government established the Winograd commission. The commsion concluded that Israel failed to achieve a military victory, that in their words " the 2nd Lebanon war [was] … a serious missed opportunity. Israel initiated a long war, which ended without its clear military victory. A semi-military organisation of a few thousand men resisted, for a few weeks, the strongest army in the Middle East, which enjoyed full air superiority and size and technology advantages. The barrage of rockets aimed at Israel’s civilian population lasted throughout the war, and the IDF did not provide an effective response to it"

Furthermore despite that deaths of around 1200 civilians (many of whom were children), and billions of dollars worth of damage to Lebanon's infrastructure, the commission added Israeli military had not used sufficient force, and that Israel deterrence capability required in future wars a greater disproportionate use of force:

"Israel cannot survive in this region, and cannot live in it in peace or at least non-war, unless people in Israel itself and in its surroundings believe that Israel has the political and military leadership, military capabilities, and social robustness that will allow her to deter those of its neighbors who wish to harm her, and to prevent them – if necessary through the use of military force – from achieving their goal"

These conclusion lead to the development of the 'Dahiya doctrine' (Dahiya refers to the southern Beirut neighborhood that was devastated by Israeli air strikes in 2006). This new doctrine is best explanied by quoting Major General Eizencourt, head of Israel’s Northern Command.

"What happened to the Dahiya neighbourhood... will happen to each village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force and inflict huge damage and destruction …. The next war must be decided quickly, aggressively, and without seeking international
approval …. Hizbollah understands very well that firing from villages will lead to their destruction."

The report is well worth read as it provides the reader with lot of information regarding the political situation and the possibility of war breaking out in the near future.

Chalmers Johnson Discusses American Empire and the war Against Al Qaeda in 2004

This is a segment of an 8 part video, but the assessment is still true today as even under Obama these types of governmental practice resemble the end of empire and repetition of imperialist mistakes of the past.

In the same vein, a great editorial from Mark Levine (HERE) informs that Obama is very indistinct from Bush's Terror Policy. It says:

The false choice of human rights vs. national security 

Instead, President Obama has essentially continued almost every major Bush security policy, either by default or design. State secrets, targeted killings, renditions and indefinite detention, opposing the right of habeas corpus, preventing victims of admitted torture from seeking judicial redress, expanding the Afghan war while moving - however gingerly - to secure a long-term presence in Iraq; all these must surely be making Bush, and especially Cheney, happy and wealthier men.

As Michael Hayden, Bush's last CIA Director, put it in a recent interview, "Obama has been as aggressive as Bush" in defending executive prerogatives and powers that have enabled and sustained the ‘war on terror.’ 

But just how close to the dark side Obama has moved became evident in the last couple of weeks, specifically from two angles. 

In the first, a federal appeals court overturned a lower court decision allowing former CIA prisoners to sue companies that participated in their rendition and torture in overseas prisons. In deciding that the plaintiffs could not sue despite an ample public (rather than classified) record supporting their claims, Judge Raymond C. Fisher supported the Obama Administration's contention that, in his words, sometimes there is a "painful conflict between human rights and national security" in which the former must be sacrificed to preserve the latter. 

But this is an utterly ludicrous concept, since a core reason for so much of the frustration, nihilistic anger, radicalisation and ultimately violence involved in Islamist terrorism and insurgencies lies precisely in the long term, structural denial of the most basic human rights by governments in the region, the lion's share of whom continue to be supported by the United States despite their behaviour on the grounds of ‘national security’. 

What neither Attorney General Eric Holder nor the President seems to understand is that there can be no contradiction between human rights and national security, since the absence of human rights can never but lead to a lack of security. 

What's more, the very idea in the globalised era that one country's "national" security (especially that of the global "hyper-power," the United States) can be defined apart from and in contrast to the security of other nations is so ridiculous. One wonders how supposedly intelligent people, like former law school professors - turned presidents, can in good faith imagine and declare it

Freedom of Expression - Egypt Style!

Al Ahram, Egyptian State Media is under some criticism from anti-government advocates like the April 6 Youth Movement for doctoring the photograph above to show Hosni Mubarek at the front of a pack of politicians when Obama visited Cairo last year.  Apparently the Egyptian Regime, the second largest recipient of U.S. aid after Israel, feels the need to promote its own prominence and/or to steer its citizens into believing the tail really wags the dog.  The real, undoctored photo is below.  

Census: 1 in 7 Americans live in poverty, Ms. Obama "being first lady is hell"

Having bragged about an economic recovery a few months ago, before realizing that a positive job report was heavily skewed due to census hiring, Americans got their first taste of the most recent census report today as results showed that 1 in 7 Americans is now in poverty.  

AP reports HERE:

The overall poverty rate climbed to 14.3 percent, or 43.6 million people, the Census Bureau said Thursday in its annual report on the economic well-being of U.S. households. The report covers 2009, President Barack Obama's first year in office.

The poverty rate climbed from 13.2 percent, or 39.8 million people, in 2008.

The share of Americans without health coverage rose from 15.4 percent to 16.7 percent — or 50.7 million people — mostly because of the loss of employer-provided health insurance during the recession. Congress passed a health overhaul this year to address rising numbers of the uninsured, but the main provisions will not take effect until 2014.

The new figures come at a politically sensitive time, just weeks before the Nov. 2 congressional elections, when voters restive about high unemployment and the slow pace of economic improvement will decide whether to keep Democrats in power or turn to Republicans.

On the eve of what is certainly destined to be a major round of victorious congressional elections for Republicans in November, news couldn't get worse for the Obama Administration. These statistics reflect that the Obama policy of bailing out banks, healthcare providers, and wealthy stockholders has actually plunged the populace into poverty. 

In other news, coincident to these horrifying stats, it was reported that the First Lady, Michelle Obama, just off her ritzy vacation to Spain and under intense criticism for lavish spending while the country goes to squat,  is apparently feeling the stress and pressure of a failed presidency.  In a new book soon to be released by Ms.Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, the First Lady of France, claims she asked Mrs. Obama about her new role. According to the book, Mrs. Obama replied: "It's hell. I can't stand it."  Just when you thought it couldn't get worse!

Two excellent critical pieces on Obama's Infrastructure Bank and his False Populism

Both of these articles incorporate the principles that drive good governance, namely that government is instituted to create the infrastructure that facilitates an effective, free economy for all - not for a rich propertied class. I was trying to find time to write a similiar cirtique. I think these will do and are must reads for those tryng to understand the role of government in infrastructure and how infrastructure spending can effectivle stimulate a population (notice I didn't say economy). 

First is Black Agenda Report writer Glen Ford (HERE). He says,

The president's proposed bank is yet another ploy to create a new windfall for the private bankers on Wall Street."

And next is Economist Michael Hudson (HERE).  He says,

I can smell the newest giveaway looming a mile off. The Wall Street bailout, health-insurance giveaway and support of real estate prices rather than mortgage-debt write-downs were bad enough, not to mention the Oil War¹s Afghan extension. But now comes a topper: the $50 billion transportation infrastructure plan that Obama proposed in Milwaukee ­ cynically enough, on Labor Day. It looks like the Thatcherite Public-Private Partnership, Britain¹s notorious giveaway to the City of London underwriters. The financial giveaway had the effect of increasing prices for basic infrastructure services by building in heavy financial fees ­ guaranteed for the banks, who lent the money that banks and property owners used to pay in taxes in more progressive times... 

Al Qaeda Leader Releases Video

Ayman Zawahiri, Al Qaeda #2, released this tape yesterday. Responding to the video message released by Zawahiri four days after the ninth anniversary of 9/11 attacks, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs Philip J. Crowley said that Washington's relations with "countries in the (militancy-infected) regions around the world are in ascendance and it is al-Qaeda - and particularly the core al-Qaeda - that is in retreat."

The tape fails to mention the attacks of September 11, 2001, and is the first 9/11 anniversary tape to do so nine years later. It concentrates heavily on Pakistan and critizes heavily the Zardari regime, appealing to Islamic identity in the nation and then onto other Islamic nations under heavy Western influence.  It seems to mark the beginning of Al-Qaeda's new approach to confronting the rhetoric and changing nature of the battle for Hearts and Minds in the Muslim world.  Zawahiri clearly differentiates between the jihadi vanguard and the rest of the Muslim nation and is thereby essentially advising all Muslims to select Islam as their primary identity but not to be deceived by moderate movements and sufi platforms. His critique is especially critical of certain aspects of the Ikwan al-Muslimeen, including their support for Muhammad Al-Baradei, secular reformist in Egypt, Sharif Ahmed in Somalia, and Yusef Qaradawi's moderation movement from Qatar.  While, not altogether a different approach, the message was geared less towards a jihadi population all too familiar with the analysis he provides and more towards enlightening the general populations in Pakistan and the Arab world especially with regard to the reality of politicla machinations at work in a war that is apparently altering its facets and components. Al Qaeda has struggled to get masses of Muslims to understand the intentions it has espoused since day one, namely to create a void that would allow citizens of the Muslim world to wrest themselves from tyrannical leaders propped up by western support.  Only time will tell how effective the message is with regard to the mass majority. It is likely that with the recent polarizations and political change coming at the end of the year, that more will pay attention to the argument of Al-Qaedists, but still highly unlikely that their message will resonate with the mass. Zawahiri claimed that "The forces of jihad have emerged victorious and the forces of the Crusader invasion have weakened by their wounds and exhausted by the hemorrhage of human and financial losses." The whole video is available (embedded and for download) below:

download here

media is included for educational purposes only

Why Nations opposed to American Empire can Never have Free Press

Most Americans do not know that the U.S. overthrew democracy in Iran in 1953 with the covert operation that took down Muhammad Mossadeq, a populist.  All Iranians are all too aware of US intervention. That coup, like others, largely utilized the power of press in creating false reports to sway public opinion.  Today countries like Iran, Venezuela, Sudan, and other non-state actors deal with incessant and deliberate propaganda. The CIA's 1953 overthrow of the elected leader of Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh was preceded by a media smear campaign by the CIA, which is estimated to have controlled 4/5 of Tehran's newspapers. Such a high degree of control and the fact that the CIA "succeeded" in its mission is enough to make you question how much influence and control the CIA has over the American politicians and media.

Latin America has largely woken up to this reality after 50-plus years of such distorted reality. As we see the Obama Administration return to "smart power" calls for the use of clandestine power over raw force, we will also see the return of "human rights" agendas.  Human Rights is a convenient platform for criticism of people like Ahmadinejad or Hugo Chavez, but never about US puppets and allies.  It is important that people seek verification and depth in dealing with the media.  With regard to the Iranian conflict, something we will cover in detail as time goes on, we have posted a relevent, albeit slightly skewed, lecture recently held at the Middle East Institute below.
Summary: 
The Middle East Institute is proud to host a discussion with Trita Parsi and Michael Singh on the prospects for a diplomatic solution to the Iran nuclear crisis in the wake of recently imposed UN and US sanctions. Their discussion will draw upon a forthcoming Middle East Journal article entitled "The Case Against the Case Against Iran" written pseudonymously by a European diplomat, who argues for greater engagement by regional actors like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China to mediate and mitigate Iran's nuclear ambitions. What are the next steps the U.S. and the international community should be taking? Parsi and Singh will shed light on strategies under consideration.

Why Are We All in Debt

The Current global economic crisis is fundamentally a crisis of indebtedness. This is the natural consequence of a system that creates money by loaning it into existence with interest. Around 97% of all money is created through this process. The consequence of this are many and perverse.

Of this system Josiah Stamp (President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain) said:

'Banking was conceived in iniquity, and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen, they will create enough deposits, to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain slaves of Bankers, and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits'

The following is a brief documentary from Tarek Diwany, of islamic-finance.com and Zest Advisory, outlining the history and workings of this system and the consequences of it.

Huffington Post Reveals Tim Geithner meets with Bankers more than Government Officials

This is another telling indicator of who those in the Treasury and at the Fed actually work with and for.  Huffington Post reports today here that,

When it comes to spending time with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the head of Goldman Sachs may have an easier time getting a meeting than either the Speaker of the House or the Senate Majority Leader.

Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein has shown up on Geithner's calendar at least 38 times through March since the Treasury Secretary took office in January 2009, three more entries than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and 13 more than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to a copy of Geithner's daily log recently published online by the Treasury Department.

All told, Geithner met with, spoke to, or attempted to secure conversations with Wall Street chieftains at least 49 times during the five-month period ending in March 2010, a slight increase from the 37 entries on his calendar during the previous five-month period.

But it's still far below his first five months in office, when Geithner met with chief executives from firms like Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and BlackRock at least 76 times -- more calendar entries than for the heads of the regional Federal Reserve banks, who are the top overseers of systemically-important banks like JPMorgan, Citi, Bank of America and Wells Fargo -- or for top members of Congress like Reid, Pelosi, their Republican counterparts, and the heads of the Senate and House committees overseeing financial institutions and economic policy.

  contact log is available in pdf here

Christiana Ampour - "This Week" - Imam Rauf and Islam in America

Panel responds to Imam Rauf's assertions made HERE

AMANPOUR: Tell me about your plans for the Islamic center.  Are you going to keep it at Park 51, where you proposed?

RAUF: The decisions that I will make -- that we will make -- will be predicated on what is best for everybody.

AMANPOUR: How do you decide that?

RAUF: That's been very difficult and very challenging, because, unfortunately, the -- the discourse has been, to a certain extent, hijacked by the radicals. The radicals on both sides, the radicals in the United States and the radicals in the Muslim world, feed off each other. And to a certain extent, the attention that they've been able to get by the media has even aggravated the problem.

AMANPOUR: 71 percent of New Yorkers say it should be moved. What is your main reason for not wanting to move it?

RAUF: My major concern with moving it is that the headline in the Muslim world will be Islam is under attack in America, this will strengthen the radicals in the Muslim world, help their recruitment, this will put our people -- our soldiers, our troops, our embassies, our citizens -- under attack in the Muslim world and we have expanded and given and fueled terrorism.

AMANPOUR: Do you think that is a legitimate reason not to move it?

RAUF: It is an extremely important consideration.

AMANPOUR: . People are saying that because you intimated that it would cause great anger in Muslim countries around the world, it could threaten the United States. And people are saying that you made a threat.

Is that -- was that your intention?

RAUF: I have never made a threat. I've never made a threat, never expressed a threat, never -- I've never -- I would never threaten violence ever, because I am a man of peace, dedicated to peace.

We have two audiences. We have the American audience and we have the Muslim audience. And this issue has riveted the attention of the whole Muslim world. And whatever we do and whatever say and how we move and the discourse about it is being watched very, very closely. And if we make the wrong move, it will only expand and strengthen the voice of the radicals and the extremists.

Al Jazeerah - Empire - Islam and America

A rather interesting discussion on Al Jazeerah English yesterday discussing Empire and US policy in the context of growing anti-Islmaic trends inside America. Chris Hedges really analyzes the situation well.

On the 9th anniversary of 9/11, the fault lines between the US and the Muslim world seem to have expanded. As America's internal cultural wars begin to affect its foreign policy, what are the options for President Obama? Which is the real US: The one that fights for Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the one that considers US Muslims as the enemy within? And have Osama bin Laden's hopes of driving a wedge between the US and the Muslim world become a reality?