Posts Tagged ‘EEAS’

Why the Euro is doomed – the German households net wealth is not EVEN HALF of that compared to Italians

9 mars, 2013

So the German people/taxpayers who so far have paid most of the bailouts of the bankrupt euro states (Greece, Spain. Portugal, Ireland etc), and were the bankrupt states insists on Germany paying EVEN more to “save the euro” (together with Sweden, Finland etc), don’t even have HALF THE NET WEALTH of the peoples they are bailing out!

No wonder that the German Bundesbank is keeping this report secret. Because I don’t think the people in Germany is going to be “very happy” when they discover the truth.

They have keep their economy in reasonably good shape and paid their taxes. Now they have to pay for the ones who didn’t.

And there is a new Germany Anti-Euro Party with some very prominent figures behind it. Its founders are a collection of some of the country’s top economists and academics, business people, journalist etc.

And by then way, this would never ever happen in Sweden. Because here, these same people, are the ones that have relentlessly driven (together with our “dear” politicians), the integration with EU and moving most of the power to Brussels. What a contrast.

See a few of my many previous EU posts here:

The economic mess and structural problems in EU and US – Part 1

Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians

This is why the Euro is doomed

EU a stupid empire on purpose

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty – Now also a crony Bankocracy)

               (If you click on the graphs they become bigger)

20130301_EU2

Here are some of these articles about the growing poverty in Germany and the cover up of these facts. You have to brush up on your German to read most of these.

(My bold and underline)

Household Finance and Consumption Network (HFCN)

http://www.ecb.int/home/html/researcher_hfcn.en.html

Notenbanker zögern Bericht über Ungleichheit hinaus

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/wirtschaftspolitik/armut-und-reichtum/verteilung-von-vermoegen-notenbanker-zoegern-bericht-ueber-ungleichheit-hinaus-12105481.html

A “Politically Explosive” Secret: Italians Are Over Twice As Wealthy As Germans

http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/2013/3/8/a-politically-explosive-secret-italians-are-over-twice-as-we.html

In December 2006, the ECB established the HFSC network of survey specialists, statisticians, and economists from its own ranks, national central banks of the Eurozone, and statistical institutes. The acronym stood for Household Finance and Consumption Survey. It would collect “micro-level structural information” on household wealth. A massive bureaucratic undertaking. Surveys went out in 2010. Results are now ready. No one in Europe had ever done a survey on that scale before. And no one might ever do it again. Because, in the era of bailouts and wealth-transfers, the results are so explosive that the Bundesbank is keeping its report secret—and word has leaked out why.

The surveys were conducted on a national basis, with each central bank publishing its own report. They would then be combined and summarized by the ECB into a cohesive picture of how wealthy—or how poor—people in various parts of the Eurozone were. A number of countries already published their reports, including Italy and Austria.

What the Austrian National Bank found was not pretty (20-page PDF). The considerable wealth in Austria was very unevenly distributed. The wealthiest 5% owned nearly half of the country’s wealth. Their median wealth was €1.7 million in diversified assets. The lower 50% owned only 4% of the country’s wealth. Of them, 83% rented their homes. Their median wealth was a measly €11,000 consisting usually of a car and a savings account. That’s half of the people! And 10% had a net wealth of less than €1,000.

This unequal distribution of wealth created a huge gap between median income (half the people earned more, the other half less) of €76,000 and average income of €265,000 (pushed up by a small number of extremely wealthy households). And that’s why some countries don’t even publish average income values. Too much truth would hurt.

Germany’s data is likely to be similar—but the Bundesbank is treating its report like a secret. Because the results are, let’s say, awkward for two reasons. The highly unequal distribution of wealth is one of them. The German government already went through wild gyrations late last year, and now again, over its Poverty Report that exposed some inconvenient facts that were then edited out—something that was leaked immediately, and it caused a ruckus [read…. Censored: Poverty Report in Germany].

Italy is the other issue. But it may be too hot for the Bundesbank to touch. Italy’s report (142-page PDF) finds that median household net wealth has increased 56% since 1991. And from 2008 to 2010, it increased by about 5% annually, despite the crisis!

But the wealth of German households stagnated during much of that time while they paid taxes out of their noses. And now they might learn that Italy’s median household wealth is €163,875—while Germany’s is closer to Austria’s, around €76,000. Less than half!

“Politically explosive,” sources at the Bundesbank whispered to the FAZ.

These reports show that in some countries, like Italy, where government finances have been in crisis, median household wealth is actually greater than in some financially healthy countries where governments have kept deficits and debts down.

Germany’s federal government only had a minuscule deficit in 2012. But high taxes and the citizens’ greater willingness to pay them—though cheating is a national sport—have over the years extracted a lot of wealth from the people and transferred it to the government. In Italy, people have been more adept at hanging on to their wealth. To the detriment of government finances. Other studies have shown similar trends, but never on such a scale with such detail, and in this “harmonized” and easily comparable manner.

It could stir up a firestorm in Germany. It’s not just jealousy. Strung-out German taxpayers would have to be bamboozled into bailing out the mountain of Italian government debt that the Italians, whose median wealth is twice that of Germans, refused to pay for. It won’t sit well. Not at all. It could become a political nightmare for Chancellor Angela Merkel, who faces an election in a few months and must keep any kind of tumult out of the scenery.

If the report ever sees the light of the day in unvarnished form—not a certainty given the debacle of the Poverty Report—Bundesbank statisticians will be trying to explain away the difference between countries like Italy and Germany. Household wealth is particularly high in countries with high homeownership rates, they will argue. In countries where renting is popular, like Germany, a considerable part of the housing stock is owned by the government and rented out in a subsidized manner. Thus the wealth is public, etc. etc. Because the bailout saga must go on. The messy reality that Germans can’t afford to bail out their richer neighbors must not be allowed to interfere with the grand and glorious saga of the euro.

Every country in the Eurozone has its own collection of big fat lies that politicians and eurocrats have served up in order to make the euro and the subsequent bailouts or austerity measures less unappetizing. Here are some from the German point of view….. Ten Big Fat Lies To Keep The Euro Dream Alive.”

The Italian report here (I BILANCI DELLE FAMIGLIE ITALIANE NELL’ANNO 2010):

http://www.bancaditalia.it/statistiche/indcamp/bilfait/boll_stat/suppl_06_12new.pdf

Part of the Austrian report here:

http://www.hfcs.at/de/img/fakten_zur_vermoegensverteilung_in_oesterreich_tcm14-251411.pdf

20130306_EU_0

The report “on Poverty and Wealth” (Lebenslagen in Deutschland) here:

http://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDF-Publikationen-DinA4/a334-4-armuts-reichtumsbericht-2013.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

Immer mehr Münchner sind arm

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/armutsbericht-immer-mehr-muenchner-sind-arm-1.1501067

Bundesregierung schönt Armutsbericht

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/einkommensverteilung-in-deutschland-bundesregierung-schoent-armutsbericht-1.1535166

Censored: Poverty Report in Germany

http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/2012/11/28/censored-poverty-report-in-germany.html

“On September 17, the German Labor Ministry sent a draft report “on Poverty and Wealth” to the other ministries to be rubber-stamped. Only the final report, once sanctified by Chancellor Angela Merkel, would be made public. The draft was supposed to remain hidden. But it seeped to the surface almost immediately. And it was hot. Too hot.

The massive data (PDF, 535 pages) described the tough reality that many people faced in Germany—a reality that got tougher every year. For example, in 1998, the lower 50% of the population owned 4% of all private wealth, while the upper 10% owned 45%. By 2008, the lower 50% owned only 1%, but the upper 10% had increased its share to 53% (at the expense also of the in-between 40%). Other reports have painted similar pictures.

The poverty report by Germany’s statistical agency showed that the “poverty rate” in Germany has been creeping up: in 2008, it was 15.5%; in 2009 it was 15.6%, and in 2010 it was 15.8%. Particularly hard-hit were people under 65 who lived alone. Their poverty rate was 36.1%. For single-parent households, it was 37.1%. The city of Munich issued its own poverty report. By taking into account Munich’s high cost of living, it found that nearly a fifth of its residents lived in poverty.”

Germany‘s New Anti-Euro Party

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/new-party-in-germany-goes-after-euro-skeptic-voters-a-887744.html

“A new party is forming this spring, intent on abandoning European efforts to prop up the common currency. And its founders are a collection of some of the country’s top economists and academics.”

Named Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany), the group has a clear goal: ”the dissolution of the euro in favor of national currencies or smaller currency unions.” The party also demands an end to aid payments and the dismantling of the European Stability Mechanism bailout fund.

”Democracy is eroding,” reads a statement on its website (German only). ”The will of the people regarding (decisions relating to the euro) is never queried and is not represented in parliament. The government is depriving voters of a voice through disinformation, is pressuring constitutional organs, like parliament and the Constitutional Court, and is making far-reaching decisions in committees that have no democratic legitimacy.”

Prominent Supporters

Alternative for Germany appears to be different, though it has yet to produce a party manifesto. Its impressive list of prominent supporters includes a large number of conservative and economically liberal university professors. The most notable name on the list is Hans-Olaf Henkel, the former president of the Federation of German Industries, but it also includes such economists as Joachim Starbatty and Wilhelm Hankel, who were part of the group that challenged Greek bailout aid at Germany’s Constitutional Court.

Main initiator Bernd Lucke, a professor of macro-economics from Hamburg, was a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats for 33 years before leaving the party in 2011 as a result of euro bailout efforts. ”The current, so-called rescue policies are exclusively focused on short-term interests, primarily those of the banks,” Lucke told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung this week.”

Here is a list of some the supporters:

http://www.alternativefuer.de/

“Die Alternative für Deutschland wird unterstützt von

Dr. Konrad Adam, Journalist (FAZ, Die Welt) und Publizist.

Walther Adler, Oberregierungsrat, Statistisches Bundesamt, Diez.

Prof. Dr. Hans–Günter Appel, Beiratsvorsitzender Nationale Anti–EEG–Bewegung.

Prof. Dr. Ronald Asch, Geschichtswissenschaften, Freiburg.

Dr. Bruno Bandulet, Journalist und Verleger, Bad Kissingen.

Prof. Dr. Charles Blankart, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Berlin.

Prof. Dr. Ulrich Blum, Präsident des Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung Halle a. D.

Prof. Dr. Ursula Braun–Moser, Mitglied des Europäischen Parlaments (CDU) 1984–1994.

Peter Christ, vormals Leiter der Wirtschaftsredaktion ”Die Zeit” und Chefredakteur von Stuttgarter Zeitung, Manager Magazin, Sächsische Zeitung u. a., Luzern.

Prof. Dr. Ludwig Cromme, Mathematik, Cottbus.

Wolfgang von Eichborn, Richter, vormals Referent der SPD–Bundestagsfraktion, Ebersberg.

Dieter Farwick, Brigadegeneral a. D. und Publizist, Sigmaringen–Laiz.

Prof. Dr.–Ing. Thomas Albert Fechter, Maschinenbau, Wiesbaden.

Prof. Dr. Herbert Frohnhofen, Systematische Theologie, Mainz.

Dr. Alexander Gauland, Staatssekretär a. D., Potsdam.

Ass. Jur. Albrecht Glaser, Stadtkämmerer der Stadt Frankfurt/Main a. D., Bürgermeister a. D., Niedenstein.

Prof. Dr. Andrea Gubitz, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Frankfurt.

Prof. Dr. Gernot Gutmann, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Rektor Universität zu Köln a. D.

Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Hankel, Präsident der Hessischen Landesbank a. D., Königswinter.

Michael Heendorf, Kriminalbeamter a. D., Magdeburg.

Prof. Dr. Ing. E.h. Hans–Olaf Henkel, Praesident der IBM Europa, des Bundesverbandes der Deutschen Industrie (BDI) und der Leibniz–Gemeinschaft a.D.

Prof. Dr. Carsten Herrmann–Pillath, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Frankfurt.

Prof. Dr. Stefan Homburg, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Hannover.

Dr. Wolfgang Hönig, Generalbevollmächtigter a. D. der Commerzbank AG, Frankfurt.

Dr. Johannes Hüdepohl, Sprecher Bündnis Bürgerwille, Ahrweiler.

Markus Keller, Aktiva Consult GmbH, Frankfurt.

Gerhard Koning, Bankvorstand a. D., Kelkheim.

Wolfgang Kräher, Dipl.–Ing. Werkstofftechnik, Bad Dürkheim.

Caroline Kreusler, Klipp+Klar Unternehmenskommunikation, Hamburg.

Prof. Dr. Jörn Kruse, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Hamburg.

Dr. Klaus–Peter Last, freiberuflicher Softwarespezialist, 1991–1998 Landesschatzmeister von Bündnis90/Die Grünen Mecklenburg–Vorpommern.

Prof. Dr. Bernd Lucke, Hochschullehrer, Universität Hamburg.

Prof. Dr. Helga Luckenbach, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Gießen.

Dagmar Metzger, wordstatt GmbH, München.

Prof. Dr. Dirk Meyer, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Hamburg.

Stefan Milkereit, Steuerberater, Biebertal.

Klaus Müller, Horländer GmbH, Speyer.

Dr. Frauke Petry, Geschäftsführerin purinvent GmbH, Leipzig.

Prof. Manfred Philipp, Chemie, The CityUniversity of New York.

Prof. Dr. Hayo Reimers, Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Gießen.

Martin Renner, Cosmed Marketing und Kommunikation GmbH, Wuppertal.

Prof. Dr. Christian Rennert, Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Köln.

Prof. Dr. Gisbert Richard, Direktor der Universitäts–Augenklinik, Hamburg.

Dr. Thomas Rietzschel, Autor und Journalist, Roßbach.

Dr. Oliver Safarowsky, Chemiker und Betriebswirt, Köln.

Prof. Dr. Karl Albrecht Schachtschneider, Öffentliches Recht, Hamburg.

Bodo Schmidt, Kölnische Haus– und Grundstücksverwaltung, Köln.

Prof. Dr. Peter Schneider, Erziehungswissenschaft, Paderborn.

Hansjörg Schrade, ecofit, Stv. Vorsitzender Aktionsbündnis Direkte Demokratie, Reutlingen.

Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schöhl, Wirtschaftsjournalismus, Darmstadt.

Wolf–Joachim Schünemann, ASS Versicherungsmakler GmbH.

Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Seeger, Neurochirurgie, Freiburg.

Dr. Bernhard Seitz, Aktionsbündnis Direkte Demokratie, Stuttgart.

Dr. Dieter Spethmann, Vorstandsvorsitzender Thyssen AG a. D.

Prof. Dr. Michael Stahl, Geschichtswissenschaften, Darmstadt/Berlin.

Prof. Dr. Joachim Starbatty, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Tübingen.

Dr. Norbert Stenzel, Geschäftsführer Wetterauer Lieferbeton, Bad Nauheim.

Prof. Dr. Roland Vaubel, Volkswirtschaftslehre, Mannheim.

Dr. Katharina Vocke–Schöhl, Geschäftsführerin und Dozentin, Darmstadt.

Prof. Dr. Heiner Willenberg, Didaktik der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, Hamburg”

Some points from the programme (again, you have to brush up on your German):

http://www.alternativefuer.de/programm.html

“Unser Standpunkt

In ernster Sorge vor politischen und wirtschaftlichen Fehlentwicklungen in Deutschland und in der Europäischen Union haben wir die Partei ”Alternative für Deutschland” gegründet. Die europäische Schulden- und Währungskrise hat viele Menschen davon überzeugt, dass die Altparteien zu einer nachhaltigen, transparenten, bürgernahen, rechtsstaatlichen und demokratischen Politik nicht imstande oder nicht willens sind. Wir formulieren Alternativen zu einer angeblich alternativlosen Politik. Dabei bejahen wir uneingeschränkt die freiheitlich-demokratische Grundordnung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und die im Grundgesetz und in den Römischen Verträgen angelegte friedliche Einigung Europas.“

 Währungspolitik

 •Wir fordern eine geordnete Auflösung des Euro-Währungsgebietes. Deutschland braucht den Euro nicht. Anderen Ländern schadet der Euro.

•Wir fordern die Wiedereinführung nationaler Währungen oder die Schaffung kleinerer und stabilerer Währungsverbünde. Die Wiedereinführung der DM darf kein Tabu sein.

•Wir fordern eine Änderung der Europäischen Verträge, um jedem Staat ein Ausscheiden aus dem Euro zu ermöglichen. Jedes Volk muss demokratisch über seine Währung entscheiden dürfen.

•Wir fordern, dass Deutschland dieses Austrittsrecht aus dem Euro erzwingt, indem es weitere Hilfskredite des ESM mit seinem Veto blockiert.

•Wir fordern, dass die Kosten der sogenannten Rettungspolitik nicht vom Steuerzahler getragen werden. Banken, Hedge-Fonds und private Großanleger sind die Nutznießer dieser Politik. Sie müssen zuerst dafür geradestehen.

•Wir fordern, dass hoffnungslos überschuldete Staaten wie Griechenland durch einen Schuldenschnitt entschuldet werden. Banken müssen ihre Verluste selbst tragen oder zu Lasten ihrer privaten Großgläubiger stabilisiert werden.

•Wir fordern ein sofortiges Verbot des Ankaufs von Schrottpapieren durch die Europäische Zentralbank. Inflation darf nicht die Ersparnisse der Bürger aufzehren

Europapolitik

•Wir fordern ein Europa souveräner Staaten mit einem gemeinsamen Binnenmarkt. Wir wollen in Freundschaft und guter Nachbarschaft zusammenleben.

•Wir fordern, das Budgetrecht den nationalen Parlamenten zu belassen. Eine Transferunion oder gar einen zentralisierten Europastaat lehnen wir entschieden ab.

•Wir fordern, Gesetzgebungskompetenzen zurück zu den nationalen Parlamenten zu verlagern. Über Glühbirnen und Gurkenkrümmungen kann der Bundestag alleine entscheiden.

•Wir fordern eine Reform der EU, um die Brüsseler Bürokratie abzubauen und Transparenz und Bürgernähe zu fördern.

•Wir fordern, die Bezüge der Brüsseler Beamten auf Normalmaß zurückzuführen. Es ist schändlich, dass Tausende Brüsseler Beamte mehr verdienen als die Bundeskanzlerin.

•Das europäische Parlament hat bei der Kontrolle Brüssels versagt. Wir unterstützen nachdrücklich die Positionen David Camerons, die EU durch mehr Wettbewerb und Eigenverantwortung zu verschlanken.

Staatsfinanzen und Steuern

•Wir fordern, die Schuldenbremse zu achten und die Schuldenberge abzubauen. Auch Deutschland hat viel mehr Schulden als zulässig.

•Wir fordern, dass die Haftungsrisiken aus der Euro-Rettungspolitik endlich in der Finanzplanung berücksichtigt werden. Derzeit wird den Bürgern bewusst Sand in die Augen gestreut.

•Wir fordern eine drastische Vereinfachung des Steuerrechts. Der Bürger muss verstehen können, warum er in welcher Höhe besteuert wird. Die Cleveren sollen nicht besser behandelt werden als die Ehrlichen.

•Wir fordern ein Steuersystem, in dem Reiche absolut und prozentual stärker belastet werden als Arme. (Progressive Einkommensbesteuerung).

•Wir fordern, dass die Politik sich dem Einfluss von Lobby-Gruppen entzieht und einen bürgernahen Vorschlag – bspw. den Kirchhof’schen Steuerreformvorschlag – umsetzt

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om<a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

The economic mess and structural problems in EU and US – Part 1

23 januari, 2013

EU, and the political elites behind it, is no longer a caricature or a joke. They have managed to become a joke of a caricature. An absurd Alice in Wonderland economic and political farce is playing out and the common people of Europe is, as usual, paying the price.

Here is just some updated data to some of my previous posts. It ain’t pretty to say the least!

(See my posts:

Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians

This is why the Euro is doomed

EU a stupid empire on purpose

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty – Now also a crony Bankocracy)

The EU Crisis is anything but over regardless of what the political elites are trying to tell people in Europe. The ECB may have pushed the banking crisis temporarily back by promising unlimited bond buying. Yes, dear people, read that again – UNLIMITED!

That’s your tax money spent like a drunken sailor.

But soon there is NO MONEY LEFT.

So here we go again for the 7th, 8th or is it the 9th time so far – Europe’s banking system is breaking down again. No surprise to anybody expect or politicians and bankers.

Just start adding up the GIGANTIC NUMBERS and be utterly horrified!

This is the situation that politicians and the banks have put the common people of Europe in.

They are literally ruining us all. And WE, the common people, have to pay the price of their folly and speculations.

As a longtime observer of EU noticed:

Then again, on the insolvent continent, nothing really surprises us any more.”

And:

How can broke economies lend money to other broke economies who haven’t got any money because they can’t pay back the money the broke economy lent to the other broke economy and shouldn’t have lent them in the first place because the broke economy cant pay it back”.

Even a 5 year old can understand this. But not “our” politicians and bankers.

Remember that the Euro was always a political project. That’s why “they” haven’t done the”proper” economic policies. Because these policies would undermine the political purpose of the Euro. So they, the political elites of EU, are trapped. And that’s why the Euro was domed from the beginning.

And of course, none of this is covered in the mainstream/old media or by our “dear” politicians.

                                  Greece

Greek Bank Capital Needs at EU27.5 Billion, Bank of Greece Says

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-27/greek-bank-capital-needs-at-eu27-5-billion-bank-of-greece-says.html

Greece’s four largest banks need to boost their capital by 27.5 billion euros ($36.3 billion) after taking losses from the country’s debt swap earlier this year, the largest sovereign restructuring in history.

National Bank of Greece SA, the country’s biggest lender, needs to raise 9.8 billion euros, according to an e-mailed report by the Athens-based Bank of Greece (TELL) today. Eurobank Ergasias SA (EUROB) needs 5.8 billion euros, Alpha Bank (ALPHA) needs 4.6 billion euros and Piraeus Bank SA (TPEIR) needs 7.3 billion euros, according to the report. Total recapitalization needs for the country’s banking sector amount to 40.5 billion euros, the report said.”

To put this in perspective: The entire capital base of the Greek banking system is only €22 billion.

By saying that Greek banks need €27.5 billion Greece is essentially admitting that is needs to recapitalize its entire banking system. Also, you should know that Greek banks are still sitting on €46.8 billion in bad loans.

So the Greek banks have a capital base of €22 billion and bad loans of €46.8 billion.

There is a name for this – Bankrupt!

And remember, this is AFTER ALL the “rescue plans”, bailouts etc. already implemented so far by the “Troika” (IMF, ECB and EC).

                                                  Cyprus      

Cyprus is the euro area’s third-smallest economy in GDP terms, accounting for less than 0.2% of the region’s output. Yet the country urgently needs external funding and applied for an Troika (EC/IMF/ECB) programme last summer. In the meantime, the amount in question has risen to EUR 17.5bn (100% of GDP).

Read that again – 100% of GDP!

By mid-2012, larger banks like Bank of Cyprus or Cyprus Popular Bank alone reported loans to Greek borrowers that exceeded Cyprus’ GDP.

The Cyprus central bank’s emergency liquidity assistance (ELA) to the banking system skyrocketed from EUR150m in March 2012 to EUR 9.9bn (55% of GDP) in September.

So the Cyprus central bank only in September but in 55% of the whole Cyprus GDP into its own banking sector.

20130119_cyprus2

                                                 Spain

Bankia worthless says new report

http://www.euronews.com/2012/12/27/bankia-worthless-says-new-report/

Bankia’s shareholders have received a nasty new year’s surprise. They may lose most of their investments or even all of them says the Spanish bank rescue fund in its latest report.

According to FROB, the Fund for Orderly Bank Restructuring, Bankia has a negative value of 4.2 billion euros, and its parent group BFA is 10.4 bn in the red.

Valuation is key in the recapitalisation of Spain’s banking system, weighed down by massive bad loans accumulated in a property bubble that burst in 2008. Bankia/BFA is set to receive 18 bn euros of European aid, and become the country’s biggest bailout recipient.”

A little known fact about the Spanish crisis is that when the Spanish Government merges troubled banks, it typically swaps out depositors’ savings for shares in the new bank.

So when the newly formed bank goes bust,  your savings are GONE. Not gone as in some Spanish version of the FDIC will eventually get you your money, but gone as in gone forever.

This is why Bankia’s collapse is so significant: in one move, former depositors at seven banks just lost virtually everything.

In addition, things are going from worse to worst, as bad loans in Spain continue to accelerate to massive new record highs.

20130118_SPAINLOAN_0

Index of Spanish Industrial Output

index of Spanish Industrial Output

                                                 Italy

In Jan 2012, Italy’s government believed Italy’s 2012 GDP would come in at – 0.4%. The actual in (Q3) – 2,4% (so far).  Only a miss by 600%.

20130118_ITALYGDP_0

And the forecast for Italy’s GDP in 2013 is being lowered every month. Each one as inaccurate as the previous one.

20130118_ITALYGDP1_0

And then there is Ireland, Portugal, France….

Part two tomorrow about USA.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

The active lying and deceit behind the creation of EU – The British story

5 januari, 2013

The all too familiar story how the political elite, in their own words and documents, decided to deceive and actively lie to the British people in an all out effort to join the “common market”.

Here is a piece by Christopher Booker and Richard North (see below) on the deceit and active lying behind Britain’s entry to the EU in their, the politicians, own words.

“The real problem the British people have had with the ‘European project’, as its insiders call it, is that they have never really begun to understand its real nature, and what was always intended to be its ultimate goal.

The chief reason for this is that our politicians have never properly explained it to us.

What makes this so much worse is that those who were most enthused by it, such as Heath, knew full well what ‘the project’ was really about — the plan to weld all Europe together under an unprecedented form of super-government.

They deliberately decided to conceal it from us, for fear that our anxieties about our loss of sovereignty might prevent them from being allowed to join.”

“Thus, stealthily assembled over decades, would this new ‘country called Europe’ finally take its place on the world stage. What we found most shocking in researching this story was that, when Britain’s leaders first considered joining the project, they were made fully aware of this hidden agenda.

As we see from Cabinet papers and other documents of the early Sixties, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and his ‘Europe Minister’ Edward Heath were put completely in the picture about the secret ‘grand plan’. But in June 1961 the Cabinet formally agreed that it must not be revealed to the British people.

In Macmillan’s words, to admit ‘the political objectives’ of the Rome Treaty would raise ‘problems of public relations’ so ‘considerable’ that they should be kept under wraps. It was vital to emphasise only the economic advantages of British entry.”

“On the day we entered, he told the British people on television that any fears that ‘we shall in some way sacrifice independence and sovereignty’ were ‘completely unjustified’.

This was a deliberate lie, as no one knew better than him and the senior Foreign Office official who two years earlier had written a secret paper on ‘Sovereignty’.

The paper chillingly spelled out how it would be the end of the century before the British people woke up to how much of their power to govern themselves and make their own laws had been given away — by which time it would be too late.”

We seen this sad story repeated in country after country. The same behaviour with few exceptions.

This relentless drive at ALL COSTS from the political elites, on purpose, for a political union and European super state regardless of the will of the people.

And if the people protest and object, as they have EVERY time they where ALLOWED to, it doesn’t matter! Run them over, force it through one way or the other as the examples from the last 40 years clearly shows.

“At first it should be presented as just a trading arrangement, the ‘Common Market’ set up in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome. But the essence of that treaty was to create the core institutions of what Monnet always intended should one day be the ‘Government of Europe.

The idea was to work for ‘ever closer union’.

Treaty by treaty, it would take over more powers from national governments, based on the sacred principle that once power to make laws was handed over to Brussels it could never be given back.”

As I wrote in my post Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians as the banderol of the police demonstration in Madrid so neatly summed it up:

”Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians.”

The whole economic and political crisis in EU and USA summarized in one simple sentence.”

Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis- bankers and politicians

And as I wrote in my post EU a stupid empire on purpose:

“This is one of the best and succinct descriptions of EU I have seen:

“The European Union is like a hospital where all the doctors are mad. It doesn’t matter what is wrong, the treatment is always the same – more integration – and it is always wrong. The best thing to do is never to enter it.

Once you are in, the best thing to do is to leave. If you can’t get out, you will probably die.”

I disagree with one thing this author says: “EU is the Stupid Empire”. EU is a POLITICAL project. The Euro is part of that political project.

A lot of  EU’s decisions make no economic sense whatsoever. In that regard, Peter Hitchens observation that “EU is the Stupid Empire” is completely right.  Not to mention the enormous cost to the common people of all these political motivated but economically disastrous decisions.

The economic side was always a way to “sell it to the people”. Step by step. So that the political agenda could be slowly, but steadily implemented. Until it was too late. The political elites new ALL along that had the EU project been presented to the people for what it really is, people in ALL countries would have rejected it.

BUT EU was on purpose designed this way. So that the people could not stop this political project.

Never forget that ALL the political elites, irrespective of party or ideology, in the EU countries were behind this. With very few exceptions.

One small example, before the referendum on the Euro in September 2003 in Sweden, ALL parties (with the exception of some communists, greens, socialists and some from the agrarian party, ALL big unions, ALL mainstream media, ALL the representatives of the business world etc was for the Euro. And they put massive financial and personal resources behind this.

But the Swedish people, wisely, rejected this with 56% to 42%.

In the latest opinion poll, December 2011, 87,6% of the Swedish people were against the Euro. 9,7 % for. (Update- one year later these figures are even worse).

They planned this, and wanted this. And they kept on purpose this real ideology behind the EU project well hidden from their citizens in their countries.

They kept everything on purpose, including treaties, SO technical and juridical that it was totally unreadable for the common people. Like the EU “constitution”.

Just to give one example of how meaningless the local parliaments have become:

In Sweden 65 to 85%, depending of which area, of “decisions” made by the Swedish parliament HAVE ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN BRUSSELS.

I.E. The national Swedish parliament is in reality rubber-stamping Brussels decisions and implementing them.

That’s all!

And they cannot change even one syllable in these decisions. So much for “representing” the will of the people.

But of course, they are not telling us that. They pretend that ALL these decisions are made locally by the Swedish parliament as the “sovereign” representatives for the Swedish nation. When in reality they can, to the most part, only decide the colour of their on toilets.”

And sadly, and as usual, the mainstream media/old media has for the most part taken en active role in promoting this political union and the European Super State. Add to that, the press utter failure to inform the people of their respective countries how EU REALLY works. And what it means to people and the sovereignty of their countries.

Most journalists have no clue about the important “inner” bureaucratic game and ”the machinery” where nearly everything is decided. Instead, we see these useless reports and photo ops when the prime ministers or finance ministers meet. When in reality 99,8 or 9 % is already decided before they meet. Most of it is just a “show”. Often “very dramatic” late in to the night.

And this is nothing new.  We have seen so many different examples of this betrayal of journalist in their role as journalist. This is just sadly another.

Some other EU posts here:

Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians

EU a stupid empire on purpose

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty – Now also a crony Bankocracy

The scam that is called EU and the Euro is behind the present crisis

Who the Hell do You Think You Are: The Euro Game Is Up!

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens

The New EU foreign minister – An undemocratic appointment to an undemocratic post created by an undemocratic treaty

EU- an expensive pile of festering rubbish, mired in corruption, surrounded by inept and impotent politicians

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover 2

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti.

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

EU – The inner game and the Corruption that Cost £684 931,5 per hour EVERY hour EVERY day EVERY year. And is increasing

The EU Auditors have, for the 15th year in a row, refused to sign off the EU’s accounts owing to Fraud and Mismanagement in the budget

                       EU Youth Unemployment Rates

20121206_EUYouth_0

(My bold and underlining)

Monumental deceit: How our politicians have lied and lied about the true purpose of the European behemoth

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255506/Monumental-deceit-How-politicians-lied-lied-true-purpose-European-behemoth.html

By Christopher Booker

Forty years ago today, in what was arguably the most fateful political move ever made by a British Prime Minister, Edward Heath took us into what was then called the ‘Common Market’.

Such a step had scarcely been mentioned at the previous General Election, and the British people had very little idea of what they were letting themselves in for, other than a trading arrangement that might make it easier for us to sell our goods to our Continental neighbours.

Four decades later, the picture could scarcely look more different. We have seen that supposedly cosy club we joined transformed, step by step, into a vast, bloated bureaucratic empire, imposing its suffocating rule over 27 nations.

We have also seen it plunged into the most destructive crisis in its history — one it has brought entirely on itself by its reckless dream of locking the countries of Europe together into the straitjacket of the euro.

During those 40 years the British have never been happy members of this club. Too often we have been out of step, and even bitterly at odds, with the rest — as in our refusal to join that single currency.

But today, as the EU’s inner core of countries drive towards ‘full political union’ in a desperate bid to save their doomed euro, the British now look at this swollen political monster with fearful bemusement.

Politicians of every party talk plaintively about the need for us to negotiate a ‘looser relationship’ with the EU, while opinion polls consistently show a growing majority wanting to leave it altogether — an option that even David Cameron no longer rules out.

Even on the Continent, influential voices are now recognising that something very significant is happening in Britain, as they suggest we should perhaps be allowed something never seen before — a mere ‘associate membership’ of the EU, allowing us to continue trading with it but without all its political superstructure.

How did we come to such a pass? Are we today looking at another historic crossroads, in its own way just as fateful as the one we faced back in 1973?

The real problem the British people have had with the ‘European project’, as its insiders call it, is that they have never really begun to understand its real nature, and what was always intended to be its ultimate goal.

The chief reason for this is that our politicians have never properly explained it to us.

What makes this so much worse is that those who were most enthused by it, such as Heath, knew full well what ‘the project’ was really about — the plan to weld all Europe together under an unprecedented form of super-government.

They deliberately decided to conceal it from us, for fear that our anxieties about our loss of sovereignty might prevent them from being allowed to join.

Ten years ago, with my co-author Richard North, I wrote a comprehensively researched history of the ‘European project’.

I had already been reporting for years on the incredible damage membership of the EU was doing to British life, through thousands of crazy directives and regulations, through the destruction of our proud fishing industry and the undermining of our agriculture, which was until 1973 the most efficient in Europe.

The real story, surprisingly, goes back to the 1920s, when a senior League of Nations official, Frenchman Jean Monnet, first began to dream of building a ‘United States of Europe’, very much on the lines that decades later would shape the European Union as it is today.

After World War II, Monnet, by then the second most powerful man in France, finally set the project on its way. He knew there was no chance of bringing such an astonishingly ambitious vision into being all at once. So his plan was that it should gradually be constructed, piece by stealthy piece, without ever declaring too openly what was intended to be its ultimate goal.

At first it should be presented as just a trading arrangement, the ‘Common Market’ set up in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome. But the essence of that treaty was to create the core institutions of what Monnet always intended should one day be the ‘Government of Europe.

The idea was to work for ‘ever closer union’.

Treaty by treaty, it would take over more powers from national governments, based on the sacred principle that once power to make laws was handed over to Brussels it could never be given back.

Ever more countries would be brought into the net, until the project reached its ultimate goal as a super-government, with its own president and parliament, its own currency and armed forces, its own flag and anthem — all the attributes of a fully-fledged nation state.

Thus, stealthily assembled over decades, would this new ‘country called Europe’ finally take its place on the world stage. What we found most shocking in researching this story was that, when Britain’s leaders first considered joining the project, they were made fully aware of this hidden agenda.

As we see from Cabinet papers and other documents of the early Sixties, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and his ‘Europe Minister’ Edward Heath were put completely in the picture about the secret ‘grand plan’. But in June 1961 the Cabinet formally agreed that it must not be revealed to the British people.

In Macmillan’s words, to admit ‘the political objectives’ of the Rome Treaty would raise ‘problems of public relations’ so ‘considerable’ that they should be kept under wraps. It was vital to emphasise only the economic advantages of British entry.

Thus did Macmillan and Heath become drawn into complicity with that same web of deceit which was driving the ‘project’ itself (which is why we called our book The Great Deception).

Twice in the Sixties Britain made failed attempts to join the project — but within weeks of Heath entering Downing Street in 1970, he applied to Brussels a third time. Scarcely had negotiations begun than he learned that his future partners were already discussing the next steps along their path to full integration: a single currency, European defence forces, a common foreign policy.

Heath immediately sent word to Brussels pleading for all this to be kept quiet, because it might blow the gaffe with British voters.

For two years the negotiations continued, with Heath handing over all he was asked for, from giving away Britain’s fishing waters, the richest in the world, to become ‘a common European resource’, to the betrayal of our Commonwealth partners by excluding their goods from what had been for many their main export market.

Finally, Heath got what he was after: entry to the club — although he still pretended that the Common Market was little more than a trading arrangement.

On the day we entered, he told the British people on television that any fears that ‘we shall in some way sacrifice independence and sovereignty’ were ‘completely unjustified’.

This was a deliberate lie, as no one knew better than him and the senior Foreign Office official who two years earlier had written a secret paper on ‘Sovereignty’.

The paper chillingly spelled out how it would be the end of the century before the British people woke up to how much of their power to govern themselves and make their own laws had been given away — by which time it would be too late.

So began the dismal story which has been unfolding ever since. Already by the late Seventies, as the Common Market morphed into ‘the European Community’, we were becoming known in Brussels as ‘the awkward partner’.

Then came Mrs Thatcher’s five-year battle to win that rebate on our payments into the EU budget which, thanks to the ludicrously lop-sided conditions accepted by Heath, would have made us the largest single contributor by 1985.

In 1986 came the treaty called the Single European Act, which not only set up the Single Market but handed over to Brussels all sorts of other powers, including environmental laws which were to lead to everything from the shambles of our rubbish collections to building thousands of hated and useless wind turbines.

                                           EBC Balance sheet

EBC Balance sheet

In 1990, nothing did more to inspire hostility to Mrs Thatcher among her European colleagues, led by Jacques Delors, than her defiant opposition to the Maastricht Treaty, designed to create the European Union, introduce the ‘social chapter’ and, above all, to launch the single currency.

As soon as he replaced her, John Major proclaimed his wish for Britain to be ‘at the heart of Europe’ and signed the Maastricht Treaty (admittedly with those vital opt-outs for Britain on the single currency and the social chapter).

But seven years later he ended up more at odds with his partners than ever, as they imposed their worldwide ban on the export of all British beef products over ‘mad cow disease’, tried to sneak us into the social chapter under ‘health and safety’ rules and laid their plans for yet another integrationist treaty in Amsterdam.

Tony Blair, too, wanted to be ‘at the heart of Europe’, as the single currency approached (which he would love to have joined), signing us up to the social chapter with its damaging working-time rules, and two more treaties, at Amsterdam and Nice.

But he too found it hard to keep up with that relentless drive for ever closer union, as it led to seven years of tortuous negotiation to create ‘A Constitution for Europe’, eventually sabotaged by the voters of France and Holland, so that it had to be smuggled in by deceit as the Lisbon Treaty (which, among much else, incorporated the Court of Human Rights into the EU). Scarcely was the ink dry on Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s signature on that treaty than the EU was plunged into its worst-ever crisis over the euro, which today is spreading misery across southern Europe.

As always, the response of the EU’s leaders has been to call for yet ‘more Europe’, and a new treaty to force the eurozone members into ‘full political union’.

This is now leaving Britain more obviously marginalised than ever, condemned to remain in the outer ring of a club, many members of which would now be only too pleased to see the back of us.

This humiliating prospect has seen our politicians running around like bewildered sheep, bleating about the need for Britain to negotiate a ‘looser relationship’ with the EU, to get back to that trading arrangement we thought we were entering 40 years ago.

Astonishingly, this is now even being echoed as a possibility by those influential voices in Europe itself — even though the most fundamental rule of the club we joined back then was that, once powers are passed to Brussels, they can never be given back.

As David Cameron prepares to give that ‘very important speech on Europe’ he has promised us very soon, he could not do better than to meditate on the shrewdest words ever uttered by a Prime Minister about Britain and Europe. In 1973, as a junior member of Heath’s Cabinet, Margaret Thatcher made all the approved noises about how wonderful it was for Britain to join this club.

Once in office, however, she went on a painful learning curve, as she saw from the inside just what the real game was and how ruthlessly it was played. She was brought down in 1990 by an alliance of Europhiles in her party and their Brussels allies, because she was the last real obstacle to their Maastricht Treaty.

What really riled them was that she had seen through their true agenda and the disastrous course on which they were set.

With even Jacques Delors, the chief architect of Maastricht, suggesting it might be best for Britain to leave the EU, Mr Cameron should dwell on a passage from her last book, Statecraft.

That such an unnecessary and irrational project as building a European super-state was ever embarked on,’ wrote Lady Thatcher, ‘will seem in future years to be perhaps the greatest folly of the modern era. And that Britain...should ever have become part of it will appear a political error of the first magnitude.’

If Mr Cameron truly wishes to speak for the British people and our country’s future, he should bear those prophetic thoughts in mind.”

And Richard North complementing on the same subject:

EU politics: monumental deceit

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=83462

“The piece serves to remind us that entry was perpetrated on the basis of structured deceit, with successive prime ministers (Macmillan and Heath) actively lying as to their broad intentions and the proposed relationship with the Six.

“Those utter fools who assert that the relationship was primarily economic (and has since gone off the rails) need to read the Cabinet Memorandum of 21 June 962, (originally referenced C. (61) 84 and now CAB/129/105), in which Macmillan set out the purpose of seeking full United Kingdom membership of the European Economic Community, as ”… the only effective way of securing our political objectives in the world, and of averting the dangers of continued division in Europe”.

Eur%20000-cab1

Then, in a note to his Cabinet colleagues on 10 October 1961 (Originally C.(61)162, now: CAB/129/107 – see above), Edward Heath asserted that the UK had been following closely the progress towards unity in fields other than those covered by the three communities.

He conveyed to his colleagues that it was the intention of the UK to work with the Six ”in a positive spirit to reinforce the unity already achieved”. Heath was ”convinced” that the UK and the Six ”share the same essential interests”, and that ”the habit of working together, once formed, will mean, not a slowing down, but a continued advance and the development of closer unity”.

From the very start, therefore, it was evident that Heath intended to take the UK into the EEC with a view to developing further political unity. The economic issues were always camouflage, and the label ”Common Market” was simply a ploy deliberately to obscure the real intent.

Cameron and modern-day politicians are now paying the price for that deceit, having to deal with a relationship founded on a bed of lies and poisoned by the continuing deception.

Such a situation is irrecoverable, which means there can only be one resolution – our withdrawal from the European Union. Simply, a relationship built on lies can never prosper, and can never be repaired. We need to start again to avoid what Thatcher called a ”the greatest folly of the modern era”.

And the first step starts with the admission that the EU and its precursors were never economic alliances. The economic aspects were always a means to an end, designed to secure political unity, something which has been foisted upon us by deceit, and of which we want no part.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>

Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians

20 november, 2012

Or this is why the Euro is doomed. And after that EU – Yes we have NO Money.

On Saturday November 17, police officers from all over Spain marched through Madrid, protesting austerity measures and cuts. They even apologized to the public for arresting the wrong people. One of the slogans was:

”Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians.”

The whole economic and political crisis in EU and USA summarized in one simple sentence.

It complements what I wrote in my post EU a stupid empire on purpose:

“This is one of the best and succinct descriptions of EU I have seen:

The European Union is like a hospital where all the doctors are mad. It doesn’t matter what is wrong, the treatment is always the same – more integration – and it is always wrong. The best thing to do is never to enter it.

Once you are in, the best thing to do is to leave. If you can’t get out, you will probably die.

I disagree with one thing this author says: “EU is the Stupid Empire”. EU is a POLITICAL project. The Euro is part of that political project.

A lot of  EU’s decisions make no economic sense whatsoever. In that regard, Peter Hitchens observation that “EU is the Stupid Empire” is completely right.  Not to mention the enormous cost to the common people of all these political motivated but economically disastrous decisions. 

The economic side was always a way to “sell it to the people”. Step by step. So that the political agenda could be slowly, but steadily implemented. Until it was too late. The political elites new ALL along that had the EU project been presented to the people for what it really is, people in ALL countries would have rejected it.

BUT EU was on purpose designed this way. So that the people could not stop this political project.

Never forget that ALL the political elites, irrespective of party or ideology, in the EU countries were behind this. With very few exceptions.”

The EU bureaucrats and the political elites always fall back, when they have nothing else to say in defence of the EU, that this is a “peace project”. Well this “peace project” has now created social havoc, riots, and put country against country, and groups of countries against group of countries.

Tearing apart the EU at it’s seems. And ALL of this because they, the political elites, literally AT ALL COST want to preserve the POLITICAL project euro. Which is the cornerstone of the federal super state of Europe.

As I have said before, this has nothing to do with economics; it’s ALL about politics,

And that is why so many people still don’t understand what is going on. Because from an economical point these policies are total madness. Ruining and lowering the living standard of most people. And the political elites know this. But the political project is MORE important.

Then there is Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Cyprus, France….

Just start adding up the GIGANTIC NUMBERS and be utterly horrified!

This is the situation that politicians and the banks have put the common people of Europe in.

They are literally ruining us all. And WE have to pay the price of their folly and speculations.

One more slogan from the protests – They are the same

Depicting Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy (L) and the leader of the opposition Socialist Party (PSOE) Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba

The Big picture

This is from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook (WEO) Notice the rising trend of the 27 Developing Asian economies as a share of World GDP.  Bloomberg’s Chart of the Day notes that by the end of 2012, Developing Asia will account for 17.9% of World GDP, surpassing for the first time Europe’s 17-nation 16.9% share. The euro-area crisis has merely accelerated a trend that has been ongoing for several years – as former IMF board member Domenico Lombardi notes, makes it clear that euro-area economies need to address their structural reforms rapidly.

America is on the same path, as while China will top Europe by 2017 as a share of global GDP, USA will be passed in five years when Developing Asia will have topped the USA for the first time ever.

All graphs gets bigger if you click on it

Just one small example of all these stupid US policies, on Januari 1, 2013, dividend tax rates are set to rise from 15% to as high as 43.4%. This affects not only US taxpayers, but everyone on the planet who invests in the US stock market.

As a result of this tax policy, many investors who own shares in US companies will now see their after-tax dividends slashed by 33%.

This is putting a lot of downward pressure on stock prices, affecting almost everyone who currently owns US shares– pension funds and retirement accounts, rich and middle class, US and non-US citizens alike. It’s as if the US government is hanging a sign over the country saying ”PLEASE DO NOT INVEST HERE.”

It’s pure genius wouldn’t you say?

(See some of my previous posts on the economic situation in USA:

The US election – Yes we have NO bananas

How Obama loves the poor SOOO MUCH, especially the black, that they have had the largest single drop in income ever

In three graphs – Obama Economics

One more small example, in this case the UK, national government borrowing is already 22% higher than at this same point last year, a record year for borrowing. Meanwhile, the UK‘s budget deficit for August hit a record high.

I hope you get the picture- it isn’t pretty!

And the unemployment picture

And let’s continue with Spain:

Spanish bad loans

The figures are just out for the total Spanish bad loans during September: the loans that fell into arrears, (the part of a debt that is overdue after missing one or more required payments), increased by €3.5 billion from August, reaching €182.2 billion in September. This is 10.71% of the total Spanish bank loans of €1.7 trillion, and an increase from the previous month.

Putting the bad loan number in perspective, it is nearly double the €100 billion that the Spanish banks will receive as part of the bank bailout plan disclosed in July, and well above the ”only” €40 billion that Spain promises it will need to actually fund bank capital shortfalls.

If you compared as a percentage of GDP, it would be the equivalent of $2.8 trillion in US loans going bad.

(See also my post This is why the Euro is doomed.)

Spain’s Regional Debt

And Greece:

The Greece budget

The Athens Finance Ministry just released 2013-2016 its latest re-re-revised budget.

http://www.minfin.gr/content-api/f/binaryChannel/minfin/datastore/a7/91/b0/a791b0bf4bc73a9679bac65792933157d4cf7b27/application/pdf/%CE%9C%CE%95%CE%A3%CE%9F%CE%A0%CE%A1%CE%9F%CE%98%CE%95%CE%A3%CE%9C%CE%9F_2013.pdf

Let’s look merely on one data series: the brand new Debt/GDP, (ignoring the -4.5% 2013 GDP forecast, already – 0.5% worse than the just released IMF forecast for Greece for the same period, remember also that the May forecast of 2013 predicted ”growth”), and compared it to the Debt/GDP ”forecast” from May 2010, when the first Greek bailout was announced.

It ain’t pretty

The Greece Finance Ministry

This is the same Finance Ministry where the EU inspectors found this in their taxation archive section (see the video 5:20-5-48):

Watch this documentary from ZDF (in german). It shows where 2 ½ years of bailout funds went, or rather didn’t go. And why 2 ½ years to the day after the first bailout, not only is Greece not fixed, but is getting worse at a cost to taxpayers of nearly half a trillion Euro.

Die Griechenland-Lüge

http://www.zdf.de/ZDFmediathek/beitrag/video/1634150/Dokumentation-Die-Griechenland-Luege#/beitrag/video/1634150/Dokumentation-Die-Griechenland-Luege

The Troika and their “predictions”

The troika (the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund, and the European Central Bank), which are supposed to get Greece’s financial future in order cannot make even the most basic forecasting. And the Troika have made these “forecasts” repeatedly, which are a complete and utter joke.  But there is NO surprise here, this is ALL about politics. The same way that EU allowed Greece into the Euro knowing that every figure was false. But for political reasons they were allowed to enter.

And these “guys” are supposed to save Europe? Where all the important decisions are being taken on the ground of these “forecasts”?

The Greece unemployment

Again, It ain’t pretty.

I could go on, but I think I stop here.

You get the picture.

And of course, none of this is covered in the mainstream media or by our “dear” politicians.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

How the Assad regime with the help of Russia, Iran, China and Hezbollah transformed peaceful protester to fighters

16 augusti, 2012

Our mistake was to ever believe there could be peaceful change in this country,” he said. ”We wasted time and sacrificed many lives trying to be peaceful. We should have just gone straight to an armed uprising.”

By taking such extreme steps against the moderate opposition the regime is pushing all of its opponents to join the armed rebellion; the regime is making it clear there is no place for the peaceful activists,” said a Syrian political analyst.”

”The cases of Mazen Darwish, Kifah Ali Deeb and Rami Hinawi show very plainly the regime is not fighting militant Islamists but is actually at war with any advocates of real reform in this country, even those who insist on peaceful methods.”

There are no more peaceful demonstrations, there’s no point, we’re not able to move a single metre before the security forces and army start shooting at us,” he says.”

“Liberal, secular, often well educated members of the opposition say their influence over the uprising has been undermined, both through widespread use of indiscriminate violence by the authorities and mass arrests of peaceful dissidents, taking them out of circulation and leaving the field open to more radical groups.”

Here in a nutshell is the description how a brutal dictator transformed peaceful protesters, who only wanted some freedom, to fighters.

In ALL of this, the Assad regime was helped by Russia, Iran, China and Hezbollah. With training, advisors and guidance, troops, snipers, material, spare parts, maintenance, weapons, ammunition, intelligence, money, political backing on ALL levels etc.

In ALL of this, the Assad regime was ALSO helped by USA, EU, UN, Turkey, and The Arab League who did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING during 12 months but talked and had meetings. And then they only sent “observers” who dutifully observed the slaughter and massacres taking place, day in day out .

And ALL the TIME the death toll of civilians keep rising, First it was a 1000, then 5000, then 10 000, then 15 000, then 20 000, and now 23 000.

Massacre after Massacre.

Torture, Slaughter, Summarily Executions and Rape.

A systematic assault on human dignity and civilian lives and freedom on a colossal scale.

Day in Day out.

And the TOTAL destruction of block after block, neighbourhood after neighbourhood in countless cities and villages. Using, aside from bombs and howitzers, tanks, rockets etc., the Russian 240mm F-864 high explosive mortar bomb to “fight” against these unarmed civilians.

The world’s largest high explosive mortar bomb designed to “demolish fortifications and fieldworks” according to a Russian arms merchandizing catalogue. It weighs 130 kilograms and contains 31.93 kilograms of TNT as an explosive charge.

This weapon system is notable for its capability to conduct a “plunging attack,” in which the munition is fired at a high angle and comes down nearly perpendicular to penetrate a building or fortification.

This is the same weapon that Russia used to destroy Grozny in 1994-96. And now they have passed on these “skills” to the Syrians.

By the way, the use of such weapons in dense urban environments is a war crime.

Here is just one small example from Friday August 10 of Cities and Towns under shelling and destruction by the Assad regime. And the list is not complete:

Harasta, Arbeen, Moadamiah, Harran Al-Awameed, Deir Al-Asafeer, Ain Terma, Zabadani, Madaya, Eltal, Dmeir, Hameh, Yelda, Rankous, Qarrah (Damascus Suburbs), Sit Zeinab, Al-Qadam, Midan, Tadamon, Al-Hajar Al-Aswad, Yarmouk, Kafar Sousseh, Mazzeh, Qaboun, Barzeh, Salhiyeh, Ruknaddine, Dafelshawk (Damascus City), Daraa City, Khirbet Al-Ghazaleh, Tafas, Bostra Al-Sham, Na’eemah, Mseifrah, Jimreen, Hraak , Saida, Tal Shihab (Daraa), Rastan, Talbisseh, Houla, Tal Kalakh, Al-Qusayr, Al-Hosn, Al-Ghanto, Al-Bouaydah, Old Homs (Homs Province), Hreitan, Elbab, Eizaz, Marei, Bayanoun (Aleppo Province), Haffeh, Jabal Al-Akrad (Lattakia), Deir Ezzor City, Mouhassan, Albou Kamal (Deir Ezzor Province), Kafar Zeiteh, Hawash, Shahshabo, Hama City (Hama Province), Jabal Al-Zawiyeh, Ma’rrat Al-Nouman, Saraqib, Maar Shoureen, Ariha, Kafroumah, Al-Rami, Khan Shaikhoon (Idlib).

An other example from yesterday August 15 when the “brave and courageous” pilots of Assads Air Force bombed a residential area in Azaz and obliterated a whole block:

The report here including video:

Syria: Fighter Jet Bombing Kills Over 40 Civilians

http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/08/16/syria-fighter-jet-bombing-kills-over-40-civilians

“(Azaz) – A Syrian government fighter jet bombed a residential neighborhood, killing more than 40 civilians and wounding at least 100 others in the town of Azaz, including many women and children, Human Rights Watch said today after visiting the town.  In the attack on August 15, 2012, at least two bombs destroyed an entire block of houses in the al-Hara al-Kablie neighborhood of Azaz, in Syria’s northern Aleppo province.

Human Rights Watch investigated the site of the bombing two hours after the attack and interviewed witnesses, victims, medical personnel, and relatives of those killed.

This horrific attack killed and wounded scores of civilians and destroyed a whole residential block,” said Anna Neistat, acting emergencies director at Human Rights Watch.  “Yet again, Syrian government forces attacked with callous disregard for civilian life.”

What is left of the al-Hara al-Kablie neighborhood of Azaz after the bombing – NOTHING!

An another brave effort by Assads Air Force – They bombed the hospital in Aleppo

Syria: Fighter Planes Strike Aleppo Hospital

http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/08/15/syria-fighter-planes-strike-aleppo-hospital

(Aleppo) – Syrian government fighter planes fired rockets that struck the main emergency hospital in an opposition-controlled area of Aleppo on August 14, 2012, wounding two civilians and causing significant damage, Human Rights Watch said today after visiting the damaged hospital.

A rocket attack by government aircraft on the hospital two days earlier, on August 12, apparently killed four civilians and wounded three, Human Rights Watch said.

Fighter jet attacks on a hospital twice in three days indicate that this was no accident,” said Ole Solvang, emergencies researcher at Human Rights Watch. “By firing rockets at a clearly marked hospital, the government shows blatant disregard for civilian lives.”

Dar al Shifaa Hospital in Aleppo after the attack

And by the way, these airplanes are provide by Russia, the pilots trained by Russia, the ammunition supplied by Russia, spare parts and maintenance done by Russia, air control and directions done by Russia, intelligence supplied by Russia etc.

Russian ammunition boxes used by the Assad army in Aleppo

They are SOOO HELPFUL these Russians wouldn’t you say?

And ALL of these politicians, governments, international organisations did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING during these 18 months but observed and talked and had meetings.

I say only one thing: You should be REALLY BE PROUD of yourselves and the children of Syria will remember you. Each one of you.

To the children of Syria!

See my previous post Russia’s solution for Syria – More Carpet Bombing and Total Destruction for links to my previous 18 posts on the situation in Syria.

The National hospital in Homs destroyed by Assad forces

Syria‘s youth found peaceful protest ‘became irrelevant’

http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/syrias-youth-found-peaceful-protest-became-irrelevant

Phil Sands

”DAMASCUS // No great soul-searching accompanied his transformation from peaceful demonstrator to rebel with the Free Syrian Army; it is a path many of his friends had already taken.

Arrested for protesting in the Damascus suburb of Dummar, Mohammed, 23, spent two months in an overcrowded military intelligence detention cell, and was released without charge to find demonstrations had been superseded by armed conflict.

”I wasn’t thinking about taking up a weapon and fighting the regime when I left prison,” he says.

”I went straight out to protest and saw the other opposition people in Dummar were now carrying rifles and I realised I had to do the same.”

Since the start of the Syrian uprising, Mohammed had been part of the Local Coordination Committees, a network of activists organising peaceful demonstrations and tracking civilian deaths.

While the LCCs are still operating and peaceful demonstrations do still take place, Mohammed and other rebels in Damascus say circumstances have rendered the unarmed protests irrelevant.

There are no more peaceful demonstrations, there’s no point, we’re not able to move a single metre before the security forces and army start shooting at us,” he says.

(The hospital in Qusier, Homs. destroyed by Assad forces. The sign reads – Smoking is Forbidden in The Patients Room)

Not all of those involved in the grassroots opposition movement agree, but a broad range of activists concede that those advocating peaceful revolt have been squeezed out by the demands of war.

Liberal, secular, often well educated members of the opposition say their influence over the uprising has been undermined, both through widespread use of indiscriminate violence by the authorities and mass arrests of peaceful dissidents, taking them out of circulation and leaving the field open to more radical groups.

On Sunday two prominent grassroots activists, Kifah Ali Deeb and Rami Hinawi, were detained by a Popular Committee – a pro-government armed militia – in their home neighbourhood of Sahnaya, south of Damascus.

Ms Deeb, an artist and author of children’s books, sits on the governing board of the opposition National Coordination Committees, a political bloc that has called for non-violent democratic change in Syria.

The NCC has been at odds with other opposition factions, including the exiled Syrian National Council, which has called for foreign military intervention to aid rebels.

Ms Deeb, 30, is a member of the Alawite sect, which forms the nucleus of Bashar Al Assad’s regime and dominates ultra-loyalist branches of the security forces and military.

Mr Hinawi, 33, who has long campaigned peacefully for democratic reforms alongside Ms Deeb, is a Druze.

Both are believed to be in the hands of air force intelligence, the most feared branch of the Syrian security forces, although, as with other detentions, no information has been released by the authorities in connection with the detentions.

Sectarian politics are complex in Syria but one of the key arguments made by supporters of Mr Al Assad is that his regime is all that protects Christian, Druze, Alawite and other minority groups from annihilation at the hands of the Sunni majority.

That has brought even sharper focus on members of those minorities who stand with the opposition, rather than the authorities.

                           (Ramadan in Aleppo)

Another influential advocate of a peaceful uprising in Syria, Mazen Darwish, also an Alawite, has been held by air force security for six months.

Although a civilian, he is facing prosecution in a military court usually reserved for army officers. There is no chance of appeal and no defence lawyer, proceedings are secret and the military judge can choose to issue a death sentence.

The human rights lawyer Anwar Al Bunni, a regular fixture at the Damascus courts of justice, said Mr Darwish and thousands of others facing special military courts had been thrown into a black hole, outside of Syria’s regular – and highly flawed – legal system.

”They have had all of their basic rights taken from them, we know nothing about their situation, all the files are kept secret. We are not even allowed to know the names of all of those facing military trials,” he said.

It emerged that Mr Darwish is facing a military court only when a judge summoned him to appear as a witness in another case, and air force security said they would not permit him to do so because he was being held for military trial.

Syrian officials do not talk about court cases but the authorities have long insisted they act in accordance with national laws and have dismissed evidence of widespread torture of detainees that has been compiled by the United Nations and rights monitors.

The use of draconian measures against advocates of non-violence has only accelerated the slide into an increasingly brutal conflict, one that rights monitors say has already killed upwards of 20,000 people, a majority of them civilians.

By taking such extreme steps against the moderate opposition the regime is pushing all of its opponents to join the armed rebellion; the regime is making it clear there is no place for the peaceful activists,” said a Syrian political analyst.

”The cases of Mazen Darwish, Kifah Ali Deeb and Rami Hinawi show very plainly the regime is not fighting militant Islamists but is actually at war with any advocates of real reform in this country, even those who insist on peaceful methods.”

In Dummar, Mohammed admits he has little idea of how to wage war as a guerrilla, never having been in the army or taught how to fire a weapon.

A shortage of arms and ammunition among rebels in Damascus means he is used as a runner to convey messages between fighters when they are in action.

Nevertheless, he believes that is a more productive way of trying to overthrow the Syrian regime than stinging street protests.

Our mistake was to ever believe there could be peaceful change in this country,” he said. ”We wasted time and sacrificed many lives trying to be peaceful. We should have just gone straight to an armed uprising.”

Hezbollah Mercenaries fighting for Assad in front of the Citadel in Aleppo

LEAKED VIDEO – Inside a helicopter gunship over Syria used to bomb and kill civilians in cities

(These videos where taken by Assad troops themselves to show how “good” they are at killing civilians, as trophies, to prove their loyalty etc. etc.)

 Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

Russia’s solution for Syria – More Carpet Bombing and Total Destruction

29 juli, 2012

Just a quick comment of the accelerated slaughter going on in Syria. And Russia’s continued role as the main weapons, ammunition, economic, personal, training, intelligence, diplomatic etc provider and support for Assad.

Here is what captain Konstantin Sivkov, a former strategist for the Russian General Staff between 1995 and 2007, now the first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Military Sciences, concluded after a “visit” in May and talks with the Assad’s gang:

http://world.time.com/2012/07/26/russia-and-syrias-assad-the-end-of-the-affair/

Sivkov was surprised, he says, with how “gentle” Assad has been in crushing the revolution. “Believe me, some of our guys have told Bashar to adopt much harsher methods, carpet bombing, total destruction,” Sivkov told TIME after returning to Moscow. “If that approach was chosen in Syria, there would be no rebels left after one week, and everyone would be happy.”

Yeah, that’s the Russian way – Total destruction and Carpet bombings of civilians. After all, they have a long experience in Afghanistan, Chechnya etc. And they taught their Syrian pupils well.

Here are just some pictures of the according to Russia “to gentle” Assad treatment of civilians in cities.

In this case from Homs, a major industrial center, and with a population of at least 652,609 people according to the 2004 census:

This is the guy who also told Izvestiya on March 22 this year regarding project 949A, were Antei nuclear-powered submarines will be completed and modernized and armed with new cruise missiles with range up to 1,500 km.

http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=14659

“In particular, the newspaper cites Capt 1 rank (retired) Konstantin Sivkov, vice president of Geopolitics Academy saying that Antei-class subs would be equipped with Caliber missiles in order to destroy missile defense assets deployed in Europe.”

That is in plain language EU. Who have done everything possible not to “irritate” Russia and have bent over backwards every time Russia raises its eyebrow.

And this is what he said on March 25 2010 “World War III Has Already Begun”

World War III Has Already Begun

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/25-03-2010/112718-world_war_three-0/

http://moodle.fhs.cuni.cz/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=4137

“A resource-poor countries and people, but rich in modern technology and weapons will also want their share. From this perspective, Russia has become the primary objective of aggression.”

“The only limiting factor at this moment is Russia’s nuclear arsenal. According to the experts they predicted that the West will attempt to remove the Russian nuclear shield. “

Yeah, these as always helpful and peaceful Russians.

This is the country, and the persons, that the Obama administration had a “reset” with and has given de facto veto power of the US foreign policy.

Here are my previous posts on Syria:

My first series:

Part 1 – Introduction

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 1

Part 2 – Reports

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 2

Part 3 – Russia

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 3

Part 4 – Iran

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 4

Part 5 – China

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 5

Part 6 – Turkey

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 6

Part 7 – Arab League

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 7

Part 8 – EU and NATO

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 8

Part 9 – UN and Kofi Annan

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 9

Part 10 – US and the Obama administartion

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 10

Part 11 – Paul Conroy and the targeting and killing of journalists

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 11

My second series:

It is now nearly one month since I finished my 11 parts series of background on what is going on in Syria (Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs  Part 1-11). So I thought it would be appropriate to give an update of what has happened or not happened since then. And here are some more updates.

The Houla Massacre and the Assad thugs

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 1

Russia, Iran and China

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 2

Turkey and EU

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 3

NATO and UN

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 4

USA and the Obama Administration

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 5

What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe, The Shabiha and the armed opposition

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 6

 Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 6

16 juni, 2012

Some observations:

We have come to the end of this follow up after my first series about what is going on in Syria. I could easily write 250 pages of observations but I am going to spare you that. Instead, I am just going to write about three things: the perception of the opposition in Syria, the Shabiha and the armed opposition.

First the perception of the opposition in Syria.

It has always amassed me that the “do nothing crowd”, (i.e. The Obama administration, NATO, EU, Turkey, Arab league etc), are actually the same ones that are ACTIVELY promoting and supporting the muslim fundamentalist i.e. SNC/The Muslim Brotherhood.

One of the excuses from the west (Obama administration, NATO, EU) has always been that they don’t want to give support to extreme/fundamentalist muslims. Which is quite “funny” if it weren’t so hypocritical because that is what you EXACTLY did in Libya. You armed, trained and fought with al-Qaida and other fundamentalist groups.

So the brutal fact, which so many don’t want to admit, is that most of the opposition are normal people how just want do defend themselves from the attacks of the Assad regime. And they also want a change for the better regarding basic freedoms and liberties.

I would say that these are very reasonable demands wouldn’t you say?

So instead of supporting this secular, civil opposition the Obama administration, NATO and EU is ACTIVELY supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, which literally hates these countries and what their societies stands for.

And if the Muslim Brotherhood came to power, with the help of the money and support of the west, their policy would be ANTI USA, ANTI EU, ANTI NATO and of course destroy Israel.

Seems like a VERY smart policy wouldn’t you say?

And our tax money goes to this madness!

And in the meantime the civilian population in Syria, including the secular, civil opposition, is getting slaughtered and massacred.

The big difference as I wrote in my original series is that after over 45 years of brutal dictatorship the FEAR IS GONE. If you don’t understand that you don’t understand very much of what is going on now.

Here is one of the very, very few opinion polls of what the opposition really thinks:

What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe?

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/what-does-the-syrian-opposition-believe

“There are increasing calls for international intervention inSyriaafter this weekend’s massacre in Houla, where Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces murdered more than 100 civilians. Obstacles to intervention remain, however, especially concern that the opposition to Assad’s regime is dominated by religious fundamentalists. Until recently, for example, the Syrian National Council, a group of exiled opponents of the regime, was led by Burhan Ghalioun, whose unwillingness to counter the Muslim Brotherhood was widely viewed in the West as a troubling sign of Islamist influence.

But a confidential survey of opposition activists living inSyriareveals that Islamists are only a minority among them. Domestic opponents of Assad, the survey indicates, look toTurkeyas a model for Syrian governance — and even widely admire theUnited States.

Pechter Polls, which conducts opinion surveys in tough spots in theMiddle East,AfricaandAsia, completed the Syria opposition poll in December 2011. Respondents were contacted over a secure Skype connection by someone they could trust — all native Syrians — who asked them to fill out a short questionnaire anonymously in Arabic. Interviewers were selected from different social and political groups to ensure that respondents reflected a rough cross-section of overall opposition attitudes. To ensure confidentiality, the online survey could be accessed only through a series of proxy servers, bypassing the regime-controlled Internet.

Given the survey’s unusual security requirements, respondents were selected by a referral (or ”controlled snowball”) technique, rather than in a purely random fashion. To be as representative as possible, the survey employed five different starting points for independent referral chains, all operating from different locations. The resulting sample consisted of 186 individuals inSyriaidentified as either opposition activists themselves (two-thirds of the total) or in contact with the opposition.

What do these ”inside” opposition supporters believe? Only about one-third expressed a favorable opinion of the Muslim Brotherhood. Almost half voiced a negative view, and the remainder were neutral. On this question, no significant differences emerged across regions.

Most of the survey’s questions asked, ”On a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 means the most negative and 7 the most positive, how would you rate your opinion of X?” Answers of 1 to 3 were considered negative, 4 as neutral, and 5 to 7 as positive.

While many respondents supported religious values in public life, only a small fraction strongly favored Shariah law, clerical influence in government, or heavy emphasis on Islamic education. A large majority (73%) said it was ”important for the new Syrian government to protect the rights of Christians.” Only 20% said that religious leaders have a great influence on their political views.

This broad rejection of Islamic fundamentalism was also reflected in the respondents’ views on government. The poll asked each respondent what country he or she would ”like to see Syria emulate politically,” and which countries the respondent ”would like to see Syria emulate economically.” The poll listed 12 countries, each with a scale of 1 to 7. Just 5% had even a mildly positive view of Saudi Arabia as a political model. In contrast, 82% gave Turkey a favorable rating as both a political and economic model (including over 40% extremely favorable). The U.S. earned 69% favorable ratings as a political model, with France, Germany and Britain close behind. Tunisia rated only 37% and Egypt 22%.

Iran was rated lowest of any country included in the survey, including Russia and China: Not even 2% of respondents had positive views of Iran as a political model. Fully 90% expressed an unfavorable view of Hezbollah, including 78% with the most negative possible attitude.

One of the surprises in the results is the scope of the opposition’s network inside Damascus, despite their difficulties in demonstrating publicly. One-third of the respondents, whether activists or sympathizers, said they live in the Syrian capital. (To protect their privacy, the survey did not ask for more precise identification.)

This ”inside” opposition is well-educated, with just over half identifying as college graduates. The ratio of male to female respondents was approximately 3 to 1, and 86% were Sunni Arab.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, they were ambivalent about Syrian Kurdish demands for ”political decentralization” (like autonomy). Views of ”Kurdish parties” were evenly divided among negative, neutral and positive. (Such feelings are evidently mutual: In the six months since the survey was completed, Syrian Kurdish organizations have increasingly decided to go their own way, separate from the other opposition groups.)

Based on a statistical analysis of the survey, most secularists among the respondents prefer weak central government, presumably as a way to safeguard their personal freedoms. On the other hand, the one-third of respondents who support the Muslim Brotherhood also tend to have a favorable view of Hamas, despite the latter movement’s previous association with the Assad regime.

The survey demonstrates that the core of the Syrian opposition inside the country is not made up of the Muslim Brotherhood or other fundamentalist forces, and certainly not of al Qaeda or other jihadi organizations. To be sure, a revolution started by secularists could pave the way for Islamists to win elections, as has occurred in Egypt. But the Syrian opposition is solidly favorable to the U.S. and overwhelmingly negative toward both Hezbollah and Iran.”

David Pollock is the Kaufman fellow at The Washington Institute and a consultant to Pechter Polls.

The Shabiha, the murderous thugs that do most of the massacres

Assad’s Pact With the Devil

Syrian Regime Using Hired Killers to Cling to Power

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/analysis-of-the-aftermath-of-houla-massacre-in-syria-a-836848.html

“The regime of Syrian ruler Bashar Assad has enlisted gangs of murderous thugs known as ‘Shabiha.’ No assignment is too brutal or bloody for these men who are free to kill, plunder and rape. Assad knows that outright victory over the opposition is his only remaining chance to stay in power.”

“Europe, the United States and perhaps even Kofi Annan are slowly realizing that there will be no compromise with Syrian President Bashar Assad, because there can be no compromise with Assad. Now that more than 10,000 people have died and tens of thousands have been tortured, the phase in which protesters were still staging peaceful demonstrations, and in which negotiations, transitional governments and compromises were possible is irrevocably over.

When the regime was still able to negotiate its own exit, it didn’t want to. Now it no longer has that option, because any sign of weakness would lead to its overthrow.

This realization hasn’t been triggered by the fact that the regime is massacring civilians to save itself. Similar bloodbaths have already taken place in the past. In April of last year, more than 60 people disappeared without a trace in Homs, after government troops had mowed down a group of peaceful protesters. In January, several families in a southeastern Homs neighborhood were massacred in a way that resembled the Houla killings. And when the Bab Amr neighborhood was captured by regime troops several weeks later, after having been almost destroyed by artillery fire, witnesses said that there were mass executions of those who hadn’t fled.

What was different this time was that on Saturday morning, only hours after the killing frenzy, a team of UN observers managed to reach Houla, where they saw and counted the bodies, heard what the survivors had to say and saw the tracks the tanks had made. ”The evidence is clear — it is not murky,” said German UN Ambassador Peter Wittig. ”There is a clear government footprint in those killings.” Whereas earlier massacres were only documented in reports by the Syrian opposition and video recordings that could not be corroborated, this was a different situation.

By failing, the UN mission appears finally to be having an impact. The roughly 300 unarmed observers cannot possibly monitor a nonexistent cease-fire, during which more than 2,000 people had been killed by the end of last week. The UN observers cannot prevent what is happening, but they can prevent it from being covered up. This isn’t much, and for angry Syrians who burned images of Annan, it’s far too little. ”We called the observers during the massacre,” a man from Houla who calls himself Abu Emad was quoted as saying, ”but they refused to come and stop the murders. Damn then, and damn the entire mission!”

“The men, some in civilian clothing and others dressed in army uniforms, went from house to house, reported survivors like 11-year-old Ali, who told CBS News: ”They came to our house at night. First they took out my father and then my oldest brother. My mother shouted: Why are you doing this? Then they shot both of them, and after that my mother. Then one of the men came in with a flashlight and saw my sister Rasha. He shot her in the head.Ali hid with his two little brothers. The man saw them and shot the brothers, but he missed Ali.

Other survivors who hid or played dead consistently gave the same accounts: The men combed through house after house and room after room, killing everyone, some with knives and some with guns. The massacre continued until the morning hours. When the UN observers arrived, they found nothing but corpses in the villages controlled by regime forces. The survivors had fled to neighborhoods held by the FSA, where they placed the bodies they had recovered on mats in the mosques before filming and burying them.

The regime in Damascus could not deny that the massacre had taken place. But Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi, parroting the government’s standard position, promptly blamed the killings on ”armed terrorists” and ”Islamists.” The Russian government, which had blocked every Security Council resolution condemning Syria, launched into a bizarre attempt to apportion the blame. The regime was apparently responsible for the assault by tanks and mortars, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. But the brutish murders, said Alexey Puchkov, chairman of the parliamentary committee on foreign affairs, ”were definitely committed by the other side.”

Igor Pankin, Russia’s deputy UN ambassador, agreed: ”We cannot imagine that it is in the Syrian regime’s interest to sabotage Special Envoy Kofi Annan’s visit to Damascus.” And he is right in one respect. In PR terms, a massacre of children cannot be helpful to the Assad regime. But he was wrong in another sense, inadvertently putting his finger on Russia’s growing frustration with its ally: Syria‘s leadership is no longer taking decisions that would make sense for a government hoping to reach a political solution to the crisis.

By gradually concentrating power in the hands of the Alawite minority, to which the Assad clan belongs, the regime is fomenting a religious war against the Sunni majority, the very conflict it claims it wants to prevent. Now Assad has backed himself into a corner from which he believes there is only way out: victory. This is why the latest proposal from Berlin and Washington to attempt the ”Yemeni solution,” which would be to depose Assad but keep the regime in power, will not work. The regime is relying solely on violence, accompanied by an outrageous propaganda narrative that blames foreign terrorists and al-Qaida for the uprising.

This conspiratorial obsession is nothing new. Starting in 2003, the intelligence services began secretly organizing the transfer of jihadists from Saudi Arabia, Libya and Kuwait across the Syrian border into Iraq, to deter the Americans from seeking regime change in Damascus as well. At the same time, the regime painted itself as a bulwark in the fight against al-Qaida. Foreigners who were later arrested reported how they had been kept in Syrian intelligence camps in Homs while waiting to be transferred into Iraq.

The attacks on several Scandinavian embassies in Damascus after the Danish cartoon controversy in early 2006 were blamed on an Islamist mob, but as it turned out, the regime had planted Islamists in the crowd. As a precaution, it also removed the guards from in front of a general’s house next to the Norwegian Embassy. Although there was no evidence that the regime was behind the major bombing attacks in Damascus, Aleppo and Deir al-Zor in recent months, they had several strange elements in common: The bombers had immense quantities of explosives, which they easily managed to get through all government checkpoints, and they detonated most of their bombs in front of empty buildings. When the regime published its death tolls after the first attack on Dec. 23, they included the names of men who had already died elsewhere. During the ostentatious burial service at the Umayyad Mosque, signs attached to many of the coffins read ”anonymous martyr.” On May 9, just before a bomb exploded near the convoy of UN observer mission chief Robert Mood, the vehicles were detained at a military checkpoint just long enough so that they would be nearby at the time of detonation.

“Murderous ‘Ghosts’

What happened in Houla followed the pattern of earlier attacks like the one in Homs. First, the target is bombarded with tanks and artillery from a great distance. Then the regular troops move in and drive out or shoot the last remaining rebels. Finally, the regime sends in its helpers, the Shabiha (”ghosts”), over which it has less and less control.

What were once gangs of thugs and smugglers from the hills around Latakia, the home turf of the Assad clan, have turned into an army of irregular troops numbering in the thousands. The gangs are backed by the beneficiaries of the regime, those who profit the most from Syria‘s façade of a market economy, and who now have the most to lose. It’s a Faustian bargain. As long as they are loyal to Assad, they are permitted to murder, loot and rape, as was the case in Houla, where the Shabiha came from neighboring villages to the south.

The Shabiha were also active in the capital Damascusin August 2011. Every evening during Ramadan, the Muslim month of fasting, dozens of them stood in front of mosques in Sunni neighborhoods, prepared to bludgeon and drag off anyone who said anything derogatory about the regime after emerging from prayers. At about 8 p.m., swarms of Shabiha thugs emerged from the intelligence service quarters, were loaded into requisitioned buses and driven to their deployment locations, where they lay in wait until the faithful dispersed after leaving the mosques.

The Shabiha are criminals and day laborers, mostly Alawites, but also Kurds with the PKK terrorist group, members of Sunni clans from Aleppo loyal to the regime, and some Christians. The Shabiha are the shadow force of a regime that no longer trusts its own army, but instead has created a monster that is taking on a life of its own, undermining the Syrian government long before it suffers a military defeat.

Months ago, the author and dissident Yassin al-Haj Saleh, who is in hiding in Damascus, wrote: ”The current heads of the security services may very well reform themselves into a mafia-type organization after the collapse of the regime and continue to practice the violence, theft and discrimination at which they are so adept.”Syria could eventually be controlled by marauding gangs, driven by greed and the fear of reprisal, which becomes more justified with each new wave of killings.”

The Shabiha: Inside Assad’s death squads

The Shabiha started off as racketeers and smugglers. But now, as ultra-loyal enforcers ofSyria’s brutal regime, they have taken on a far more bloodthirsty role, write Harriet Alexander and Ruth Sherlock.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9307411/The-Shabiha-Inside-Assads-death-squads.html

“The door to Dr Mousab Azzawi’s clinic, on the Mediterranean coast ofSyria, was always open to anyone who needed help. But, operating in the heartland of the feared Shabiha militia, there were some patients the doctor would have preferred not to treat.

They were like monsters,” said Dr Azzawi, who worked in Latakia. ”They had huge muscles, big bellies, big beards. They were all very tall and frightening, and took steroids to pump up their bodies.

I had to talk to them like children, because the Shabiha likes people with low intelligence. But that is what makes them so terrifying – the combination of brute strength and blind allegiance to the regime.”

As President Bashar al-Assad’s country continues its savage slide towards full-blown civil war, the violent, dark and secretive world of the Shabiha is coming out into the open.

Nine days ago, 108 people were butchered by the Shabiha in the town of Houla. The pro-Assad thugs went through the village, house to house, and slit the throats of anyone they came across – including 49 children. Exactly a week later, the Shabiha pulled 12 factory workers off a bus in the town of Qusayr, 40 miles to the south; tied their hands behind their backs, and shot them in the head. “

“The world is learning just how bloodthirsty the Shabiha can be. But insideSyria, their capacity for hideous brutality has long been known.

”Even before the revolution, any time there was unrest they would go out into the streets and stop it for the government,” said Selma, who comes from a prominent Alawite family – a Shia Muslim sect, into which the Assad family was born, and to which almost all of the Shabiha belong. Her cousins are Shabiha.

They would just break people’s arms and legs. They would fight for Bashar to the death. It is natural – they have to defend their sect.”

Her cousins wore civilian clothes, she explained – ”then the television can say that these are just civilians who love Bashar.”

President Assad, and his father Hafez before him, used the Shabiha to terrorise Syrians into obedience, brainwashing the militia into believing the Sunni majority was their enemy. “

“After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Syria’s French rulers needed soldiers willing to defend the regime from a Sunni uprising, so they incorporated large numbers of Alawites into the army, who were only too happy to fight their Sunni ”oppressors”.

They became the most politically powerful sect in Syria, and the vast majority of the country’s top intelligence and military officers adhere to the faith. It was from the army that Hafez al-Assad emerged to stage his coup.

Initially the Shabiha were a mafia clan, making money through racketeering. Selma, the Alawite with Shabiha family, said her cousins were ”filthy rich” through smuggling in diesel, milk and electronics. ”Anything toLebanon that is cheaper inSyria, and whatever is needed inSyria fromLebanon,” she said.

The ruling Assad family turned a blind eye to their criminal behaviour and violent methods. In return, the Shabiha became the Assads’ fiercely loyal defenders and enforcers.

”They are fuelled by this belief that they are fighting for their survival,” said Dr Azzawi. ”Assad tells them that they must defend the government or else they will be destroyed; it’s kill, or be killed.”

“An enormous man, identified on the video as Areen al-Assad – a member of the president’s family clan – posed with his gun, grinned from the steering wheel of his car, and flexed his muscles. His huge bicep bulged with a tattoo of the president’s face.

At the end of the video, the posturing Shabiha militants proclaim: ”Bashar, do not be sad: you have men who drink blood.”

”It is their motto,” explained Dr Azzawi, who said that many of the men were recruited from bodybuilding clubs and encouraged to take steroids. ”They are treated like animals, and manipulated by their bosses to carry out these murders. They are unstoppable.”

“The militia operated with blind devotion to the leaders, referred to as ”muallim”, meaning boss, or ”khaal”, uncle. And indeed, it was in many ways a family business.

Mr Assad’s cousin Numir has taken over as one of the key rulers of the Shabiha – even though the government is careful to avoid direct association with the militia and their murderous acts.

How the men are paid is unclear, although many claim the Shabiha is funded by businessmen tied into the Alawite clique that dominates the government.

What is known is that the Shabiha have a strong economic motives for backing the regime. Foot soldiers can earn up to £120 for a day’s thuggery – a fortune in Syria.”

“”If they know the whole area is against the regime they have no problem killing everybody,” she said. ”That is how it works.”

The armed opposition

It has been fascinating to watch the development during the last 15 months of the opposition’s developing from the first few demonstrations. How the demonstrations started spreading and got bigger and bigger.

To the first sporadic attempts from civilians to defend themselves and their families, villages, neighbourhoods etc. against the attacks by the Assad regime. Via the first appearance of the defectors from the Assad army. Until today where you have a lot of groups going from hit-and-run attacks to learning how to coordinate and organize more sophisticated attacks against stronger targets.

They are learning, and they are learning fast because they have to.

In addition, they have increased the pressure on the regime many times over, increasing attrition and increasing defections etc

Still the armed opposition desperately lacks weapons and ammunition, especially to defend against Assad’s tanks and helicopter gunships.

The rebels are also gaining confidence. “Every day we control more territory, every day we have more defections, and we are having better organization in our ranks,” said Maj. Sami al-Kurdi, a spokesman for the Homs Military Council, one of the new military structures that are being established around the country. “The regime now controls only the territory under its tanks, and the evidence is that they don’t dare step out of their tanks.”

And as I said, they are growing in effectiveness and strength.

After driving rebels from strongholds in the Baba Amr district of Homs and several Idlib towns in March, the government has since been unable to press home the advantage. Repeated efforts to dislodge the FSA from the provincial Homs towns of Rastan and Qusair have failed, and a major offensive launched last week against a rebel stronghold in the town of Haffa, northeast of Latakia, faltered despite intense shelling and the deployment of combat helicopters.

The Assad regime can go in and suppress an area with heavy weapons, but as soon as they leave it, it losses the control.

The result is that many parts of northern and central Syria have effectively fallen under the sway of the opposition,

Which also makes it really hard for the regime to move around, and for them to get out of their checkpoints that they are barricaded in. The Assad forces are in many cases pinned down.

Remember that I two months ago talked about how the Syrian army de facto had defected “in place”? Well, now the defections have started to increase and continues at a steady rate. And regular troops are weary after nearly 15 months of continuous deployment since no new conscripts have been called in.

One example – Of 400 soldiers originally stationed in the provincial capital of Idlib, just around 60 remained last week defending their base near the centre of the city, which has seen significant fighting. In the small city of Maraa, near Aleppo, 15 soldiers defected within the space of a weekas many as in the entire previous year.

The rebels also are starting to inflict heavy casualties on government troop’s security forces. It is likely to hit a record level in June for the second month in a row. As of Monday, June 11, the state news agency has announced the funerals of 259 soldiers and police officers who were killed in combat with rebels this month, a record 57 of them Saturday June 10 alone. Well ahead of May’s pace, when 404 such burials took place

Just during the period of June 10 to June 13, here are some of the main events:

– FSA Attacked the Taftanaz military airport.

– In Deir Ezzor several BMP:s and tanks where destroyed there alone. In Baba Amr, where the massacre occurred, well the FSA is back and on June 12 they destroyed two BMP:s.

– And on the same day three tanks where destroyed in Haritan,Aleppo

– The FSA captured the Deir Ezzor checkpoint operated by Army and shabiha. They captured lots of weaponry and ammunition after the attack

– FSA attacked a big regime convoy outside Latakia in operation ‘Cutting the snake’.

– Capture by FSA of shabiha and army in one of their strongpoints in Al Qusayr on June 10.

– Syrian rebels on June 11 briefly seized control of the strategic army base al-Ghanto (surface-to-air missiles are stationed there), close to the central town of Rastan before the army rained down artillery and forced them out of the station. They seized a lot of weapons and ammunition.

– On June 3, rebels attacked a Syrian Air Force As Suwayda air base east of the southern town of Deraa opposite the Israeli Golan border – their first such attack in the 14-month uprising,  Several rebel groups firing mortars set fire to fighter aircraft and assault helicopters in their hangars and ripped up runways.

Does this sounds like some “ragtag” wild bands on the lose?

Inside Syria: You will never guess who arms the rebels

In any revolution, getting weapons is a key challenge. Syria’s rebels have found an interesting solution.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/syria/120606/syrian-rebels-weapons-arms-revolution

“JABAL AL-ZAWIYA, Syria— At the Free Syrian Army base here, a group of men led a nervous prisoner from his cell to a car waiting outside. A few hours later, the rebels returned alone, with a trunkload of weapons.

As they loaded the store room with new bullets and rocket-propelled grenades, Hamza Fatahallah, an army defector who joined the Free Syrian Army nine months ago, described the transaction that had taken place.

We have caught many army prisoners,” he said. “We send them back home for a small amount of money on the condition they do not return to the regime. We use the money to buy weapons.”

For the release of this prisoner, Ahmed Haseeba, the group received $500. With this money, Fatahallah said they were able to buy ammunition from their main supplier: Syria’s national army, also known as the enemy.

This strange cycle of exchanging prisoners for weapons has been playing out between rebel forces and President Bashar al-Assad’s army since the beginning of the revolution.

Fatahallah estimated that his village purchased 40 percent of their weapons from the regime. Prisoner exchanges have so far contributed almost $80,000 toward weapons purchases, he said. And they obtain an additional 50 percent of their weapons during battle. The remaining 10 percent are donated and smuggled from outside the country, or are purchased from private merchants, mostly from Iraq.

Occasionally, prisoners are also exchanged directly for weapons, Fatahallah said. They have received up to two Kalashnikov rifles in exchange for a prisoner in the past.

For the regime, or at least the duplicitous members of it, supplying the enemy is a big business. Government officers also sell Kalashnikov bullets, which typically sold for less than 40 cents before the uprising, for about $4 each, according to Ahmed Al Sheikh, the leader of the armed opposition in Jabal al-Zawiya. He leads about 6,000 men from eight battalions that are collectively known as the Sham Falcons.

Kalashnikovs are bought for about $1,000, he said. Rocket-propelled grenade launchers, complete with a set of four rockets, cost up to $4,000, as does a BKT machine gun.

“These officers sell to us not because they love the revolution but because they love money,” Al Sheikh said of his chain of suppliers. “Their loyalty is to their pockets only, not the regime.

While most of the sellers are corrupt officers, they said lower ranking soldiers have occasionally stolen supplies from government weapons storage and sold them to the rebel forces.

The relationship is not always a smooth one.

Back at the base, the men were relaxing after lunch when a loud explosion shocked everyone to their feet. As they feared, the previous night’s purchase of Kalashnikov bullets had been booby-trapped. This time their colleagues were lucky enough to survive the discovery.

The men had learned from prior experience — bullets acquired from the regime are sometimes emptied of their gunpowder and filled with TNT designed to destroy the Kalashnikov and its owner, rather than the enemy.

After several injuries and the loss of two rifles, the men had learned to spot the fakes. To everyone’s relief this had been a controlled explosion, by someone suspicious of the new batch. The damage inflicted was only a blackened hand, some singed hair and a hole in the table.

“These ones here are good bullets,” said battalion leader Asad Ibrahim, showing the red marking on the base of one of the bullets. Holding up another with a slightly darker red off-center mark he said, “These are Bashar’s bullets to explode our guns.”

The men said bullets like these have destroyed many guns and killed or seriously injured several of their fellow fighters. But desperate for ammunition, they take the risk.

Commander Al Sheikh said that half of the Sham Falcon arsenal are seized from the enemy. Most are taken either during battle, or after attacks on government checkpoints. And the rebels carry out organized raids on government weapon stores whenever they can.

During an attack on a checkpoint in Mughara last week, Al Sheikh proudly boasted that his men had managed a rare grab: a T62 tank along with anti-aircraft weapons.

Another source of arms is from the army defectors themselves, who bring their own weapons along when they join the rebel forces.

Sitting at the base, the men laughed as they recalled the story of two friends, both defectors, who told their superior they needed one of the gun-mounted vehicles and some heavy weapons to check on a call regarding rebel activity. Loading the truck with as much ammunition and weapons as they could find, they drove straight toward the rebels, checking in by radio with their boss with stories of hunting down “rebel traitors” hours after they had already betrayed sides.

While the Free Syrian Army has been adept at obtaining weapons, it has also proven skillful in manufacturing their own.

In a secret warehouse across town from the base, fertilizer and sugar were being boiled in a large pot. Everything from teapots to large metal pipes were being filled to make roadside bombs for attacks on tanks and army vehicles. 23mm bullet casings were filled with explosives with a small wick on top, looking more like an ACME special from a Loony Tunes cartoon than a deadly hand grenade.

We are using very simple weapons against the highly sophisticated weapons of the regime — tanks, rockets, missiles. What a government! What a regime. Doing nothing but killing their people,” Fatahallah said during a tour of the busy workshop.

The men from the battalion spoke constantly of the need, not for military intervention from abroad, but for international help in obtaining more weapons. But with or without this support, they vowed to continue the fight until Assad is removed.

“The Quran says to prepare whatever weapons you can to fight your enemy,” said Al Sheikh, the commander, as his local leaders discussed preparations for their next mission.

“Even if no weapons are available and all we have left to use are stones, we will go on with our revolution until Assad falls.”

Syrian rebels in Turkey doubtful over new Arab arms supplies

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/nationworld/sns-rt-us-syria-crisis-turkeybre85d10p-20120614,0,3789440.story

“ANTAKYA, Turkey(Reuters) – Syrian rebels resting and recovering from wounds in Turkeysay that far from receiving a host of heavy weapons to take the fight to government forces, they feel forgotten by their Western and Arab backers.

Some rebels and opposition figures inside and outside Syria say there has been an upsurge in recent weeks of heavier weaponry being smuggled into Syria via Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq from suppliers inSaudi Arabia and Qatar.

The weapons, which according to the rebels are being supplied by private sponsors, include thousands of shells, hundreds of sniper rifles, as well as anti-armor missiles.

But in the verdant hills, wooded mountainsides and languid refugee camps of Turkey’s southern Hatay province, Free Syrian Army rebels returning from the fight to rest and tend their wounds, said they had seen no sign of any new weapons.

One rebel said less than half the fighters in his unit even had a gun. What weapons they did have, the rebels said, came from inside Syria.

This is an absolute lie. We have not seen anything. If they are coming through Lebanon, maybe, but if they were, we would see these weapons. We don’t see them, where are they? said one rebel who gave his name only as Ahmad.

Every household has had one person killed or wounded. If we had weapons we could defend ourselves,” said Ahmad, clean-shaven and dressed in jeans and a white t-shirt, not fitting the typical image of a rebel fighter.”

“After the tanks push their way through the town and surrounding villages, Ahmad said, Assad’s soldiers, move from house to house rounding up young men and looting their homes. What they leave behind, they destroy, he said.

From a hospital ward in Hatay’s main cityAntakya, Ahmad becomes frustrated when speaking about weapons. He motions his hands emphatically to drive home his point.

By God, we don’t trust anyone. We don’t believe anyone anymore. The world has forgotten us,” he said.

Like most of the Syrians inTurkey, Ahmad would only give one name for fear of reprisals against his relatives at home.

As Ahmad spoke, the newest wounded arrival, 31-year-old Lutfi, was wheeled into the emergency department below. Lutfi, a Free Army fighter was shot in the leg during a clash with government troops in Jabal al-Krad near the western city of Latakia.

Lutfi said he and some 150 rebel fighters ambushed around 200-250 of Assad’s men who were on their way to occupy one of the surrounding villages. Two rebels were killed in the clash and another four were wounded.

The right leg of his camouflage military trousers has been ripped off, revealing a bandage covering his bullet wound. Lutfi laughed when asked whether new weapons had reached his men.

There are no new weapons. All we can do is attack and retreat. They are nothing against their weapons,” he said.

ONLY 40 PERCENT HAVE WEAPONS

Some 45 km (30 miles) south of Antakya only minutes from the Syrian border, Nasim, another rebel stands outside the Yayladagi refugee camp – tents erected inside an old, derelict tobacco factory that now serves as his temporary home.

Like at the others camps scattered around Hatay and further to the east, here fighters come to recoup with comrades or family members. Syrians are free to enter and leave the camp but access to the media is restricted.

Nasim says he regularly crosses back into Syriato smuggle food and blankets to fighters stationed inside but said he had not seen any new weapons cross from Turkey into Syria and that all the weapons he had seen had been acquired in the country.

”Three months ago I heard that Arab countries were going to send us money or weapons but I have not seen anything. Not one country has sent us money or weapons,” said Nasim, a short, stocky, scruffily dressed man in his 30s with a full black beard.

”The only weapons we get are by pooling our money together and buying them in Syria, or someone who supports us will come and give us their hunting rifle or something. Sometimes soldiers from the army sell us weapons,” he said.

Only around 40 percent of his unit even had a weapon, Nasim said, ”and these are light weapons. Assad is hitting us with tanks.”

Some 40 rebels and activists who spoke to Reuters this week all said that apart from a small number of light weapons which had been bought on the black market, they had not seen any weapons smuggled to Syria through Turkey.

While Turkey has thrown its support behind Assad’s opposition, has called for the Syrian leader to step down and given sanctuary to senior defected Syrian army officers, it has opposed any outside military intervention in its neighbor.

Turkish officials sayAnkara is not arming the rebels and have denied reports that weapons from other countries are being smuggled over Turkish territory.

Corroborating accounts of what is happening inside Syria is difficult because the government tightly restricts foreign media access. Most rebels also cross into Syria during darkness and Turkish security forces do not allow media near informal border crossings.

But for the rebels it does not matter where the weapons originate or how they get there, as long as they come.

Wherever they come from it does not matter. We want weapons. We want to be able to defend our women and our families. We don’t want money, just weapons,” said Omar, another rebel smuggler at Yayladagi.”

Syrian Army Unable to Stop Flood of Deserters

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/syrian-army-unable-to-stop-flood-of-deserters-a-838188.html

“Yet the cynical joke about the soldiers at the checkpoint reflects a reality that grows closer with each day, one which is welcomed by many Syrians: The regime is finding its soldiers slipping out of its grasp. One noncommissioned officer from the northwestern Syrian city of Idlib, just hours after defecting to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), relates breathlessly how he made his escape: ”The officer was sitting there, and when he was alone with me and a friend of mine, he demanded, ‘What are you still doing here? Go on and get out of here!’ The officer will issue the order to shoot them, the defector says, and he’ll call their families and threaten them, but all that is nothing but show. It’s over, he says, and it was time for them to disappear.

Shooting from a Distance

Of 400 soldiers originally stationed in the provincial capital of Idlib, just a couple dozen remained last week defending their base near the center of the city, which has seen significant fighting. In the small city of Maraa, near Aleppo, 15 soldiers defected within the space of a week — as many as in the entire previous year.

In Azaz, where Assad’s troops still control a checkpoint at the edge of the city, a heavily fortified city quarter and the minarets of the largest mosque, two soldiers defected a few days ago under the cover of a fake attack. They reported they had received hardly any supplies in weeks, and that they were living on dried out bread and brackish water. One earlier defector had taken with him the numbers of everyone in his unit who owned a cell phone. The FSA then contacted each of them, offering to help them escape. Many of the soldiers found it an attractive offer.

This is just one small insight into the situation in northern Syria, but deserters from other parts of the country who have managed to make their way back to their native villages near Aleppo tell of similar conditions in their own units. Reports of the types of attacks carried out by Assad’s troops also suggest the situation in the south, in the area around Damascus, in Deir al-Zor in the east and in Homs in the west is much the same as it is in the north: In many cases, the army no longer deploys its troops, but instead shoots from great distances using tanks and heavy artillery, or from helicopters, strategies which decrease the risk to the army.

One defector from Homs, a city that has also been the site of heavy fighting, describes a cycle of accelerating collapse. ”If I’d left sooner, state security would have arrested my family and burned down my house,” he says. ”But they’re not going to come now, certainly not just because of me.”

Diminishing Fear

With each bit of the country that slips from the regime’s control, the soldiers’ fear diminishes. That in turn increases the number of defectors, more and more of whom join the FSA. One officer, who defected to the FSA and has a precise mind for figures, estimates the group has around 40,000 former army soldiers in its ranks, although the proportion of soldiers and civilians varies among regions.

Outwardly, power dynamics in Syria have changed little in the past 15 months. The rebellion has gripped the cities, but unlike in Libya, here there is no still no large, contiguous region for the rebels to defend. But the appearance of stability is deceptive. While it’s true that soldiers are no longer allowed to travel by intercity bus without a permit, and that many of those who escape still risk being shot by the omnipresent intelligence service, the fact remains that the regime is no longer able to stay the gradual erosion of its army.

The impression of power and control emanating from the centers of Damascus, Aleppo and other major cities may also be deceptive. The Western half of Syria is a land of villages and small cities, which have joined together with the insurgency in the most densely populated provinces. The area around Aleppo, Idlib, Homs, Hama and Daraa together forms a zone in which the government’s troops may attack anywhere, at any time, yet are no longer able to control the area permanently. And in many places, the people living here have switched sides. Sunni Muslims have certainly done so, but so have most Druzes and Ismailis. And though Kurdish villages in the northwest, such as Basuta and Ain Dara, have started flying the Kurdish flag in recent weeks, rather than the revolutionary flag with its three stars, there’s no one left here who still defends the regime.

Around 50 soldiers are stationed on Sheikh Barakat Mountain near the Churchof St. Simeon, northern Syria’s famous late antiquity ruin, but for the past two months they’ve received supplies only by air, because convoys are no longer able to pass through the surrounding area, which is completely under the FSA’s control

‘We Don’t Get Orders’

The FSA itself is a peculiar entity. It’s clear that it’s effectively organized at the village level and in small cities, each group loosely connected with other districts and provinces, but without a set hierarchy or command structure. ”We have a good relationship with the FSA’s commander in exile in Turkey,” says one local commander, ”but we don’t get orders. We’re in charge of ourselves.”

This set-up isn’t enough to allow coordinated attacks on the regime’s centers of power, but it appears to be good enough to control the rest of the country. What’s sustaining the regime is its monopoly on heavy weaponry, as well as its tough core of 100,000 to 200,000 officers, secret police, elite soldiers and militia members, most of whom are Alawis and fear that the regime’s fall would spell their own end as well. These troops have their stronghold in the Ansariyah Mountains in the west of the country and control parts of the larger cities as well, but they no longer hold all the land between.

Everyone — the rebels, the hundreds of thousands of undecided currently fleeing through the country to wherever they feel they will be somewhat safer, even those who support the regime — are all dreading the ”next step,” in the words of Abu Ali al-Dirri, an officer who changed sides six months ago. The next step is the air force.

‘They’re Going to Bomb the Country’

Syria has made massive improvements to its air force in the past year, but so far, aside from the helicopters, hardly put it into action. ”But before the Assads go down, they’re going to bomb the country,” Dirri believes. For years, he says, the regime has made a point of ensuring the loyalty of the air force, the branch of the military where President Bashar Assad’s father Hafez began his career. ”They’ve increased the proportion of Alawi cadets at the military academy in Aleppo constantly, especially in the air force,” he says. ”They knew things would turn against them at some point.”

At most, Dirri says, the regime would face the problem that many older pilots have been discharged in recent years, while many newer pilots have only barely completed the number of flying hours necessary in order to fly a fighter jet. Dirri himself, as a Sunni, hasn’t even been allowed to carry a gun since the revolution began.

For years, the officer says, ”Russia didn’t want to supply replacement parts any more, because we never paid, but now Russia is providing enormous amounts of assistance, even sending over personnel.” He adds that more than 1,000 Russian engineers were present in the country this January. Many of them were officially there as agricultural consultants, ”but their work doesn’t have much to do with agriculture.” Iran has sent arms and ammunition, he adds, but not much in the way of personnel, while China has a group of air force specialists stationed at Aleppo‘s military airports.

Around half of the air force’s 360 fighter jets are fully operational, Dirri says. It’s roughly the same proportion with its 120 helicopters. Its French ”Gazelle” helicopters, equipped with armor-piercing weapons, are in the best condition, ”but not a single one of them has ever taken off — they’re all stationed at the presidential palace airport.”

Where Will the West Draw a Line?

As long as the West continues to declare every few days that it has no intention of carrying out a military intervention, says Colonel Dirri, the regime in Syria will continue to use everything at its disposal. ”Its strength rests in the fact that the whole world is saying, ‘We’re not going to get involved,'” he says. ”If this Rasmussen” — a reference to NATO’s secretary general — ”would just shut his mouth for once, that alone would do Syria a great service!”

At the very latest, after the massacres in Houla two weeks ago and in Mazraat al-Qubair last Wednesday, none of the rebels in northern Syrian still believe the UN’s peace plan will be successful. Instead, their greatest hope is little more than a rumor: that at some point the US must surely draw a line, and perhaps Russia too. What will it take to reach that line? The deployment of Syria‘s air force to carpet-bomb the country? Or perhaps the regime resorting to its arsenal of chemical weapons?

One thing is clear: With or without a vote from the UN Security Council, the rebels want an intervention.”

The T-HOMS 75

Finally the T-HOMS 75. It is a Toyota pickup fitted with steel plates to protect teams of three rebel fighters each behind the rockets and machine guns. Under the motto, “you take what you have”

This is what NATO and Anders Fogh Rasmussen probably would call “a serious proliferation of weapons in the region”.

And this piece from Haaretz on the left and very critical of Israeli policies. Regarding the deafening silence from nearly ALL Israeli Arab artists in Israel and Jewish radicals, the peace movement etc.

A deafening silence

Tolerance in the face of Assad’s bloody murderousness is liable to have the same effect on Arab-Jewish radicalism in Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/a-deafening-silence.premium-1.436292

By Ari Shavit

“Remember Deir Yassin? The number of innocent people murdered in Syriaover the past year is 100 times greater than the number of innocent people who were murdered in this Arab village at the edge of Jerusalem in 1948.

Remember the Qibya incident? The number of innocent people killed in Syriaover the past year is 250 times the number of innocent people killed in this pastoral village in Jordan in 1953.

Remember Sabra and Shatila? The number of innocent people butchered during the past year in Syria is 20 times the number of innocent people who were butchered in those Palestinian refugee camps in western Beirut in 1982.

Remember the bloody rioting in October 2000? The number of innocent people who were shot to death in Syria during the past year is 1,000 times the number of innocent people who were shot to death by the Israel Police in the Galilee and the Triangle area in central Israel.

Remember Operation Cast Lead? The number of innocent people who were felled in Syria during this past year is dozens of times the number of innocent people who fell in the Gaza Strip during that widely condemned Israeli military operation in the winter of 2008-09.

The picture is clear: During one year, the secular Arab nationalism of Bashar Assad has spilled more innocent blood than the Zionists have in decades. This Arab tyrant, who in the past was the darling of Arab Knesset members, is massacring his fellow Arabs in a way that Israel never did.

Arab cities are being bombed, Arab women are murdered, Arab children are slaughtered. An Arab society is being shredded, and an Arab state shattered into fragments.

Despite all this, the The High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel is not demanding that the United Nations intervene to stop the bloodshed. Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, is not petitioning the International Criminal Court in the Hague to put the war criminals on trial. Large Land Day type demonstrations have not been called. Protesters who take part in mass marches every October aren’t marching. Arab students who mark the Palestinian Nakba of 1948 aren’t coming out against the Syrian Nakba of 2012. Israel’s Arab minority and its anti-Zionist left are watching as thousands of Arab are massacred – and are standing idly by.

It’s crystal clear that the Syrian tragedy unfolding before our eyes has serious international ramifications. It is taking all meaning out concepts such as international community, international law and the idea of moral validity in international relations.

It’s crystal clear that the Syrian tragedy has serious pan-Arab ramifications. It is taking all meaning out of concepts such as Arab unity, Arab solidarity and the idea that the contemporary Arab world accords any real meaning to human rights.

But the Syrian tragedy has serious ramifications for Israel’s anti-Zionist community as well. The inability of this community to directly confront Arab evil undermines the moral basis for its battle against Israeli evil.

Its unwillingness to demand that universal values be upheld in Hama and in Homs pulls the rug out from under its demands that universal values be upheld in Ramallah and Nazareth. Its silence when faced with the butcher of Damascus makes its condemnations of the State of Israel sound hollow.

The Syrian challenge is a moral challenge. There are some Israeli Arabs who are passing this test honorably. For example, Azmi Bishara, the former MK who fled Israel after being questioned on suspicion of aiding the enemy, who in the past was close to Assad, is today waging a brave and intensive campaign against him on Al Jazeera tv. Unfortunately, few of Bishara’s colleagues in Israel are following suit.

Israeli Arab artists in Israel and Jewish radicals in Israel are silent about what’s going on just over the border. This troublesome silence makes one wonder if their declared humanitarianism is authentic. When they spoke up – against Israel – about human dignity and freedom, perhaps they were simply fooling us?

Communism in the West was destroyed in the 1950s because it tolerated Stalin’s bloody dictatorship. Tolerance in the face of Assad’s bloody murderousness is liable to have the same effect on Arab-Jewish radicalism in Israel.

See Part 1 – Introduction in my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 1

See Part 2 – Reports in my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 2

Refusing to arm or help the opposition will not end the conflict or limit it; it will drag on as all the  examples of  like Rwanda, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Darfur, Bosnia (Srebrenica anyone?) etc. shows. Leading to more massacres and atrocities.

And by waiting the situation gets worse and much more complex, then “they” used its complexity as an excuse not to intervene while decrying the lost opportunity for intervention. And ALL this time the killing and atrocities committed by Assad’s regime just continues as nothing has happened.

On the contrary, the Assad regime has increased it’s attacks since Bashar al-Assad agreed to implement the “new” peace plan.

The international community’s response has been ludicrous. Syrians on the ground have felt forgotten and betrayed. A system that is supposed to protect civilians from brutal force has failed on a monumental scale.

And to ALL these countries, USA, EU, NATO, Turkey etc. that are supposed to defend and protect freedom, liberty and human rights.

To ALL these global government organisations (UN),and local ones like the Arab League etc.

To ALL the statesmen and politicians that talk so loudly about “responsibility to protect” (Samantha Power anyone?), freedom, liberty and human rights.

I say only one thing: You should be REALLY BE PROUD of yourselves and the children of  Syria will remember you. Each one of you.

                             To the children of Syria!

 Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 5

12 juni, 2012

Third, the countries and organizations that makes this possible (continuation):

USA and the Obama Administration

You can say much about the Obama administrations Middle East policies. But the easiest is to state the obvious – it is an utter and total failure. In fact, it is even worse than that.

Because what Obama has managed to do is to totally destroy US reputation and standing in the region. He has single-handed managed to alienate ALL the traditional allies in the region like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel.

The Saudis was so upset after the way Obama throw Mubarak under the buss that they decided that they could NO longer trust this man. After that, they strengthen the Gulf Cooperation Council, intervened in Bahrain etc.

And how Obama have supported the Muslim Brotherhood and the fundamentalist take over after Mubarak and the military regime.

And the Israelis, the way the have been treated regarding the fundamental and existential treat from a nuclear Iran.

Make no mistake; this is a fundamental strategic break. That America will suffer the consequences for many years to come.

Add to that the total failure inIraq where you now have a US installed government that is closely allied to Iran. And is helping Iran support Assad in Syria.

You can add to that the disintegration of Afghanistan. Yemen, where the Obama administration forced out the sitting president Ali Abdullah Saleh and now al-Qaidi controls large parts of that country.

Etc.

Etc.

Remember also that Obama and Hillary Clinton switched the policy 180 degrees compared to the Bush time. Assad was “their” man because he was a ”reformer”. And there was a parade of American politicians going toDamascus to shake the “reformers” hand and praising Assad for his “reforms”.

Even several months into this uprising and the slaughter, Obama and Hillary Clinton still vehemently defend him as a reformer refusing to condemn what was going on.

And Turkey, under his close personal friend Erdogan, witch Obama has hold up as a role model for the rest of the Middle East.

A Turkey under Erdogan which have, on purpose, slowly but very determined Islamized Turkey.  With hundreds of political prisoners like journalist, judges, layers, military, kurds etc. Who have spent years and years in prison without a trial.

And the latest example of how far this process have gone:

This Week, Turkey Went a Long Way Toward Becoming an Islamic Republic

http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2012/06/this-week-turkey-went-long-way-toward.html

“Hardly surprising; deeply upsetting; and geo-strategically catastrophic, it’s official. Turkey has now passed over toward being an Islamist state. That turning point is marked by a tiny event of gigantic importance. Fazil Say is an internationally acclaimed Turkish classical pianist. He has performed with prestigious symphony orchestras such as the New York Philharmonic, Berlin, Israel Philharmonic, France, and Tokyo as well as being a European Union cultural ambassador. The Turkish state is now going to put him on trial.

An Istanbul court has accepted the prosecutor’s charge, which amounts to heresy. Specifically, he is accused of insulting Islam because of tweets he sent. Say suggested that since the Koran says there are rivers of drinks in heaven that makes it sound like a pub, while the beautiful women available there make it sound like a brothel. A number of his tweets are quoted here. That’s his crime, writing a couple of sentences to describe his thoughts.

We are not talking of someone criticizing Say or disagreeing with him. We are talking about the power of the Turkish state being used to charge a man with a crime and send him to prison for exercising free speech. True, they are only asking for a sentence of eighteen months in prison but once the precedent is set their ambitions will expand.

There are already hundreds of political prisoners in Turkey today who have been in prison for over three years without any trial at all. Now if criticizing Islam in Turkey is a crime, Turkey is not a secular state. And with all of those innocent people already thrown in jail by the regime on trumped-up charges of treason and terrorism, Turkey is no longer a democratic state either.

Yeap, that really sound like a good role model for the rest of the Middle East!

This is the same Turkey, with active American help, trying to make Syrian National Council (SNC, i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood) the sole “representative of the Syrian opposition. Thereby fuelling ALL resources to them and not to the rest of the more secular, democratic opposition inside Syria.

Doesn’t this also seems like another excellent policy by the Obama administration if you REALLY want to be sure of a democratic development in Syria in the future??

And this obsession of Obama and Hillary Clinton that the Russians has to “approve” everything before he actually do anything.

The Obama administration is actually, which is astounding, giving Russia de facto veto power over US foreign policy. A Russia, which literally hates everything USA stands for and it’s position in the world. And witch have done everything it can to interrupt, damage or sabotage US foreign policy.

Russia is the one that is supporting and protecting Assad, Iran etc. Russia is the one selling ALL these weapons to Syria and Iran etc.

And remember that Obama actually told outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on March 26 that he is going to be “more flexible” after the election in November.

MORE FLEXIBLE???

Just to give some recent examples of the “democratic development” in Russia:

This is the Russia that just raised the fines for participating in unsanctioned rallies or demonstration from 300 rubles to 300,000 rubles, a year salary for a normal Russian.

Putin signed the bill on June 8.

The Kremlin’s own Human Rights Council said in a statement the bill violates an article in the constitution guaranteeing freedom of assembly.

And oh by the way, the Russian authorities don’t very often give “permission” for demonstrations.

In March, a discriminatory ban on “homosexual propaganda” went into effect in St. Petersburg.

And on the same theme – Moscow Bans Gay Pride Parades For 100 Years

Yeas, you read right. Moscow city courts has banned ALL pride parades for the NEXT 100 years!

http://www.queerty.com/moscow-bans-gay-pride-parades-for-100-years-20120608/

“Yikes,Russia! A week after protestors for gay rights were arrested in Moscow, a district court upheld the decision by a Moscow city court to ban gay pride parades for 100 years. Yes, the government can now legally forbid gay pride for a century, from March 2012 to March 2112.”

And this how the Russian government defend it:

“The Russian government has said that rulings such as that of the Moscow City Council are not anti-gay but rather rulings that protect ”the majority’s rights.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2893357/posts

Not to mention the regular killings of journalist, layers, judges etc.

And just today some more “democratic” developments:

Russian Opposition Leaders’ Homes Raided

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-opposition-leaders-homes-searched/24610215.html

“Russian police have searched the homes of leading opposition figures in an apparent crackdown on the eve of a planned mass protest against President Vladimir Putin’s third term as president.

The opposition figures have been summoned for questioning by investigators on June 12 — the same day as the planned protest.

Police, some armed with assault rifles, carried out searches on the homes of opposition figures including Boris Nemtsov, Ilya Yashin, Ksenia Sobchak, Sergei Udaltsov, Aleksei Navalny, and at least five others.

Udaltsov said police showed up at his door early in the morning.

Police and Investigative Committee officers started banging on my door early in the morning, at 7 a.m. At the same time, they searched my parents’ home,” Udaltsov said. ”They presented a search warrant as part of the criminal investigation of the events of May 6.”

Udaltsov said police confiscated his computer, a flash stick, his iPad, and mobile telephone.”

By the way “the criminal investigation of the events of May 6.”  was a demonstration against Putin.

I could continue another 3-4 pages with some more recent “democratic” developments inRussia. But I think you get the picture.

Doesn’t this also seems like another excellent policy by the Obama administration??

Begging Russia,  your enemy, to “help” you and de facto giving them veto power over your policies.

After ALL the “resets”Russia hasn’t moved one millimeter to help USA. On the contrary

Just a few examples:

US condemns Syria massacre and looks for Russian help to oust Assad Hillary Clinton harshly condemns Syrian president as Obama reportedly plans to urge Putin to back a transition of power

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/27/us-condemns-syria-massacre-russia?newsfeed=true

“The comments came amid reports that President Barack Obama is preparing to push Russia to back the departure of Assad under a scheme modelled on the transition of power in Yemen.

According to an article in the New York Times, Obama hopes to enlist President Vladimir Putin’s support over a transition of power in Syria during a meeting next month – the first between the pair since Putin’s return to the Kremlin.

Under the reported plan, the international community would broker a settlement in which Assad would leave, but remnants of the political structure would remain intact.

But for the plan to have a chance of succeeding it would need greater backing from Moscow, which to date has been strongly opposed to Assad’s removal.

Russia, as one of Assad’s few remaining allies, has long blocked tough sanctions against the regime proposed by the United Nations, claiming that it could lead to the bloody ouster of Assad.”

And more peddling of the same:

Clinton presses Russia to back political change in Syria

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ickPHmGjO2L1vDcfS4yInarU-gvw?docId=CNG.6b132c77c83405c53dd440d729dc1b73.c1

““STOCKHOLM — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged Russia Sunday to get behind a political transition in Syria, saying President Bashar al-Assad’s departure was not a precondition but should be ”an outcome”.

Clinton spoke to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov by telephone at the weekend to say that Washington and Moscow needed to work together on a plan that would halt the violence and bring about political change in the country.

”In my conversation with him, I made it very clear there would be no point to any meeting unless it included all elements of Kofi Annan’s (peace) plan, and that certainly means we have to focus on a path forward for a political transition,” Clinton told reporters Sunday during a visit to Stockholm.

”Assad’s departure does not have to be a precondition but it should be an outcome, so the people of Syria have a chance to express themselves,” she said.”

Russia has resisted UN Security Council efforts to sanction the Assad regime, a longtime ally of Moscow, questioning the effectiveness of sanctions and warning that outside meddling could lead to civil war.

Clinton has sharply criticised Moscow for ”propping up” the Assad regime with continued arms shipments, prompting President Vladimir Putin to defend Russia‘s stance in meetings with the leaders of Germany and France.”

“She said her message to Lavrov was: ”We all have to intensify our efforts to achieve a political transition, and Russia has to be at the table helping that occur. The Syrian people want and deserve change.”

U.S. Hopes Assad Can Be Eased Out With Russia’s Aid

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/world/middleeast/us-seeks-russias-help-in-removing-assad-in-syria.html?pagewanted=all

“WASHINGTON — In a new effort to halt more than a year of bloodshed in Syria, President Obama will push for the departure of President Bashar al-Assad under a proposal modeled on the transition in another strife-torn Arab country, Yemen.

The plan calls for a negotiated political settlement that would satisfy Syrian opposition groups but that could leave remnants of Mr. Assad’s government in place. Its goal is the kind of transition under way in Yemen, where after months of violent unrest, President Ali Abdullah Saleh agreed to step down and hand control to his vice president, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi, in a deal arranged byYemen’s Arab neighbors. Mr. Hadi, though later elected in an uncontested vote, is viewed as a transitional leader.

The success of the plan hinges on Russia, one of Mr. Assad’s staunchest allies, which has strongly opposed his removal.

In the past year, Russia has blocked any tough United Nations Security Council action against Mr. Assad, arguing that it could lead to his forced ouster and the kind of fates suffered by Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi ofLibya, who was killed, or Hosni Mubarak ofEgypt, who was imprisoned and put on trial. ButRussia is facing intense international pressure to use its influence to bring about the removal of Mr. Assad as the killings inSyria continue unabated, including the massacre of more than 90 people in a village nearHoms that was reported by United Nations officials on Saturday. “

The Yemen example has been widely discussed in Moscow, so much so that the option has become known by its Russian term, “the Yemenskii Variant,” even in theUnited States. In part, that reflectsRussia’s desperation for a solution to the crisis in Syria, where, the United Nations says, thousands of civilians have been killed since protests began there in March of last year.

Mr. Obama, administration officials said, will press the proposal with President Vladimir V. Putin ofRussianext month at their first meeting since Mr. Putin returned to his old post on May 7. Thomas E. Donilon, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, raised the plan with Mr. Putin in Moscow three weeks ago.

When Mr. Obama brought it up with Prime Minister Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia at the Group of 8 meeting at Camp Davidlast weekend, Mr. Medvedev appeared receptive, American officials said, signaling that Russia would prefer that option to other transitions in the Arab upheaval. During the meeting, “Medvedev raised the example of Mubarak in a cage,” a senior official said, referring to Mr. Mubarak’s confinement at his trial. The official, who requested anonymity because of the delicacy of the discussions, said Mr. Obama had then “countered withYemen, and the indication was, yes, this was something we could talk about.”

And

“After the hopeless gridlock at the special UN session on the Syrian crisis Thursday, an American delegation headed by Fred Hoff, the Secretary of State’s special adviser on Syria, drew a blank in the talks it conducted at the Russian Foreign Ministry in Moscow Friday, June 8, with Syrian expert, Mikhail Bogdanov.

Moscow has flatly rejected President Barack Obama’s proposal to post 5,000 armed UN monitors in Syria, most of them Russian troops, as the core of a new plan to resolve the Syrian crisis. The Russians may consider convening an international conference, but only if its remit is limited to offering a basis for negotiations between the Assad regime and the opposition and new political reforms. On no account must it deal with Bashar Assad’s removal.

Moscow’s position has grown tougher in the last few days. After Russian officials stated this week that keeping the Assad regime in power was not a priority, Bogdanev said Friday: Moscow isn’t discussing ways to promote Bashar al-Assad’s ouster with Washington. “We aren’t holding such talks.”

He stressed that the only way forward on the Syrian issue was by expanding Annan’s peace plan.

However, the only thing that all the participants at the UN could agree on was that the Annan peace plan had failed. And now that the US mission to Moscow has run into another dead end, the violence in Syria will continue to run riot with no world power or body prepared to step in and stop it.

Adding to the complications, the Syrian conflict and the Iranian nuclear controversy are becoming inextricably intermeshed. The U Sofficial Hoff knew he was arriving in Moscow at a grave disadvantage after Iran indicated to the six world powers that it was seriously considering not turning up for their third round of nuclear talks in Moscow on June 18-19.

Its pretext: The West had failed to come up with “serious proposals.”

Most of all, Tehran took umbrage over US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s demand that Iran come to the talks prepared with “concrete steps to curb its enrichment of uranium to 20 percent purity.”

When she spoke, Clinton knew there was not the slightest chance of the Iranians accepting this demand.

Tehran also pulled in its horns at International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) headquarters inVienna when confronted Friday, June 8, with demands to open up its suspect nuclear sites to international inspection.

These related developments all point in one direction: US President Barack Obama’s deep reluctance to intervene directly in Syria and preference for Russia and Iran to take over have run up against equally powerful reluctance in Moscow and Tehran to put their hands in the Syrian fire or take part in any international effort to quench its flames.

Indeed, the Russians and Iranians believe that as the flames of the civil war already raging there spread, the US president will be blamed by the American public and the Arab world for the horrendous sectarian bloodbath.

And if Obama and America’s European allies do decide on military intervention, they will be too late and find themselves pulled down into a bottomless quagmire.”

Here is yet another example of the utter folly of the Obama administrations policy:

How Can Obama’s Middle East Policy Possibly Get Worse? Answer: Look at Syria

http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/05/29/how-can-obamas-middle-east-policy-possibly-get-worse-answer-look-at-syria/

“Some of my readers are unhappy that I keep criticizing President Barack Obama and his government. The problem is that this administration keeps doing terrible things in the Middle East. And the most damning evidence on these actions comes not from Obama’s enemies but from the administration itself and the supportive mass media.

Here’s the latest such item:

“U.S. Hopes Assad Can Be Eased Out withRussia’s Aid,” by Helene Cooper and Mark Landler, in the New York Times.

For almost three years, Obama insisted he would win over the Syrian dictatorship and make it America’s friend rather than Iran’s number-one ally. That was ludicrous. Forced by the uprising to back away from Damascus, the Obama administration has spent almost a year bumbling about what to do.

The U.S. government’s main activity was to entrust to the Turkish Islamist regime the job of forming an umbrella Syrian opposition leadership. Not surprisingly, Ankara pursued its own interest by assembling a Muslim Brotherhood-dominated group, the Syrian National Congress. Though several members resigned, complaining of the radical Islamist control, the Obama administration is still trying to force hostile oppositionists to join.

Now the administration has unveiled a new and equally terrible policy. I’ll let the New York Times’ reporters explain it:

President Obama will push for the departure of President Bashar al-Assad under a plan that calls for a negotiated political settlement that would satisfy Syrian opposition groups but that could leave remnants of Assad’s government in place. The success of the plan hinges on Russia, one of Assad’s staunchest allies, which has strongly opposed his removal. Obama, administration officials said, will press the proposal with President Putin ofRussia at their meeting next month. Obama’s national security adviser raised the plan with Putin inMoscow three weeks ago.

Good grief! There are four different acts of strategic insanity involved in this paragraph. They are…

1. “A negotiated political settlement that…could leave remnants of Assad’s government in place.”

The Syrian dictatorship is led by murderous thugs who know this is a case of kill or be killed. They aren’t going to give up any of their power. And why should they since they think they’re winning and may well be right? They know the outside world won’t do anything, despite the regime killing around 10,000 civilians.

2. “A negotiated political settlement that would satisfy Syrian opposition groups but that could leave remnants of Assad’s government in place.”

The opposition is not so foolish as a Washington pundit, policymaker, or politician. They know that their only hope is to destroy the regime entirely. The democrats want to do so in order to have a modern democracy. The Islamists want Islamism. The Kurds and Druze want autonomy. How could there possibly be a coalition? Both sides know that within days people would be murdering each other. How could anyone expect this kind of deal would work or that the opposition would accept it?

If anyone in Syria might favor such a plan it’s the Muslim Brotherhood. which has toyed with the idea of using such a transition period to strengthen its own hand. So the idea cannot succeed but reveals once again that the Obama administration seems to get many of its strategies from the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s an observation, not a conspiracy theory.

3. “The success of the plan hinges on Russia, one of Assad’s staunchest allies, which has strongly opposed his removal.”

Just think about that sentence! The Obama administration wants to depend on a country that’s disdainful of U.S. interests, wants to sabotage them, and is on the opposite side! The president wants to ask a country that is “strongly opposed” to Assad’s removal to remove Assad!

And finally, equally amazingly:

4. “Obama, administration officials said, will press the proposal with President Putin of Russia at their meeting next month. Obama’s national security adviser raised the plan with Putin in Moscow three weeks ago.”

It’s Obama, not Russian leader Vladimir Putin, who is pushing this plan to put Russia in control! If your enemy tries to fool or cheat you, that’s a problem. If you beg him to cheat you and hand him the means to do so, that’s a betrayal of U.S. interests.

To summarize, the Obama policy shows three characteristics that have wider implications for the president’s strategies:

•It favors Islamist enemies.

It “leads from behind” by giving the initiative to those who wish America no good.

And it shows no interest in helping genuinely pro-American moderates who are fighting for their lives.

And that, friends, is why I spend so much time bashing Obama’s Middle East policy, because it is so very bad and dangerous.

Now a possible explanation for all of this would be that Obama doesn’t really want to do anything about Syria for other reasons. The United States doesn’t want to get dragged into direct intervention; it’s a lower-priority issue; there’s no great policy option; and his only concern is the American election.

But so what? It’s still possible to come up with a better policy than this, a policy that would make Obama look good as well as serve U.S. interests. He could call for Assad’s overthrow; back truly moderate oppositionists; subvert Islamist influence; and send arms and money, but only to the moderates. In order to portray himself as decisive, heroic, and a friend of democracy, Obama could take every possible overt and covert opportunity to weaken Assad, even helping at a low cost to create a no-fly zone and safe havens. None of this is going to happen.

Instead, though, he turns over dealing with the opposition to an Islamist regime in Turkey and subcontracts dealing with the regime to a pro-regime Russian government. I’d say that Obama’s policy in the region could not easily be worse, but who knows what’s next, especially if there’s a second term.”

More on the Kurdish question and Obamas push for them to join SNC:

Syrian Kurdish Dissident: BreakSyriaInto Pieces

http://www.gloria-center.org/2012/05/syrian-kurdish-dissident-break-syria-into-pieces/

“Sherkoh Abbas, a veteran Syrian Kurdish dissident, called on Israel this week to support the break-up of Syria into a series of federal structures based on the country’s various ethnicities.

Speaking from Washington, Abbas was also critical of US attempts to induce Syrian Kurds to join and work with the main opposition body, the Syrian National Council. Abbas, who heads the Washington- based Kurdistan National Assembly, said that dismantling Syria into ethnic enclaves with a federal administration would serve to “break the link” between Syria and the Iran-led “Shi’a crescent.”

Syrian Kurdish, Druse, Alawite and Sunni Arab federal areas, he suggested, would have no interest in aligning with Iran.

At the same time, a federalized Syria would avoid the possibility of a resurgent, Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Sunni Islamist Syria emerging as a new challenge to Israel and the West.

“We need to break Syria into pieces,” Abbas said.

The Syrian Kurdish dissident argued that a federal Syria, separated into four or five regions on an ethnic basis, would also serve as a natural “buffer” forIsraelagainst both Sunni and Shi’ite Islamist forces.”

And

Two Obama Administration Scandals on Syria?

http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/05/17/two-obama-administration-scandals-on-syria/

“When a delegation of Syrian Kurdish rebels recently visited Washington, D.C., the State Department met them to ask for a favor. What was it? The Obama administration urged them to join the Syrian National Council (SNC), the organization created by the U.S. government through Turkey to lead the opposition movement and receive Western aid for all Syrian opposition groups.

But the Turkish Islamist regime, which Obama put in charge of forming the SNC, put the Muslim Brotherhood in control, a fact I pointed out within hours of the announcement of the SNC leadership’s names.

Now that several SNC leaders have resigned complaining about Brotherhood domination, followed by some Arab journalists pointing out the obvious Brotherhood domination at the SNC’s last meeting, that reality is clear. But the implications of such an incredibly foolish policy—America putting an anti-American, antisemitic group into the “official” leadership of Syria’s rebels — have never been properly examined as a case study for Obama’s disastrous Middle East policy.

The Kurds had walked out of the talks that formed the SNC last year when they saw how Islamists would be in control. Not only do they oppose Islamism itself but they also see the Brotherhood as an Arabizing and centralizing group that would impose a regime oppressing the non-Arab Kurds.

The new U.S. effort so backfired  that, with the Obama administration ignoring their concerns, the enraged Kurds in the delegation spoke for the first time of breaking up Syria altogether!

To sum up, Obama policy has strengthened the Islamist forces in the opposition and fragmented the rebels, thus helping preserve a radical anti-American Syrian regime that is an ally of Iran or helping make any revolution more likely to produce a radical anti-American Syrian Islamist regime that will be an ally of an Islamist Egypt.

Now comes a very peculiar story in the Washington Post with the headline, “Syrian rebels get influx of arms with Gulf Neighbors’ Money, U.S. coordination.” Let’s break this down logically:

–The Saudis and Qataris have been providing arms already.

–They know how to buy weapons, how to get them to the Syrian border, and how to give them to Syrian rebels.

What do they need American “coordination” for? What does the word “coordination” mean? I presume it means that the Obama administration, absolutely clueless about what to do regarding Syria, simply wants to take credit for others’ actions. It is part of the pre-election spin about what a great job Obama is doing.

Yet there is another problem here, a potentially devastating one. Who is getting the weapons? There are different people and groups in the Syrian opposition. Some are Salafists who feel comfortable with al-Qaida; some are Brotherhood men; some are ex-Syrian army officers, professionals and relatively apolitical; and some are liberals who really want democracy.

Whoever gets these weapons will be tremendously empowered. So what’s to say that the arms being “coordinated” by the United States aren’t going to revolutionary Islamists? While this is a complex subject, there is information that these arms supplies up until now have not been sufficiently discriminatory toward moderates and away from Islamist radicals. We will know more in the weeks to come if we can see and identify which opposition groups in what parts of Syria have become better armed.

And if it comes out that the U.S. government is “coordinating” the arming of such people with weapons — as it is already helping their political counterparts in the SNC — wouldn’t that be a tremendous scandal?

Let’s be clear here: A proper U.S.policy would help moderate Syrians overthrow the Assad dictatorship and make sure weapons went to the best elements in the Free Syrian Army’s decentralized forces. Such a policy would make sure to deny money, weapons, and power to the Islamists and Salafists, who are proportionately far weaker in Syria than in Egypt.

Obama policy follows the worst possible course. It minimizes U.S. help to the revolution while at the same time ensuring that a disproportionately large amount goes to Islamists.”

And

Will There Be Room for Kurds and Other Minorities in a Post-Assad Syria?

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/115831/sec_id/115831

“New York Times reported that the US hopes that Russia, one of the Assad regime’s allies, along with the Islamic Republic of Iran and China, might offer some assistance to facilitate Assad leaving the embattled regime in Damascus. Prof. Eyal Zisser of the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University in a recent Israel Hayom article, “The Road to Damascus Runs Through Moscow,” noted the transition proposal of the Obama Administration:

The Americans pulled a new rabbit out of their hat in the form of Russian President Vladimir Putin. They suggested that Moscow and Washington jointly impose the ”Yemen solution” on Syria, which calls for Assad’s removal while keeping his regime in place to rule Syria until elections can be held; similar to what took place in Egypt and Tunisia. The Americans hope that such a solution will appeal to those inside Assad’s inner circle, who feel his end is near and will agree to abandon him in order to ensure their own futures.

However that may be a vain hope. Given US, Turkey, Saudi, Qatar and Gulf Emirate support for the Syrian National Council what might follow in Syria could be a Sunni Arab nationalist regime.  A regime dominated by a fundamentalist Islamist coalition. That would dash hopes of minority ethnic and religious groups for a secular democratic federal republic. A federal republic that might include secular Sunni and Alawi moderates, Christians, Druze, Turkmen and the country’s second largest ethnic group, the Kurds. Arabs constitute nearly three-fifths (57 percent) of the country’s 22 million population. That is the hope of the Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria (KURDNAS) leader Sherkoh Abbas. He has joined with US Syrian Sunni reformer Dr. M. Zhudi Jasser to advance this cause via the Syrian Democratic Coalition.”

“For Abbas and other Syrian Kurds, the past four decades witnessed socio-economic deprivations and Arabization of the Kurdistan Region by the Assad regimes – a virtual ethnic cleansing. An estimated 500,000 Kurds were denied Syrian citizenship following a special census in 1963. They lived as aliens in their ancestral lands in the northeastern border areas adjacent to Turkey on the north and Iraq to the east. Arable land and control of valuable oil resources in the Syrian Kurdistan heartland were seized to become the personal wealth of the Assad family. Instruction and schooling in Kurdish language and culture was stopped. This repression of Syria’s Kurds witnessed virtual starvation and usurpation of their national provenance. That led to the uprising in 2004. Dozens of Kurds were killed; more than 4000 were jailed and tortured. “

“Abbas demurs. He maintains that Syria post-Assad may not become another fundamentalist Sunni Arab post-revolutionary government. He noted in a recent Front Page Magazine interview with Joseph Puder, “Syria: An Alternative Choice”:

The Muslim Brotherhood, with the support of President Obama and Turkey, will not succeed in controlling all of Syria. The Alawis and Hezbollah backed by Iran, Russia and China, will not give up power easily.

Asked what the US role might be in the current struggle, Abbas asserted:

The US has a moral responsibility to insure freedom and democracy for all Syrians. .. an Arab nationalist or Islamist regime would lead to more violence and civil war.”

“Gordon:  Recently, the US State Department held meetings in Washington with the Syrian National Kurdish Council. What were the purposes of the session, who attended and what did the Obama Administration hope to achieve?

Abbas:  The U.S. Administration has asked the Kurdish National Council delegation to join the Syrian National Council, and wanted this meeting to directly hear Kurdish opinion. The interpretation of the U.S. Administration in support for the Kurdish political movement is premature. This was a positive event, but the US government should contact and meet various representatives of the Syrian Kurdish street, especially those that work for a federal Syria and want to bring down the Assad terrorist regime.

Gordon:  Do you believe that the Obama Administration has played a productive role in fostering Syrian dissident opposition during this crisis?

Abbas:  Unfortunately, the Obama administration played a role in the mismanagement of the Syrian crisis. It did not encourage a clear and supportive policy toward democratic groups. If the Syrian Revolution fails, the current U.S. administration will have had a key role. This policy is producing harmful results for the Syrian people and encourages the system to continue to commit crimes against humanity. The question for President Obama is what is his Administration’s goal? Is the goal either keeping the Baathists in power in Damascus or bringing Muslim Brotherhood Islamists who control the SNC to power? Both cases do not serve the interests of either the majority of the Syrian people or the international community.”

And the Obama administration stopped a France and Saudi plan to in one strike take out the top Assad leadership:

“US President Obama recently vetoed a detailed Franco-Saudi plan for ending President Bashar Assad’s rule by means of a massive air strike against his palace that would at one fell swoop wipe him, his family and top leadership circle out,

Their plan was for the presidential palace situated atop Mount Qassioun northeast of Damascus to be devastated by French warplanes taking off from the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier off Syria’s Mediterranean coast and Saudi and United Arab Emirates bombers flying in through Jordan.

They would bomb the palace for 12 hours in several sorties while at the same time American fighter jets launched from a US aircraft carrier cruising in the Mediterranean or Red Sea would shut down Syria’s air defenses, which are considered among the most sophisticated and densely-arrayed in the region.

US warplanes would also keep the Syrian Air Force grounded and prevented from repulsing the incoming bombers.

This plan was presented to President Obama separately by Nicolas Sarkozy before he was voted out of office and Saudi Defense Minister Prince Salman, who arrived at the White House on April 12 for a personal presentation. The prince maintained that there is no end in sight for the Syrian conflict; it would only spread and ignite the rest of the Middle East. The peril could only be rooted out at source by a single, sharp military strike that would remove Assad and his close clan for good. This would be the only acceptable kind of Western-Arab armed intervention in Syria and it had the added advantage of being effective without bringing foreign boots to Syrian soil.

In early May, Sarkozy was still trying to talk Obama around to the plan. He spent his last days in the Elysée Palace in long telephone conversations with the White House in which he drove home three points:

1. Because Assad has concentrated his family, top military command and intelligence chiefs at a single nerve center behind the fortified walls of the Qassioun Palace, the snake’s head can feasibly be cut off at one stroke.

The case of Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi was different because, unlike Assad, he never stayed long in one place and was constantly on the move.

2. Once that nerve center is destroyed, Syrian army and intelligence would be bereft of their sources of command. Their troops may remain in their bases and wait for news, while their officers may use the sudden political vacuum inDamascus to try and seize power. In either case, the Syrian military would be free of its orders to crush the anti-Assad revolt.

3. The French, Saudi and UAE air forces lack a central command center capable of coordinating a major combined air operation and therefore depend on the United States to provide this essential component. American military input is also vital for paralyzingSyria’s air defenses by applying its cyber warfare capabilities to disrupt the radar systems ofSyria’s anti-air missile batteries.

Our Washington sources report that Obama consistently resisted repeated French and Saudi efforts to jump aboard their initiative.

The Saudi defense minister at one point in their conversation told the US president harshly that it was time for the Americans to stop talking and start acting. But Obama remained unmoved.

These events, provide the background for Presidents Barak Obama and Francois Hollande’s divergent responses Tuesday, May 29, to the al-Houla atrocity and its 108 brutally murdered victims.

The White House repeated its objection to military intervention in Syria “at this time,” because it would only “increase the carnage.” A military option was left on the table.

That was standard Obama-speak for the crisis in Syria, behind which he remains determined to stay out of armed action for unseating President Assad and instead seek a deal with the Russians on the Syrian ruler’s fate as part and parcel of a comprehensive accord on Syria and Iran’s nuclear program.

President Hollande was at first quoted as saying he does not rule out armed intervention in Syria. Elysée sources later watered down this statement with the qualifier: …”only with UN Security Council approval.”

On top of the American hurdle, Moscow and Beijing rushed Wednesday, May 30, to reiterate that they would oppose (veto) any Security Council resolution authorizing military intervention in Syria, so effectively nipping the French intention in the bud.

Bashar Assad accordingly had no qualms about sending UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan off empty-handed from a final bid to salvage his peace mission: The world powers have left him sitting pretty in his palace, unconcerned about his future and free to pursue one of the most vicious anti-opposition campaigns of modern times.”

I wrote six weeks ago:

“Samantha Power, a prominent advocate of humanitarian intervention and the principle of ”responsibility to protect”, is considered to be the key figure within the Obama administration in persuading the president to intervene militarily in Libya.

Power, was a senior foreign policy adviser to senator Obama, and now a Special Assistant to President Barack Obama and Senior Director of the National Security Council.

But on Syria? NOT A PEEP!

And the same Samantha Power, Special Assistant to President Barack Obama and Senior Director of the National Security Council, mentioned above just got apointed by Obama to head the new White House Atrocities Prevention Board.

But still on Syria? NOT A PEEP!

So apparently she is Very SELECTIVE in which atrocities to “prevent”.”

And now over a month later, the White House Atrocities Prevention Board hasn’t said one letter or peep about Syria.

So apparently the slaughter of over 15 000 civilians, many of them children, in the most barbaric ways imaginable are not apparently considered by Samantha Power, The White house, Hillary Clinton or Obama; to be atrocities.

So the next time these people in their usual pompous ways start talking about human rights, peace, the UN Charter,  ”responsibility to protect”, prevention of atrocities etc. ; you know it’s utter crap and a lie.

Their hypocrisy is so staggering that it is sickening. Literally. And they are the enablers of this crime against humanity.

I have to stop here because this is way too long already. I could continue for another, say 30 pages. to describe the folly of the Obama administrations Middle East policy. But that I leave for another day.

See Part 10 – US and the Obama administartion in my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 10

The final part in two or three days

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

This is why the Euro is doomed.

11 juni, 2012

As a complement to my previous post  EU a stupid empire on purpose

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/spains-real-debt-gdp-right-now-1466

And then there is Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Cyprus….

Just start adding up the GIGANTIC NUMBERS and be utterly horrified!

This is the situation that politicians and the banks have put the common people of Europe in.

They are literally ruining us all. And WE have to pay the price of their folly and speculations.

And after the Spanish bailout Ireland promptly requested a renegotiation of its own terms to match those of Spain.

And in six days there is the Greece election. Alexis Tsipras, leader of Greece’s leftwing Syriza coalition of course used this bailout to strengthening his party’s position.

“What we wonder is why did Europe cave to the Spanish demands before the Greek elections. Because, paradoxically, by yielding to a bailout plan, which at least superficially has been painted as one without conditions, it just cemented Syriza’s entire electoral platform as having absolute validity.

Then again, on the insolvent continent, nothing really surprises us any more.”

And of course, none of this is covered in the mainstream media or by our “dear” politicians.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 4

9 juni, 2012

Third, the countries and organizations that makes this possible (continuation):

NATO

NATO is becoming more irrelevant and hypocritical by the day. Here is one of the latest masterpieces:

NATO action in Syria not on the table, US envoy says

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArchiveDetails.aspx?ID=403578

NATO military action in Syria was not on the table despite the massacre of civilians by the regime, the US envoy to the alliance said Thursday.

NATO allies have neither discussed an intervention in Syria nor made any military planning to stop the relentless crackdown by the regime of President Bashar al-Assad against dissidents, said US ambassador Ivo Daalder.

Daalder noted that the alliance launched its air war in Libya last year after three conditions were fulfilled: a ”demonstrable need” to intervene, support from nations in the region, and a UN Security Council mandate.

”With respect to a demonstrable need, clearly when government forces are attacking civilians with artillery and tanks, there is a need to bring that to an end. That was true in Libya and that is true in Syria,” he said.

But there is neither regional support nor a UN mandate to act militarily in Syria.

”So under those circumstances, the NATO countries understand that the issue of military intervention, which is also always complex, is not right now on the table when it comes to Syria,” Daalder said.

All NATO members, notably Syria‘s neighbor Turkey, are watching the situation ”very carefully and that is where things stand right now,” the ambassador added.

”How it will evolve in the future is anyone’s guess,” he said.

”But the point is that for now there is no active planning in NATO for a military intervention and there is no agreement among or even within the NATO members for moving in this direction at this point.”

This is interesting to say the least. Ivo Daalder just TOTALLY rewrote the NATO doctrine and reason d’être.

In Libyat here was only some “support” from nations in the region”. And the mandate from UN was very different for what they actually used it for.

And in Afghanistan the same thing, only some nations in the region supported that.

But in either case, it didn’t stop NATO from intervening.

So now suddenly when it comes to Syria, and NATO don’t want t do anything because there is “no” support from nations in the region. Well, there is A LOT OF SUPPORT IN THE REGION FOR THAT. So that’s not the real reason.

It seems that NATO is changing it’s doctrine to fit the circumstances and as an excuse for not doing things when it so chose.

In NATO: s new doctrine, the “New Strategic Concept” adopted in Lisbon in November 2010, there is no mention that a prerequisite for any NATO action is to have “support from nations in the region”.

If NATO doesn’t want to do anything in Syria, fine. But be straightforward and say so instead of hiding between “grand principles” and inventing excuses that is not in their doctrine.

It is sad to see an organisation that played such a crucial role for the protection of the Western European countries become what it now have become.

And it’s getting even more ridicules as I have written about before. NATO pretends that doing ANYTHING in Syria  “would fuel a proliferation of weapons in the region”.

So on one side Russia, Iran and China literally pouring in all types of heavy weapons (remember the 240 mm Russian mortar bomb), personal, training etc for the Assad regime.

On the other unarmed civilians and a resistance with some light arms.

And NATO is apparently very worried that if the civilians get anything more than Kalashnikovs and the odd RPG, so they at least can defend themselves and offer some resistance to the Assad forces, that that would constitute “a proliferation of weapons in the region”.

NATO opposes arming Syria rebels

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=382781

“NATO’s chief on Monday said the alliance was opposed to providing arms to the Syrian opposition seeking to counter a regime crackdown, warning that it would fuel a proliferation of weapons in the region.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen called for a diplomatic solution and reiterated that NATO, which led the Libya air war that contributed to Moammar Qaddafi’s downfall last year, had ”no intention whatsoever to intervene in Syria.”

And to top it off:

We monitor the situation closely,” Rasmussen said, adding that the situation in Syria could impact neighboring Turkey, a NATO member.

It’s absolutely outrageous what we have witnessed in Syria,” he added.”

This must be one of the most hypocritical, cynical and ridiculous statements ever made by NATO.

The people of Syria will “thank you” for your “deep concern” as they are being slaughtered by the Assads forces.

So according to this superb NATO logic, the Russian 240 mm mortar bomb, supplied by the as always helpful Russia, used to destroy block after block, neighbourhood after neighbourhood in CIVILIAN Syrian cities, is NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER.

It is the largest mortar bomb known to be in production and use. It weighs 130 kilograms and contains 31.93 kilograms of TNT as an explosive charge.

But giving this to the resistance so they can defend themselves is a serious “proliferation of weapons in the region”

Really good work there NATO!

By the way, the use of such weapons in dense urban environments is a war crime.

This is the same NATO that without any hesitation went in full scale in Libya. Then it wasn’t any talk about “that it would fuel a proliferation of weapons in the region”.

See Part 8 – EU and NATO in my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 8

UN and Kofi Annan

As for the do nothing as usual UN, it “proudly” upholds its tradition of doing ABSOLUTLY NOTHING when it really maters, like Rwanda, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Darfur, Bosnia (Srebrenica anyone?) etc.  And now Syria.

Remember that the UN observers are now there in full “force” and all the slaughtering going on is happening on their watch.

Just to show the total and utter failure of this latest UN and Kofi Annan peace plan:

After the latest massacre, number XX in order, the UN observers where stopped by Assads troops from reaching the place of massacre. And then Assad troops shot at them.

Doesn’t it really seems that Assad is fulfilling EVERY POINT OF THE PEACE PLAN HE FORMERLY AGREED TO?

It’s pathetic and the people of Syria is, as usual, paying the price.

Heavy weapons, drones, gunfire used against UN monitors inSyria, Ban says

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/18731532/heavy-weapons-drones-gunfire-used-against-un-monitors-ban-says

Source: AFP

”NEW YORK– Heavy weapons, armor-piercing bullets and surveillance drones have been used against UN observers in Syria to hamper their efforts to monitor the worsening conflict, UN leader Ban Ki-moon told a Security Council meeting Thursday.

Diplomats inside a closed council briefing on Syriaquoted Ban as saying the tactics had been used to try to force the unarmed monitors to withdraw from areas where government forces have been accused of staging attacks.

Ban said the heavy shelling had been used to deter a UN Supervision Mission in Syria convoy, drones had monitored the movements of observers and the armor-piercing bullets had been fired at UN vehicles.

According to UN officials, UN vehicles are shot at almost every day in Syria.

Ban told the 15-nation council that UN observers had seen Syrian military convoys approaching villages and tried to stop tank assaults against populated areas but had been ”ignored.”

UN observers unable to reach Syria massacre site

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=406496

Syrian troops and local residents are preventing UN observers from reaching a site where 55 people were reported killed by pro-regime militants, the head of the UN mission in Syria said Thursday.

”The UN Supervision Mission in Syria dispatched UN observers to Al-Kubeir early Thursday morning to verify reports of large-scale killings in the village,” Major General Robert Mood said in a statement.

He said the observers were stopped at Syrian army checkpoints and in some cases turned back. He said civilians were also stopping the monitors.

”We are receiving information from residents of the area that the safety of our observers is at risk if we enter [the]village of Al-Kubeir,” Mood said.

”Despite these challenges, the observers are still working to get into the village to try to establish the facts on the ground,” he added.

Mood said he was concerned that the restrictions imposed on the movement of the monitors will impede their ability to carry out their mission.”

UN monitors shot at trying to get to Syria massacre, Ban says

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=406566

UN monitors trying to get to the scene of a new massacre in Syria were shot at, UN leader Ban Ki-moon said Thursday, calling the latest atrocity ”shocking and sickening.”

Ban discussed the attack on the UN monitors in a speech to the UN General Assembly hours after the reported slaughter of dozens of people in the village of Al-Kubeir.

”UN monitors were initially denied access,” Ban told the 193-country assembly.

They are working now to get to the scene and I just learned a few minutes ago that while trying to do so, the UN monitors were shot at with small arms.”

A UN spokesperson, Farhan Haq, later gave more details of the attack.

”The mission reports that, around 3:00 pmlocal time today, a four-vehicle convoy from the mission was hit by small arms fire in Hama, while en route to investigate yesterday’s alleged killings,” Haq said.

”No UN military observers were injured, but one vehicle was slightly damaged. The patrol was forced to withdraw to a nearby government checkpoint.”

Al-Kubeir is close to the protest city of Hama.

The monitors were not able to enter Al-Kubeir today. They will try again tomorrow,” Haq added.

Ban again strongly condemned President Bashar al-Assad’s government, saying it had ”lost all legitimacy,” with its record further tarnished by the massacres in Houla last month and in Al-Kubeir.

”The trail of blood leads back to those responsible,” he said. ”Any regime or leader that tolerates such killing of innocents has lost its fundamental humanity.”

Ban called the reports coming from Al-Kubeir ”shocking and sickening.”

We condemn this unspeakable barbarity and renew our determination to bring those responsible to account,” he said.”

On Friday, the observers finally managed to get to al-Qubair:

UN’s Syria monitors sift through debris of al-Qubair attack Scenes of burned-out houses and charred human remains in village where up to 78 people were reportedly killed in cold blood

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/08/un-syria-monitors-al-qubair?newsfeed=true

“UN monitors on Friday entered for the first time the Syrian village where up to 78 people were reportedly killed in cold blood on Wednesday, the latest in a series of atrocities that have underlined the gravity of the escalating crisis.

The observers were met with scenes of burned-out houses, charred human remains and the clear impression that a ”terrible crime” had occurred in Mazraat al-Qubair near Hama, according to a BBC correspondent following the UN team. On Thursday the monitors were fired at and their access blocked by Syrian forces.

”It is not hard to verify. As soon as you walk into the first house, you are hit by the stench of burnt flesh,” reported Paul Danahar. ”You can see that a terrible crime has taken place. Everything has been burnt, houses have been gutted. The most distressing scenes were at the house next door. I walked in and saw brains lying on the floor. There was a tablecloth covered in blood and flesh and someone had tried to mop the blood up by pushing it into the corner, but it seems they had given up because there was so much of it around.”

In a video clip posted on the internet, a Syrian woman named Lathat calmly described how the hamlet had been attacked by ”regime forces and Shabiha” (government militia) who killed children, including two of her daughters, with knives and axes. ”The army came with the Shabiha with a tank,” she said. ”May God take revenge on Bashar al-Assad.” Like much material emanating from Syria, it was impossible to verify independently.”

And

UN observers reach Syria massacre village, activists say

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=407010

“United Nations observers on Friday reached the Syrian village of Al-Kubeirwhere dozens of residents were massacred two days ago, activists told AFP.

The monitors on Thursday were fired at by gunmen and forced to turn back as they tried to reach the village located in a farming region in the centralprovince of Hama.

”The observers first headed to the village of Maarzaf where the victims were buried and then to Al-Kubeir to survey the damage from army shelling,” activist Abdel Karim al-Hamwi said.

He said soldiers at a checkpoint in Maarzaf ordered residents not to speak to the observers or face reprisals.”

“Paul Danahar, a BBC correspondent travelling on Friday with the UN convoy, reported seeing gutted buildings in Al-Kubeir and no sign of life.

”The largest of the two houses on a hilltop in Al-Kubeir has been gutted by fire. The stench of burnt flesh is still strong,” he wrote in a post on the social networking website Twitter.

He quoted activists as saying that government forces had removed the bodies of the victims on Thursday while the observers were being hindered from reaching the village.

Danahar said Al-Kubeir consists of just a few single-story flat-roofed buildings set in the middle of corn fields.”

And what do they do about these in their own words barbaric acts? – Nothing as usual!

Only more of the same, i.e. doing nothing:

Annan says Assad must face “consequences”

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=406593

Expressing horror at the latest massacre in Syria, UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan told the major powers on Thursday that it was time to threaten ”consequences” if President Bashar al-Assad does not act to halt the strife.

Annan and UN leader Ban Ki-moon condemned the reported slaughter of dozens of people in the villageof Al-Kubeir on Tuesday and told the 193-nation UN General Assembly it was time to increase pressure.

Annan expressed ”horror and condemnation” at the Al-Kubeir killings. Ban said the massacre reports were ”shocking and sickening.”

”The trail of blood leads back to those responsible,” Ban said, in describing how UN monitors trying to get to Al-Kubeir were shot at. ”Any regime or leader that tolerates such killing of innocents has lost its fundamental humanity.”

The international envoy, who secured Assad’s agreement to a six-point peace plan, grimly told the assembly: ”I must be frank and confirm that the plan is not being implemented.”

Yeah, it took him over two months to discover that witch was obvious to anyone with eyes and more than one brain cell after only the first week..

And AS USUAL what do the UN/Kofi Annan recommend? MORE OF THE SAME TOTALLY USELESS “measures”. While the slaughter is going on.

Annan called for stronger international action to back his peace plan, which includes demands for Assad to pull troops and guns out of cities and halt violence so that political talks can start. But a cessation of hostilities that officially started on April 12 has now all but collapsed.

Annan said the international community had united behind the peace planbut it now must take that unity to a new level.”

”We must find the will and the common ground to act—and act as one,” he said.

”Individual actions or interventions will not resolve the crisis. As we demand compliance with international law and the six-point plan, it must be made clear that there will be consequences if compliance is not forthcoming.”

He warned that without change in Syria, ”the future is likely to be one of brutal repression, massacres, sectarian violence and even all-out civil war”

The future???

 IT IS ALREADY HAPPENING SINCE 15 months!

“UN leader Ban also expressed grave concern at the growing death toll, which Syrian activists say has now surpassed 13,000 in 15 months of conflict.

”In view of the deteriorating situation, I would welcome further international discussion on how we can act more effectively,” Ban said.

”No one can predict how the situation in Syria will evolve. We must be prepared for any eventuality. We must be ready to respond to many possible scenarios.”

As I said before what do the UN/Kofi Annan recommend? MORE OF THE SAME TOTALLY USELESS “measures”. While the slaughter is going on.

The most recent example: Annan now wants to create a new “contract group”.

It is to be composed of the five permanent Security Council members (US, UK, France, Russia and China) plus Iran,Turkey,Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

IRAN???

So it is NOT ENOUGH THAT RUSSIA and CHINA IS BLOCKING EVERY MOVE against Syria. Now that “genius” Annan wants IRAN, which together with Russia is the biggest supporter of Assad and made sure that he has survived so far, to be on the group that is supposed to make all the decisions regarding Syria.

And of course the Obama administration immediately approved of this plan. At least the French had the sense to demand that Iran be excluded from this group..

As for the rest of the countries on that list, they are the countries that have managed to do absolutely nothing during these 15 months of the slaughter and uprising,

Remember also that Iran have been trying for the last year to kill Saudi Arabian diplomats all over the world, including in USA. And Iran also want to overthrow ALL the Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia. That’s what behind the troubles in Bahrain.

And Saudi Arabia on it’s hand is doing everything to thwart and overthrow the Iranian regime.

Doesn’t this sounds like a “lovely, peaceful and harmonious” group that is going to solve everything regarding Syria??

Only a “genius” like Annan and UN could come up with a so derailed plan. Because in their perverted world view it is ONLY diplomacy that MATTERS. If one plan fails, ok so we try another and another in all endlessness regardless of how useless or ridicules the plans are.

They change a comma here, add an asterisk there, change a word or the ending of a word here etc. in their “peace plans”.

And voila – everything is magically fixed and solved forever!

In the meantime, as we have seen time and time again ALL OVER THE WORLD, the civilian populations are getting killed and slaughtered year in and year out.

While the UN “observes” and condemns.

And do nothing in the name of the high charter they were founded on.

The contract group:

Iran stalled the US Secretary and UN-Arab League Envoy Kofi Annan’s plan to present the world body’s special session Thursday, June 7, with a plan for a contract group based on five permanent Security Council members and Iran to handle the Syrian impasse. Tehran refused to join the group as long as it faces nuclear conditions, after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Istanbul that Iran must come to the nuclear talks in Moscow “ready to take concrete steps” to curb its enrichment of uranium to 20 percent purity.

Discussion of the plan was therefore abandoned in the hall and confined to UN corridors. By forcing the pace at the special general assembly crisis session, Tehran once again demonstrated its refusal to play ball with the international community until its major power status in the Middle East is recognized.

Iranian sources have insisted in recent days that the six power talks with Iran were not just about its nuclear program but affected a wider spectrum, because the nuclear issue could be settled at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. Tehran has made it clear that the continuation of nuclear diplomacy is contingent on the general recognition of Iran’s major power status.

Kofi Annan warned that if nothing changes in Syria, the future holds all-out civil war. His words attested to the helplessness of the world body to put a stop of the bloodshed in Syria, combined with the Obama administration’s refusal to intervene in the crisis in the expectation that Russia and Iran would step up. That expectation has faded.

Israel remains dormant despite the serious consequences to its strategic and security situation threatened by the new proposal the UN-Arab League envoy for Syria Kofi Annan is to present to the UN Thursday, June 7, for saving his peace plan. The nub of his proposal, is the creation of a “contact group” for handling the hot Syrian potato. It is to be composed of the five permanent Security Council members (US, UK, France, Russia and China) plus Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

The proposal has won the blessing of the Obama administration, meaning its consent to letting the two powers that will dominate the contact group, Russia and Iran, determine the course and outcome of the Syrian crisis.

Washington believes that only they have the clout in the Syrian army for bringing about Bashar Assad’s removal and his replacement in Damascus by a provisional military regime. Washingtonalso hopes, according to our sources, that this gesture will give Moscowa strong incentive to lean hard onTehran for concessions at the next round of its talk with the six world powers on June 13.

Neither Iran nor Moscow have promised the US anything of the sort, but the administration hopes Iran will start being forthcoming on its nuclear program after being permitted to assume a central role in Damascus.

There is less optimism outside administration circles and inIsrael. They expect from Tehran nothing more at the next round of talks than token nuclear concessions, and none at all toward curtailing its work on a nuclear weapon.

However the Obama administration appears to have opted for this course, even though it is the first time since the outbreak of the Arab Revolt in December 2010 that the United States is willing to let go of a major Middle East crisis and allow its foremost Middle East rivals, Moscow and Tehran, to take charge.

President Barack Obama had proposed to President Vladimir Putin the creation of a large force of 5,000 international monitors for Syria, most of them Russians, to safeguard Assad’s stock of biological and chemical weapons against falling into the hands of al Qaeda or Syrian rebels. This team consisting of thousands of Russian troops would be the operational arm of the future “contact group.”

As far as Israelis concerned, the plan has disastrous connotations. Instead of containing the spread of hostile Iranian influence in the region, as Obama promised Israel, he is opening for the door for Iran to extend its influence squarely in the countries neighboring on – and still at war with – Israel, while at the same time moving back from a focused effort to draw the sting of Iran’s nuclear bomb program.

Israel’s political and security tacticians never took into account that a consequence of the Syrian revolt would be the establishment of full-blown Iranian sway over Damascus in partnership with Russia. Indeed, for 15 months, they insisted that the Syrian uprising was proof ofAmerica’s success in breaking up the dangerous Tehran-Damascus-Hizballah axis.”

France backs new Syria “Contact Group,” says Foreign Ministry

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=406957

“France backs UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan’s bid to bring key powers into a contact group on the Syria crisis, but it opposes bringing Iran into the group, the Foreign Ministry said Friday.

”We are favorable to any initiative that can help put into operation the Annan plan,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bernard Valero told reporters.

But he noted that Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius had already stated two days ago that Iran, an ally of the regime led by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, could in no way be involved in such a group.

Setting up a new contact group on Syria was not incompatible with the Friends of Syria group meeting on July 6 in Paris, said Valero.

That group seeks to co-ordinate Western and Arab efforts to stop the violence inSyria.

Annan is under pressure to revive his six-point peace plan, which the international community has accused Assad of flouting. A series of massacres of civilians have heightened international outrage over the conflict.

Annan’s proposal for a contact group however risks setting off new tensions over Syria.

The United States quickly made it known that it considered Iran to be a ”spoiler” in the worsening Syria crisis.

Russia, Assad’s last major ally, has offered to host an international conference on the situation in Syria.”

And this is the UN that wants to be a “world government” and a words power.

See Part 9 – UN and Kofi Annan in my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 9

And finally some perspectives from the Israeli side after their talks with Russia and China:

Syria atrocities to go on

Op-ed: Condemnations of Assad meaningless as long asChina,RussiaandIranthink he’s legitimate

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4239906,00.html

“The Russians have no problem telling the truth: They have no idea of the direction the Syrian crisis is heading to. In ongoing diplomatic contacts amongIsraeland senior Russian officials, the Russians admit that their policy is determined from one week to the next.

In fact, they’re not alone. The Russian policy, which the Chinese share, is no different in essence than Europe’s and America’s policy towards Syria. In Mideastern terms we can say that both sides are making their decisions from one massacre to the next.

A few weeks ago, the head of Israel’s National Security Agency, Major-General Yaakov Amidror, visited Moscow in a bid to convince the Russians to end their support for Assad and stop pouring weapons to his regime. The Russians made it clear that they have no intention of doing so, and never had such intention.

It’s not as though they are clinging to Assad the man; they would have no trouble endorsing someone else, as long as he will be able to preserve Russia’s regional interests the way Assad can. They also have no trouble, alongside the arms shipments, to prepare the immediate evacuation of their people should Assad fall.

IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz heard the same mantra, more or less, when he visited China recently and the Syria issue came up.

The Foreign Ministry’s political research center, which is an intelligence agency in every way, has been drafting detailed lists of the civilians killed in Syria since the crisis erupted: The total stands at 12,500 people. The killing rate at this time stands at 50-60 dead civilians per day, on average.

See you in next massacre

Yet despite this, the conclusion of Foreign Ministry researchers is that the state of Assad’s regime today is essentially no different than it was six months ago. There is indeed gradual erosion, yet one cannot yet see the great crisis that will prompt its collapse.

Indeed, all the talk about Assad’s de-legitimacy is meaningless as long as the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians and the Lebanese think he’s legitimate. He also maintains his legitimacy for now in large sectors of Syrian society.

So the US State Department publicizes yet another plan referring to the need to invoke the UN’s Chapter 7 and accuse Assad of undermining the global order. Big deal. The Americans are talking about 3,000 monitors – instead of the current 300 – who would also engage in enforcement. They are again talking about buffer zones along the Syrian border and about humanitarian corridors deep in Syria to be protected by gunships. For the time being, it’s all talk.

So what did we have in Syria this week? Two brutal massacres, more horrific pictures, and a meeting of world leaders in Turkey that produced numerous declarations on the Syrian question and zero actions.

We’ll see you in the next massacre. Under this state of affairs, President Assad can survive for a long time. “

Next part in two or three days

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

The Slaughter in Syria and the countries that make it possible – 3

8 juni, 2012

Third, the countries and organizations that makes this possible (continuation):

TURKEY

There are reports that Turkey has switched side again (for the fourth time). Remember that up to last summer Erdogan was Assads (and Iran’s) buddy and ally. Then Turkey switched to “neutrality”, sort of. Then last winter Turkey switched to sort of support for the opposition.

It is now reported that Ankara had secretly notified leaders of the rebel Free Syrian Army on Thursday, May 31 that it had withdrawn permission for them to launch operations against the Assad regime from Turkish soil.

So the Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and his Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has double-crossed Western/UN/Arab Syrian policy and moved over to help prop Assad up at the very moment his regime was partly on the point of buckling under international after-shocks from the systematic massacres of his own people

That day, Foreign Minister Davutoglu announced over Turkish NTV: “We have never advised either the Syrian National Council or the Syrian administration to conduct an armed fight, and we will never do so.” He added: “The Syrian people will be the driving force that eventually topples the Syrian regime. Assad will leave as a result of the people’s will.”

This was precisely what Russian President Vladimir Putin, said the day before when he spoke out against violent rebellion, military intervention and sanctions to topple the Syrian ruler.

Obama and his administration have built their whole Syrian policy by letting Erdogan in practice be in the driving seat. Remember also that Obama repeatedly have said that he consider Erdogan to be a “close personal friend” and one of the five top international friends.

To be fair, Turkey had some proposals how to support the opposition and what to do, But they were ALL turned down by the Obama administration, And Turkey didn’t dare going at it alone.

See Part 6 –Turkeyin my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 6

EU

The joke that is called EU and its “united” foreign policy (EEAS) is now at round 15 of sanctions against Syria.

Just one example of the steady stream of UTTER MEANINGLESS BABBLE AND PRATTLE that’s coming from EU:

EU: Syria massacres ‘unforgivable’

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=406621

“European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton on Thursday condemned the ”horrendous” and ”unforgivable” massacres of citizens in Syria.”

Just a hint – if they are SO ”horrendous” and ”unforgivable” why don’t you DO SOMETHING FOR A CHANGE!

”It is totally unacceptable and unforgivable that any party to the Syrian conflict, either government or opposition forces, continues to commit these heinous acts of violence against innocent Syrian citizens,” she said.”

So let’s se if I get this right – The Syrian civilian population are in effect, according to this “brilliant analysis of EU: s Foreign Minister, slaughtering themselves in the most barbaric way??

Yeah, that sounds right.

”I strongly condemn the brutal violence and killing of dozens of civilians yesterday” in the villages of Al-Kubeir and Maarzaf in Hama province, she added in a statement.

The Syrian government has the responsibility to protect its people,” the statement also said. ”I call for a full investigation of the horrendous crimes and support all efforts to this end.”

Well, the Assad regime doesn’t want to “protect” its people. It wants to slaughter ALL the opposition, which is most of the country.

“Ashton said the EU also condemned efforts to obstruct the implementation of Special Envoy Kofi Annan’s six point plan and called on the international community ”to unite behind a political process leading to a democratic transition.”

It is time for us to agree on a united way forward. There is no time to lose. The UN Security Council must continue to support Kofi Annan and use all its influence to stop the violence.”

“There is no time to lose”  Eehh – the slaughtering has been going on for over 15 months by now. With over 15 000 dead. And the brutal dictatorship has been going “on” for over 45 years.

After all this talk, what do they propose? More of the same that has failed all this time. And time and time again before Syria.

Another meaningless sanction.

Another condemnation.

Another meeting or conference.

Another “peace plan”.

Another “observation” mission.

Etc.

See Part 8 – EU and NATO in my original series for more info

Syria and Vladimir Putin: The Butcher of Homs – Part 8

And some news from Syria- Nothing new here:

A new Massacre (number XX) – now in al-Qubeir. In the all too familiar pattern. First, the army begins by a merciless barrage of artillery on a village, town or neighborhood. Second, the   Shabiha goes in and literally slaughter EVERYONE. From the youngest child to the oldest pensioner.

Syria: full horror of al-Qubeir masacre emerges

The voice of Laith al-Hemary’s brother whispered on the mobile phone: ”There are shouts and screams coming from outside,” he said. ”They are killing everyone they find.” Then the line went dead.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9317692/Syria-full-horror-of-al-Qubeir-masacre-emerges.html

“This was the last time that Mr Hemary, 30, spoke to his brother before he was killed inside the family home in the Syrian hamlet of al-Qubeir on Wednesday.

He was among 78 victims who are believed to have died in a frenzied onslaught in this village in a farming district some 15 miles from the city ofHama.

The full horror of the atrocity was betrayed by bloody videos of mutilated children’s bodies and charred corpses.

In a few hours, almost the entire population of al-Qubeir was massacred in what appears to have been one of the bloodiest incidents since the start of the Syrian uprising.

Forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad were responsible, according to opposition activists. They said that regular forces were working in tandem with a pro-government militia, known as the Shabiha, recruited largely from Mr Assad’s minority Alawite sect.

The regime’s troops began the attack on Wednesday afternoon with a heavy artillery barrage, said the activists. Then Shabiha militiamen entered the hamlet armed with sticks, guns and knives. They attacked homes and farmhouses, shooting and slaughtering all the inhabitants they could find.

Mr Hemary and his cousin were among only a handful of survivors of the massacre. ”I could see thick smoke rising from al-Qubeir,” he said. ”I called my brother constantly on the mobile. He was hiding in our home. He told me cars full of Shabiha had come to the village and were attacking everyone and burning houses.”

At 5.10pm, three hours after the attack began, Mr Hemary’s brother’s voice died away and he stopped answering his calls. Pushing open the door of his home several hours later, Mr Hemary found the bodies of his mother, three sisters and three brothers lying bloodied on the ground.

They had been beaten on the head by sticks and stabbed with knives,” he said. ”I went to other homes. I saw family after family slaughtered by knives.”

After the militia departed and al-Qubeir fell quiet later that evening, people from nearby villages ventured into the stricken hamlet. ”I saw a two-month-old child without a head,” said Abou Hisham al-Hamouli, who lives in a village just over a mile from al-Qubeir. ”I saw the burnt corpse of a woman. Her two children were wrapped around, hugging her. They died like that. There were two many burnt bodies.”

Other eyewitnesses reported how the militiamen sang songs in praise of Mr Assad.

A former soldier who joined the rebel Free Syrian Army said that he reached the village within hours of the massacre, but left quickly because Syrian government troops were still in the area. ”I went into houses and saw children without a head, and others without arms. Some were burned and some were without eyes,” he said.

There were only five known survivors, he added. The exact number of victims could not be confirmed, but people from the nearby village of Maarizab said they had buried 57 corpses. A further thirty bodies were missing and had not yet been buried, said activists.

With almost no foreign reporters inSyria, the accounts of what happened in this remote farming village cannot be independently verified.

The massacre comes less than two weeks after an atrocity in the town of al-Houla in Homs province, where eyewitnesses blamed the killing on the same Shabiha milita.”

Or as EU:s Lady Ashton said: ”It is time for us to agree on a united way forward. There is no time to lose”

Yeah sure, You are going to hit Assad with a 16th round of sanctions and he will be “so scared” that he stops the slaughtering don’t you think?

And the as always helpful Russians are as usual blocking EVERY ACTION:

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=406647

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov Thursday vowed there would be no UN Security Council mandate for outside intervention in Syria, indicating Moscow would use its veto to block any military action.

There will not be a Security Council mandate for outside intervention, I guarantee you that,” Lavrov told reporters on the sidelines of a trip toKazakhstan by President Vladimir Putin.”

This piece from Amal Hanano sums up the desperation inside Syria quite well:

Houla: Not a Game Changer

http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/5853/-houla_not-a-game-changer-%20#Syria

“Confession: the images of the carnage in Houla did not move me like they seem to have moved the rest of the world. Yes, they were tragic, horrific acts of violence against the most innocent of victims. But they didn’t break anything inside of me that was not already broken, nor did they raise the level of outrage or sorrow I feel everyday over what is happening in Syria.

Maybe it was because in the twenty-fours hours before hearing about the Houla massacre, I had heard that a friend’s relative had been killed, I had heard that another friend’s elderly relative had been kidnapped by gangs for ransom, I had received desperate Skype messages from an activist in Homs, crying, “my precious ones are gone, my precious ones are gone,” referring to three Shaam News Network media activists who had been shot dead by Assad forces, I had spoken with the brother of a martyr in Aleppo, who told me that since his older brother was killed one week ago, he was trying to act normally but the truth was, his “heart was burning.” By late afternoon, when I watched the first video of the children of Houla, with their tiny throats slit open below their ashen, angelic faces, all I could feel was yet another heavy thud of dread. One we had felt many times before.

The days after Houla brought the news of the death of Basel Shehade, the brilliant, young filmmaker who was killed by the shells falling over Homs. (Will the shells ever stop falling over Homs?) The days after Houla brought news of continued shelling and burning of Aleppo’s and Idleb’s countryside, and the deaths of another a dozen men — their eyes blindfolded and hands bound — executed in Deir al-Zor. The days after Houla brought news of thousands of Syrian refugees inEgypt who found themselves stranded with empty homes, empty pockets, and a bleak, uncertain future.

The days after Houla continued as all the days had before. But the world’s eyes halted on the massacre.

Houla’s images instigated the world’s outrage in its predictable forms: in heart-wrenching eyewitness accounts of children watching their families being murdered; in sectarian-tainted op-eds that cynically questioned who had perpetrated the crimes; in dry-eyed, canned statements by regime mouthpieces complaining about the media’s “tsunami of lies” which painted the regime as criminal when in fact it was a “victim.” There was outrage over the images themselves andoutrage over the decision to exposing the international public to the violent images (as not to upset an innocent British boy or girl).

And the outrage moved from analysis and narrative to questions: Is the UN plan working? Is a regime-led investigation a fair way to proceed? Who committed the crimes? Is killing by shelling (by the regime) as bad as killing by close-range (by unknown “monsters” according to Bashar al-Assad)? Is it pronounced Houla or Huli? Were the slaughtered people Sunni or Shite (or Sunnis who had converted to Shiism)? Are we with or against foreign intervention? Who will replace Assad? Who will arm the rebels? Who are the rebels? Why is the Syrian opposition still fragmented?

And of course the debate: Will Houla be Syria’s Sabra and Shatila, Syria’s Srebrenica, Syria’s game changer?

What exactly is the “world” responding to? The graphic images? The sheer brutality? The number of dead? The gruesome stories?

Over the last fifteen months we have seen Houla and variations of Houla happen over and over. We witnessed slaughtered bodies in February in the Karm al-Zeitoun massacre. We have seen men and boys dripping with blood, with half their face blown off, still struggling to breath. We watched while an entire city was destroyed, missile by missile. We watched a man flattened by an Assad tank, over and over, into human road kill. We have seen dead children, not only slaughtered but bombed, burned, and mutilated. We know in addition to Houla’s fifty-two dead children, there are hundreds of others; in addition to Houla’s murdered men and women, there are thousands of others. Our dead have been left to rot on the streets of Homs. Our dead have been buried in the public parks ofHama. Houla’s mass grave is just one more to add to the others, inHoms,Hama, Rastan, and Jisr al-Shoughour. And let’s not forget the unknown thousands of Syrians buried under the concrete foundations of a luxury hotel inHama by Assad the elder.

Houla was tragedy. But it was not a game changer. Not even close. Not to us, at least. Maybe it was to those who have been hedging bets on Syria’s future. Or to those who keep a secret, magic “number” of how many Syrians are allowed to die before it’s too much.

How many more gruesome violent videos can we watch before we really can’t stomach it any more? How many people have to die before the world either says enough is enough, or turns away from their screens? How long before the daily death toll in Syria is no longer on the front pages and becomes an invisible battlefield, like Iraq, like Afghanistan, like Libya?

How long before you are desensitized?

How long before you forget?

The cynics still claim that the majority of the Syrian people still back the murderous regime, (although by this time the regime and its “silent majority” should be irrelevant like it would be anywhere else in the world in face of such violence, includingBahrain). When a regime decides to kill thousands of its own, its supporters have become accomplices not neutral citizens.

Why the empty debates? Because the cautiously-watching (yet horrified) world has not decided yet on our “so-called” revolution. They claim it has changed from its romantic (and just) beginnings and has become armed, violent, and sectarian. While the world doubts, we watched the “sectarian” Abd al-Basset Sarout and his “bloodthirsty Salafi” FSA brothers sing in a room to a gleaming wooden coffin with a cross, that held their friend Basel Shehade’s shrapnel-ridden body. We witnessed the regime shut down Basel’s memorial service last Thursday in Damascus to the peaceful thousands who wanted to join the church service and light a candle in his honor. We watched last Friday in mosques across Syria, as Muslim men performed an “absentee” prayer for their martyr,Syria’s martyr,Basel. These are the Syrian people too, whether the world wishes to see them or not. Or perhaps they only tolerate seeing them as shrouded corpses.

Those who still argue searching for game changers in Syria should stop exerting themselves. Those who wait for Assad to change his ways and stop the killing, don’t hold your breath. For those who have been waiting for their magic “number,” it’s too late. The number is too high and has passed the threshold of forgiveness.

The game changed months ago while you were turned away.

Whether your eyes decide to confront or slide away from the images of our slain children makes no difference. Because we have already moved on, to face tomorrow, which holds only one Syrian certainty: there will be blood.

I, along with thousands of Syrians, made a decision from the moment the first fingernails were torn from the innocent hands of Bashir Abazid and his schoolmates in Daraa. After decades of our own silence, we had two words for the Assad regime: Game Over.

As for the world, across the spectrum, from the ones fretting anxiously to the ones claiming Houla was a “hoax,” and everyone else in between: we have one question: What’s your number?”

That is a good question.

What is the number of dead and slaughtered civilians the world “accept”? It now stands at over 15 000 dead.

Next part in one or two days

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

EU a stupid empire on purpose

21 maj, 2012

This is one of the best and succinct descriptions of EU I have seen:

“The European Union is like a hospital where all the doctors are mad. It doesn’t matter what is wrong, the treatment is always the same – more integration – and it is always wrong. The best thing to do is never to enter it.

Once you are in, the best thing to do is to leave. If you can’t get out, you will probably die.”

I disagree with one thing this author says: “EU is the Stupid Empire”. EU is a POLITICAL project. The Euro is part of that political project.

A lot of  EU’s decisions make no economic sense whatsoever. In that regard, Peter Hitchens observation that “EU is the Stupid Empire” is completely right.  Not to mention the enormous cost to the common people of all these political motivated but economically disastrous decisions.

The economic side was always a way to “sell it to the people”. Step by step. So that the political agenda could be slowly, but steadily implemented. Until it was too late. The political elites new ALL along that had the EU project been presented to the people for what it really is, people in ALL countries would have rejected it.

BUT EU was on purpose designed this way. So that the people could not stop this political project.

Never forget that ALL the political elites, irrespective of party or ideology, in the EU countries were behind this. With very few exceptions.

One small example, before the referendum on the Euro in September 2003 in Sweden, ALL parties (with the exception of some communists, greens, socialists and some from the agrarian party, ALL big unions, ALL mainstream media, ALL the representatives of the business world etc was for the Euro. And they put massive financial and personal resources behind this.

But the Swedish people, wisely, rejected this with 56% to 42%.

In the latest opinion poll, December 2011, 87,6% of the Swedish people were against the Euro. 9,7 % for.

They planned this, and wanted this. And they kept on purpose this real ideology behind the EU project well hidden from their citizens in their countries.

They kept everything on purpose, including treaties, SO technical and juridical that it was totally unreadable for the common people. Like the EU “constitution”.

Just to give one example of how meaningless the local parliaments have become:

In Sweden 65 to 85%, depending of which area, of “decisions” made by the Swedish parliament HAVE ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN BRUSSELS.

I.E. The national Swedish parliament is in reality rubber-stamping Brussels decisions and implementing them.

That’s all!

And they cannot change even one syllable in these decisions. So much for “representing” the will of the people.

But of course, they are not telling us that. They pretend that ALL these decisions are made locally by the Swedish parliament as the “sovereign” representatives for the Swedish nation. When in reality they can, to the most part, only decide the colour of their on toilets.

Some other EU posts here:

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty – Now also a crony Bankocracy

The scam that is called EU and the Euro is behind the present crisis

Who the Hell do You Think You Are: The Euro Game Is Up!

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens

The New EU foreign minister – An undemocratic appointment to an undemocratic post created by an undemocratic treaty

EU- an expensive pile of festering rubbish, mired in corruption, surrounded by inept and impotent politicians

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover 2

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti.

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

EU – The inner game and the Corruption that Cost £684 931,5 per hour EVERY hour EVERY day EVERY year. And is increasing

The EU Auditors have, for the 15th year in a row, refused to sign off the EU’s accounts owing to Fraud and Mismanagement in the budget

Peter Hitchens blog post here (my bold):

Why defeat an evil empire – and then embrace a stupid one?

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/

”The European Union is like a hospital where all the doctors are mad. It doesn’t matter what is wrong, the treatment is always the same – more integration – and it is always wrong. The best thing to do is never to enter it.

Once you are in, the best thing to do is to leave. If you can’t get out, you will probably die.

Those of us who pay attention to history, politics and truth have known this for many years.

But as the EU’s ‘experts’ and ‘technocrats’ insanely destroy the economies ofGreece,SpainandItaly, it must now surely be obvious to everyone.

The EU, far from being a bright future, offers nothing but bankruptcy and decline.

If the old USSRwas an Evil Empire – and it was – the EU is the Stupid Empire. Obsessed with the idea that the nation state is obsolete, the EU has sought to bind its colonies tightly, while pretending they are still independent.

This is why what is essentially a modern German empire is not held together by armies, but by a sticky web of regulations and a currency that destroys prosperity wherever it is introduced (with one important exception, Germany itself, for whom the euro means cheap exports to Asia).

It is also why it has been built backwards, starting with the roof and ending with the foundations. Old-fashioned empires were at least honest.

They marched in, plundered everything they could cart away, killed or imprisoned resisters, suborned collaborators, and imposed their language on the conquered.

Other humiliating measures followed – forcing the newly-subject people to live according to the invader’s time, to pay special taxes to their new masters, to surrender control of their borders, to use the invader’s weights and measures, salute the invader’s flag and obey the invader’s laws.

Eventually, after a few years of imposed occupation money, set at a viciously rigged exchange rate, the subjugated nation’s economy would have been reduced to such a devastated and dependent state that it could be forced to accept the imperial currency.

The EU, which cannot admit to being what it really is, has to achieve the same means sideways or backwards. The colonial laws are disguised as local Acts of Parliament. The flag is slowly introduced, the borders stealthily erased, the weights and measures and the clocks gradually brought into conformity.

Resources (such as Britain’s fisheries) are bureaucratically plundered, giant taxes are  quietly levied, but collected by our own Revenue & Customs as our ‘contribution’, our banking industry is menaced.

Opponents are politically marginalised, collaborators discreetly rewarded, armed forces quietly dismantled or placed under supranational command. It is happening before our eyes and yet, while the exit is still just open, we make no move to depart.

Our grandchildren will wonder, bitterly, why we were so feeble.”

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>

Who the Hell do You Think You Are: The Euro Game Is Up!

30 november, 2010

As always, a very refreshing and direct to the point speech by Nigel Farage in the EU- parliament on November 24(see video below):

“We don’t want that flag, we don’t want the anthem, we don’t want this political class, we want the whole thing consigned to the dustbin of history.”

Just who the hell do you think you people are? You are very, very dangerous people indeed.Your obsession with creating this Euro-State means that you’re happy to destroy democracy. You appear to be happy for millions and millions of people to be unemployed and to be poor. Untold millions must suffer so that your Euro-Dream can continue.”

If you rob people of their identity, if you rob them of their democracy, then all they are left with is nationalism and violence. I can only hope and pray that the euro project is destroyed by the markets before that really happens.”

As I have said many times:

The political elite in Europe DELIBERATELY constructed the Lisbon Treaty so that the common people COULD NOT UNDERSTAND IT and comprehend what was going on.

I.E. THE  LARGEST TRANSFER OF SOVEREIGNTY AND POWER FROM the people and local governments to the EU central level.

And the people were NOT allowed to have their say and to vote on it.  With one exception, Ireland.  Its constitution made it impossible for the politicians not to have a referendum.

The result – the people of Ireland voted NO 54 to 46 %.

But of course – The political elite in Europe doesn’t accept a NO from the people.

As already have happened before in France (2005 – 55% NO) Netherland (2005- 62% NO), Ireland (2001- 54% NO) and Denmark (1992 – 51% NO)  

They started their maneuvering, twisting, some minor concessions here some more money and transfers there etc.

At ALL COST they had to have a Yes on this one. And they got one a year later.

How many times does the voters have to vote NO before NO is really a NO? Or what part of NO! don’t you understand?

And a very INTERESTING Account of how former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, in a meeting with Gorbachev in January 1989, told Gorbachev that Europe in 15 years time is going to be a FEDERALSTATE.

How in the HELL DID HE KNOW THAT??????

Well the answer is very simple – because that’s been the plan all along from the political elite in Europe.

And surprise, surprise, he become the author of the European constitution (2002-03).

Wouldn’t you say that that was another “lucky” coincidence?

Nigel Farage’s speech very accurately describes the EU mess and the consequences for the common people who have to pay the price for this elitist political project. But he is a rare exception – most politicians in the EU countries ARE STILL LOUDLY praising and singing the hallelujah choir.

Here in Sweden ALL political parties (except the new SD party) now support EU. The greens and the communists, who were opposed, now in practice accept it.

It is fantastic – The whole political class in every country has WILLINGLY AND GLADLY SURRENDERED their national sovereignty and power to EU AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IN ALL THESE COUNTRIES.

After the Lisbon Treaty the national parliaments are a mere joke and charade for local consumption, since 70-80 of all decisions now are all ready made and decided in Brussels. The national parliaments roll is in practice just to put a “local flavor” on what have already been decided in Brussels.

See also my previous posts on EU and the Lisbon Treaty:

EU- an expensive pile of festering rubbish, mired in corruption, surrounded by inept and impotent politicians

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover 2

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti.

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

The New EU foreign minister – An undemocratic appointment to an undemocratic post created by an undemocratic treaty

EU – The inner game and the Corruption that Cost £684 931,5 per hour EVERY hour EVERY day EVERY year. And is increasing

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens

The EU Auditors have, for the 15th year in a row, refused to sign off the EU’s accounts owing to Fraud and Mismanagement in the budget

See also:

Den svenska utrikesförvaltningens död

Nigel Farage harangues EU President Herman van Rompuy, February 24, 2010

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om =” http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>

varning-2

EU- an expensive pile of festering rubbish, mired in corruption, surrounded by inept and impotent politicians

23 oktober, 2010

Italy is a member of the EU. It is charged with running the government of Europe, through the European Council and other institutions, alongside our own government. Yet you have a government which can’t even sort out its own rubbish problems, and it is telling us, the British people, how to run our affairs.

In a way though, the experience is a more than adequate symbol of Europe – an expensive pile of festering rubbish, mired in corruption, surrounded by inept and impotent politicians, which is managing to piss of the local population so much that they are driven to rioting. We should be so proud to belong to such an exclusive club – and hope to share in the end game some time soon.! 

As a complement to my previous posts on EU and the Lisbon Treaty, (see my posts:

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover 2

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti.

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

The New EU foreign minister – An undemocratic appointment to an undemocratic post created by an undemocratic treaty

EU – The inner game and the Corruption that Cost £684 931,5 per hour EVERY hour EVERY day EVERY year. And is increasing

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens

The EU Auditors have, for the 15th year in a row, refused to sign off the EU’s accounts owing to Fraud and Mismanagement in the budget

See also:

Den svenska utrikesförvaltningens död

Here is accurate, direct to the point analyses by Richard from EUReferendum

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/10/our-partners-in-government.html

Our partners in government

Posted by Richard Saturday, October 23, 2010

If anything can be taken to define the ”European” experience, it is this amazing confrontation over the rubbish of Naples. Over this one issue, we have Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi vowing to put a stop to an ongoing dispute over whether to build another dump in a national park near Naples, after violent clashes between police and protesters.

As the rubbish piles up in Italy’s third-largest city, Naples, and at least 20 police offers were injured in violent clashes with protestors. Thus is Berlusconi forced to say: ”We expect that within 10 days, the situation in Terzigno can return to normal.” And this at a news conference in Rome after an emergency meeting – about rubbish?  He needs an emergency meeting about rubbish?

What has triggered this is the government’s plans to build a new dump in Terzigno, which is located 20 kilometers (12 miles) southeast of Naples in Vesuvius National Park. This has for years met with fierce opposition by locals, who have repeatedly blocked access to the existing waste disposal site there. Then, on Thursday, police confronted around 2,000 demonstrators, who threw stones, marbles and firecrackers and used tree trunks to block access to the dump.

Berlusconi also announced he would release €14 million ($20 million) to modernize the existing facility, which the protesters say is overflowing and causing health problems.

The bigger problem, however, is that the site is overflowing with Camorra, the Naples version of the Mafia, who have taken control of waste management in the region. And while the current report refers to the crisis being a major issue for the Italian government for several years, with Berlusconi declaring a national disaster in 2008 – which is when we picked it up, also charting EU involvement – the problem goes back over 14 years. And still the Italians can’t sort it out.

Despite this, as we noted in 2008, Italy is a member of the EU. It is charged with running the government of Europe, through the European Council and other institutions, alongside our own government. Yet you have a government which can’t even sort out its own rubbish problems, and it is telling us, the British people, how to run our affairs.

In a way though, the experience is a more than adequate symbol of Europe – an expensive pile of festering rubbish, mired in corruption, surrounded by inept and impotent politicians, which is managing to piss of the local population so much that they are driven to rioting. We should be so proud to belong to such an exclusive club – and hope to share in the end game some time soon. 

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om =” http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>

varning-2

 

EU – an unaccountable mess created by an undemocratic treaty

12 september, 2010

Above a short but very succinct description of the Lisbon Treaty and what it really means for the common people.

The EU’s president Herman Van Rompuy:

Today, people are discovering what a ‘common destiny’ in monetary matters means. They are discovering that the euro affects their pensions, savings, and jobs, their very daily life. It hurts,” he said.”

The political elite in Europe DELIBERATELY constructed the Lisbon Treaty so that the common people COULD NOT UNDERSTAND IT and comprehend what was going on.

I.E. THE  LARGEST TRANSFER OF SOVEREIGNTY AND POWER FROM the people and local governments to the EU central level.

And the people were NOT allowed to have their say and to vote on it.  With one exception, Ireland.  Its constitution made it impossible for the politicians not to have a referendum.

The result – the people of Ireland voted NO 54 to 46 %.

But of course – The political elite in Europe doesn’t accept a NO from the people.

As already have happened before in France (2005 – 55% NO) Netherland (2005- 62% NO), Ireland (2001- 54% NO) and Denmark (1992 – 51% NO)  

They started their manoeuvring, twisting, some minor concessions here some more money and transfers there etc.

At ALL COST they had to have a Yes on this one. And they got one a year later.

How many times does the voters have to vote NO before NO is really a NO? Or what part of NO! don’t you understand?

And a very INTERESTING Account of how former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, in a meeting with Gorbachev in January 1989, told Gorbachev that Europe in 15 years time is going to be a FEDERAL STATE.

How in the HELL DID HE KNOW THAT??????

Well the answer is very simple – because that’s been the plan all along from the political elite in Europe.

And surprise, surprise, he become the author of the European constitution (2002-03).

Wouldn’t you say that that was another “lucky” coincidence?

Below are just a small number of articles describing the EU mess and the consequences for the common people who have to pay the price for this elitist political project.

See also:

Den svenska utrikesförvaltningens död

See also my other post on the Lisbon Treaty:

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover 2

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti.

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

The New EU foreign minister – An undemocratic appointment to an undemocratic post created by an undemocratic treaty

EU – The inner game and the Corruption that Cost £684 931,5 per hour EVERY hour EVERY day EVERY year. And is increasing

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens

The EU Auditors have, for the 15th year in a row, refused to sign off the EU’s accounts owing to Fraud and Mismanagement in the budget

‘LIVES AT RISK’ AS EU BANS CHECKS ON FOREIGN NURSES

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/195115/-Lives-at-risk-as-EU-bans-checks-on-foreign-nurses

“UKIP health spokesman David Campbell Bannerman said: “People’s health and in some cases their very lives will be put at risk at the altar of being good Europeans.” Katherine Murphy, of the Patients Association, said: “It beggars belief that patients are to be put at such obvious risk from EU legislation.”

Safety tests on EU nurses working in Britain scrapped for being ‘discriminatory’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/7958662/Safety-tests-on-EU-nurses-working-in-Britain-scrapped-for-being-discriminatory.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/08/lives-at-risk.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/08/roll-on-day.html

European police to spy on Britons: Now ministers hand over Big Brother powers to foreign officers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1297621/Ministers-hand-Big-Brother-powers-EU-police.html

“Ministers are ready to hand sweeping Big Brother powers to EU states so they can spy on British citizens.

Foreign police will be able to travel to the UK and take part in the arrest of Britons. They will be able to place them under surveillance, bug telephone conversations, monitor bank accounts and demand fingerprints, DNA or blood samples.

Anyone who refuses to comply with a formal request for co-operation by a foreign-based force is likely to be arrested by UK officers. “

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-europe-and-ruled-by-europe.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/07/conspiracy-in-plain-sight.html

Governance in the 21st Century

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/0/17394484.pdf

David Cameron will back down in fight with EU, say officials

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/david-cameron/7861400/David-Cameron-will-back-down-in-fight-with-EU-say-officials.html

“Belgium has acknowledged that there will be a major battle over proposals to give the EU powers to vet budgets before they are presented to national parliaments.

Formal legislative proposals on ”budget peer review” and increased ”budgetary surveillance” to prevent another euro zone debt crisis will be tabled by the Commission Wednesday.

There is a question of sovereignty if the role of the European Commission in economic government is reinforced,” admitted the Belgian source.

Belgian officials, with strong French and German support, are pushing hard to set up new EU supervisors to police financial markets, giving European authorities the power to dictate to regulators in the City of London. ”It is necessary to transfer some decisions away from national to European authorities,” said the source.

EU officials have warned British diplomats that the Lisbon Treaty means it will have to compromise on sovereignty because Britain does not have veto for either the budget scrutiny or financial market supervision measures.

Belgium is also ready to pick a fight with Britain over plans for new European-wide taxes to directly fund the EU independently of contributions from national treasuries.

We can also explore, for example, the financing of European projects via new sources of revenue,” said the government source.”

An Old Battlefront Returns in War on Euro

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,703613,00.html#ref=nlint

“explained why the euro has always been a monstrosity, and why it will and must fail. Although the current plans to ”get a living corpse to walk” are touching, he scoffed, one thing is already clear: The euro bailout package will only save the banks.”

Wilhelm Hankel, professor for currency and development policy, Ministry for Economic Cooperation, the Foreign Office, chief economist of Bank for Reconstruction, the head of the department of money and credit in the Ministry for Economic Affairs and one of the closest staff members to the German economy minister Karl Schiller. etc.

”As was once the case before the outbreak of the French Revolution, Europe‘s politicians have now lost any sense for the rights, concerns and expectations of their citizens.

Dieter Spethmann, the former CEO of the giant German industrial conglomerate Thyssen.

“He criticizes Berlin for demanding solidarity with Europe while demonstrating no solidarity whatsoever with its people. Hundreds of billions of euros are being destroyed in Germany ”because the country has taken on the role of the monetary union’s paymaster,” Nölling says. ”In violation of all laws, we are being forced to rescue a currency that cannot be saved.”

Wilhelm Nölling, former member of the Bundestag for the SPD, finance minister for the city-state of Hamburg and president of Hamburg’s state central bank.

“But he finds it undemocratic that citizens are simply being forced to be part of a community in which one country is required to bail out another. ”What is happening here is almost dictatorial,”

Karl Schachtschneider, constitutional law expert, lawyer and professor.

Galileo Satellite Needs Extra Financing of $1.85 Billion, Le Monde Reports

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-25/galileo-satellite-needs-extra-financing-of-1-85-billion-le-monde-says.html

EU takes on extra 18 MEPs for £7 million

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/7849918/EU-takes-on-extra-18-MEPs-for-7-million.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/06/to-barricades.html

“This was done by permanent representatives, known as ”EU ambassadors” who met behind closed doors yesterday to sign off the amendment. The amendment must now be ratified in all the Union’s 27 countries and will require primary legislation in the UK – ”potentially opening up dissent among Conservative MPs who campaigned for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.”

Actually, though, it isn’t an amendment to the Lisbon Treaty. According to the EU Council, it is a ”protocol amending the protocol on transitional provisions annexed to the treaty on European Union, to the treaty on the functioning of the European Union and to the treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community.”

Now, if you can actually work out what that is saying, we are talking about an addendum amending an addendum which sets out changes to transitional provisions. It doesn’t even change a treaty. It simply changes the speed at which a previously agreed change to the treaty comes into force.”

Ordinary people were misled over impact of the euro, says Herman Van Rompuy

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/7767898/Ordinary-people-were-misled-over-impact-of-the-euro-says-Herman-Van-Rompuy.html

In the first public admission of the scale of the popular backlash, Mr Van Rompuy acknowledged that ”growing public awareness” of the euro zone’s problems was ”a major political development.”

Today, people are discovering what a ‘common destiny’ in monetary matters means. They are discovering that the euro affects their pensions, savings, and jobs, their very daily life. It hurts,” he said.”

“The President of the European Council, the body that brings together EU leaders in summits, also confessed that the euro had been flawed from the moment of its creation in 1992, a situation that had not been made clear to voters.

”We are clearly confronted with a tension within the system, the ill-famous dilemma of being a monetary union and not a full-fledged economic and political union,” he said. ”This tension has been there since the single currency was created. However, the general public was not really made aware of it.”

“Vincenzo Scarpetta, an analyst for the pressure group, said: ”The euro zone crisis is not simply about economic failure but also a breakdown in trust between the political class and European citizens. The EU elite simply got it wrong on the euro.”

The euro crisis is a judgment on the great lie of ‘Europe

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7754100/The-euro-crisis-is-a-judgment-on-the-great-lie-of-Europe.html

“What we are witnessing here is a judgment on the entire deceitful and self-deceiving way in which the ”European project” has been assembled over the past 53 years. One of the most important things to understand about that project is that it has only ever had one real agenda. Everything it has done has been directed to one ultimate goal, full political and economic integration. The headline labels put on the various stages of that process may have changed over the years, such as building first a ”common market”, then a ”single market”, finally a ”constitution”. But by far the most important project of all was locking the member states into a single currency.

This was always above all a political not an economic project, to be driven through at any cost, which was why all those ”Maastricht criteria” laid down to bring it about were repeatedly breached. But as expert voices were warning as long ago as the 1970s, when it was first put on the agenda, there was no way economic and monetary union could work unless it was run by a single all-powerful economic government, with the power to raise taxes.

As was advised by Sir Donald MacDougall’s report to Brussels in 1978, it could only work if, following the US model, between 20 and 25 per cent of Europe’s GDP was available to such a government, to enable a huge transfer of wealth from richer countries such as Germany to the poorer, more backward countries of southern Europe – and how ironically has that come about!

When the 10-year-long construction of the euro began in the 1990s, all these warnings were ignored. The cart was put before the horse. So fixated were the Eurocrats on the need to get their grand project in place that the ”rules” were treated as mere window dressing. The member states were locked together willy-nilly in a one-size-fits-all system, with a single low interest rate, enabling countries such as Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece to live on a seemingly limitless sea of borrowed money. And now, entirely predictably, judgment day has come.”

As alarming as anything, with this tsunami roaring down on us, has been the sight of our new leaders preening themselves with their list of irrelevant little ”coalition policies” and babyish boasts about the ”greatest democratic shake-up since the 1832 Reform Act”, as if none of this was happening. As one analyst put it: ”They are like children let loose in the sweet shop, seemingly oblivious to the horrendous reality unfolding before us.”

Europe’s deflation torture is a gift to the Far Left

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/7756879/Europes-deflation-torture-is-a-gift-to-the-Far-Left.html

Communist leader Jerónimo de Sousa said last week that the country was being reduced to a ”protectorate of Brussels”, cowed into submission by financial blackmail. He invoked the civil war in 1383 when the country rallied heroically to expel the foreign opressor – with English help, the ”ultimato inglês” as he calls it – from Portuguese soil.

”It is not just the Communists who are worrying about this. There are a great numbers of Portuguese who are concerned that this country built over the centuries, for better or worse, on a foundation of sovereignty and independence is endangered by accepting everything that comes from Brussels without a trace of patriotism. The EU’s claim of economic and social cohesion is just propaganda,” he told Publico. “

It was refreshing to read ”The Euro Burns” by Michael Schlecht, Die Linke’s economic guru, arguing that the primary cause of Euroland’s crisis is ”German wage-dumping”. He shows from Eurostat data that German labour costs rose 7pc between 2000 and 2008, compared to 34pc in Ireland, 30pc in Spain, Portugal, and Italy, 28pc in Greece and Holland, and 20pc in France. Again, my loose translation.

Germany ran an accumulated trade surplus of €1,261bn over the period, while Spain ran a deficit of €598bn, and Portugal €273bn. This shell game was kept afloat by recycling German capital to Club Med debt markets beyond sustainable levels until it all blew up over Greece. The Club Med victims are now trapped. “

“The North-South divide within EMU has been allowed to go so far that any solution must now be offensive to either side, and therefore will be resisted. The euro is becoming an engine of intra-European tribal hatred. Brilliant work, Monsieur Delors.”

Less influence and a slower recovery: the dangers for Britain of crisis at heart of eurozone

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7133980.ece

“The euro was a political invention not properly thought through. Its collapse would have profound consequences.”

European Union expecting £6.3bn budget increase

The European Commission has proposed a £6.3 billion increase in the EU’s budget despite its calls for governments to cut national public spending.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/7639712/European-Union-expecting-6.3bn-budget-increase.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/04/more-for-our-masters.html

While every one of the 27 EU member states is looking to cutting public expenditure – some more than others – the EU is demanding a £6.3 billion increase in its budget to bring its spending ”into line with its new powers under the Lisbon Treaty.”

So much for the claim that Lisbon was a mere amending treaty, but then the ”colleagues” always have lived on a diet of lies, confident that when the chips are down, they can still hold out their hands and the member state governments will come rushing to throw money at them.

In the 2010/11 financial period, British taxpayers will have to hand over £7.9 billion – that is £7,900,000,000, or more than £400 for every household – to keep the ”colleagues” in the luxury they most certainly do not deserve, while the EU enjoys a budget of £113 billion for its 2011 financial year (which coincides with the calendar year).

This situation is beyond irony as the commission has been urging on member state governments cutbacks in their own finances, and – according to Bruno Waterfield – is calling for a six percent cut in British public spending by 2013.

At the same time, we are continually assailed by EU laws and requirements which further add to the cost of governance and daily life, all promulgated by institutions where profligacy is their middle name. And to this, we append our now ritual question – and the reason we do not rise up and slaughter them all is?

The question becomes less rhetorical with each passing day – the pics are of the Résidence Palace in Brussels, that £280 million monstrosity to house the European Council, symbol of being ”in Europe but not ruled by Europe,” as that idiot Cameron would have us believe.”

The EU Is in Crisis Mode—Once Again

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304739104575154060733970280.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

“It is easy to overcook the idea of the European Union being in crisis. It is always said—by its supporters and its critics alike—to be approaching one sort of exciting denouement or another. But then it passes, the caravan moves on and in time another potential disaster that can be negotiated around swings into view.”

“Even the death of the EU constitution, which seemed like a serious impediment to the progress of the project, wasn’t much of a setback in the end. It was simply reborn as the Lisbon Treaty.

The motive force behind the EU is integration and the creation of a continent-wide power block. National governments and the Brussels-based bureaucracy have so much invested in advancing that cause that any obstacles will not be allowed to cause more than temporary interruptions. They have become expert at improvising ways to press on regardless.”

“Yes, after much wrangling a deal to support stricken Greece is in place, but only with the Germans enforcing strict conditions. This is a sticking plaster solution. What must come, logically, is something close to a form of economic government by those states that want to stay as the inner core of the euro. It might be called by another name, but that is what it will be.

And that leads to a full-blown political crisis for the EU itself. The choice for various countries then is between trying to be part of an inner core organized around the euro with coordinated fiscal policy, or standing outside it in a trading zone built on cooperation rather than coercion.

The Eurosceptics, in countries such as Britain, are just starting to realize this. The euro’s problems will force its strongest members into much closer integration than even they currently envisage. Other than breaking up the euro they can do nothing elsestanding still isn’t an option. In this way that old discussion about there being two distinct Europe’s inside the EU is coming back rapidly into fashion. Sounds like it has the makings of a proper crisis.”

EUROBAROMETER 73 – PUBLIC OPINION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb73/eb73_first_en.pdf

”EU popularity ratings are hitting a nine-year low.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7996747/Brussels-has-broken-our-power-to-rule.html

Brussels has broken our power to rule

The EU has become a lumbering, unaccountable mess, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker, Published: 7:00PM BST 11 Sep 2010

The latest findings of Eurobarometer, the EU’s own polling organisation, show that less than half its citizens now believe it is a “good thing”. In many countries, its popularity is at record lows, and only 19 per cent see the EU as “democratic” (in Britain, Finland and Latvia this is as low as 10 per cent).

What makes this particularly ironic is that in 2001 the EU’s leaders issued their Laeken Declaration, admitting that the EU faced a crisis through its “democratic deficit”. Their remedy was the process designed to give Europe a “constitution”. After eight years of negotiation, obfuscation, lies and referendum-reverses, they got the constitution they wanted (although they had to disguise it as the Lisbon Treaty). The upshot of this tortuous attempt to “bring Europe closer to its peoples” is that those peoples see the EU as less democratic than ever.

Meanwhile, armed with its new powers, the inflated engine of our EU government rolls on, more power-crazed than ever. It is spending £800 million on setting up its new worldwide diplomatic service, with 100 of its officials earning more than our own shrunken and virtually irrelevant Foreign Secretary William Hague.

Also now on the table are the EU’s options for imposing its own taxes, the front-runner being a tax on financial transactions to which Britain, as a world financial centre, would contribute 70 per cent, more than 300 billion euros a year. Britain and the City will also be hit hardest by the EU’s seizure of control over the regulation of financial services.

Our Chancellor, George Osborne, has just conceded the EU’s right to “supervise” the contents of national budgets, taking away much of a power Parliament has exercised for centuries. Britain also seems likely to lose what remains of the EU budget rebate won by Mrs Thatcher, putting up our yearly contributions to the EU by another £3 billion – even though, for every £1 we get back from Brussels for our farmers, we already hand over £2 to farmers in other countries.

Theresa May, our Home Secretary, weakly claims that she wants reform of the European Arrest Warrant, when half of all those affected by it are being extradited from Britain. The EU’s response, in effect, is that we agreed to this travesty of justice and we must learn to live with it.

But no current issue better illustrates the bizarre nature of the system to which we have surrendered the power to run our country than the chaos inflicted on our hospitals by the enforced application of the EU’s working time directive. Led by John Black, head of the Royal College of Surgeons, medical professionals protest that this is threatening many patients’ lives.

Even the European Commission freely admits, in a recent “communication” to the European Parliament and sundry others, that its rules are, in practice, highly “unsatisfactory” and in need of urgent reform. But it adds that attempts to amend the directives have been going on since 2004 and that any chance of getting the reforms needed will involve so many consultations and negotiations that little is likely to happen for years.

Of course, if we still had the power to run our own country, this crisis in the NHS and much else besides could be sorted out within months, But since our Government seems quite happy to continue handing over even more powers to this crazy system, there is nothing we can do about it – until eventually the whole lumbering, labyrinthine, unaccountable, undemocratic mess implodes under the weight of its own contradictions.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om =”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>

varning-2

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover 2

6 februari, 2010

This is an answer to comments by Swan Lake and EU itself a disaster:

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti. and EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

The New EU foreign minister and the new European President are both undemocratic appointments to undemocratic posts created by an undemocratic treaty.

A short but very succinct description of the Lisbon Treaty and what it really means for the common people.

That these people are so lackluster and bland apparatichs is not a coincidence according to this article. And there are merits to their arguments.

Another factor is the usual squabble among the top EU nations to get THEIR candidates to the most important posts. And here nations like Sweden CAN ONLY WATCH AND HAVE TO ACCEPT WHATEVER ARE THE OUTCOME.

One small step for union, one giant leap for uniformity

“In fact, the anointing of Mr van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton is completely in accord with the new arrangements that brought about their promotion. The Lisbon Treaty – née the European Constitution – is not about politics. Its chief purpose is to do with management and it has thus created additional layers in an attempt to impose “consensus” more firmly on the still distressingly nationalistic member states.

In that respect, the new executive directors seem ideal. Both have risen without trace through the pathways of management – we are tempted to recall the Peter Principle relating to advancement and competence. Both have reputations that resonate only among their own managerial classes and both lard their public utterances with the buzzwords of managementspeak. Post-Lisbon Europe could hardly be better served.

While commercial management can sometimes be imaginative and innovative and benefit from big personalities, those are not qualities required in bureaucracies. Their survival depends upon a certain drab uniformity (see “consensus” above) enforced by Kafkaesque regulation unintelligible to those outside the circle. Consequently, Mr van Rompuy will direct an army of civil servants whose job will be to bamboozle the leaders of the member states into what can be presented to their voters as the desirable “European” approach.

Baroness Ashton will command a budget of £3.6 billion a year and 3,000 new  bureaucrats spanning the globe to mould the foreign relations of what used to be 27 sovereign governments into a similar “European” position.”

For such responsibilities, a distinct lack of charisma is beneficial. Already there have been mutterings among governments that their foreign affairs ministries are being downgraded and concern at a suggestion that their ministers should become EU envoys instead. How long before similar diminution overtakes national justice departments, social security ministries and treasuries? In order to complete this process, Brussels has calculated that for the moment it needs an invisible managerial hand, rather than a political Colossus, so as to confuse potential opposition.

These are early days, however. The European project is a long-term venture and far from being popular (which is why the successor to the rejected Constitution was not generally submitted to electorates and written in such a way as to avoid unpredictable votes in the future). That being so, the appointments of two unknowns were designed not to frighten the horses – hence Mr Farage’s difficulty in responding. The promoters of the single European state know that their vision can only be realised through attrition, not by revolution. Our new managers have the task of achieving a bland, ideology-free European uniformity. Once that is in place, their successors will be free to go all out for full European Union.”

http://www.junepress.com/PDF/Vol%2015%20No%204%20-%2018th%20December%202009%20(Leading%20Article).pdf

The political elite in Europe DELIBERATELY constructed the Lisbon Treaty so that the common people COULD NOT UNDERSTAND IT and comprehend what was going on.

I.E. THE  LARGEST TRANSFER OF SOVEREIGNTY AND POWER FROM the people and local governments to the EU central level.

And the people were NOT allowed to have their say and to vote on it.  With one exception, Ireland.  Its constitution made it impossible for the politicians not to have a referendum.

The result – the people of Ireland voted NO 54 to 46 %.

But of course – The political elite in Europe doesn’t accept a NO from the people.

As already have happened before in France (2005 – 55% NO) Netherland (2005- 62% NO), Ireland (2001- 54% NO) and Denmark (1992 – 51% NO)  

They started their manoeuvring, twisting, some minor concessions here some more money and transfers there etc.

At ALL COST they had to have a Yes on this one. And they got one a year later.

How many times does the voters have to vote NO before NO is really a NO? Or what part of NO! don’t you understand?

 

And a very INTERESTING Account of how former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, in a meeting with Gorbachev in January 1989, told Gorbachev that Europe in 15 years time is going to be a FEDERAL STATE.

How in the HELL DID HE KNOW THAT??????

Well the answer is very simple – because that’s been the plan all along from the political elite in Europe.

And surprise, surprise, he become the author of the European constitution (2002-03).

Wouldn’t you say that that was another “lucky” coincidence?

Here is the account from Vladimir Bukovksy describing an amazing meeting between President Gorbachev and representatives of the Trilateral Commission, which included David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger.

”In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included [former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro] Nakasone, [former French President Valéry] Giscard d’Estaing, [American banker David] Rockefeller and [former US Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to Gorbachev that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank,” said .Bukovksy

”In the middle of it Giscard d’Estaing suddenly takes the floor and says: “Mr President, I cannot tell you exactly when it will happen – probably within 15 years – but Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that, how would you allow the other Easteuropean countries to interact with it or how to become a part of it, you have to be prepared,” added the whistleblower.

 ”This was January 1989, at a time when the [1992] Maastricht treaty had not even been drafted. How the hell did Giscard d’Estaing know what was going to happen in 15 years time? And surprise, surprise, how did he become the author of the European constitution [in 2002-03]? A very good question. It does smell of conspiracy, doesn’t it?” said Bukovksy.

“Paul Belien: You were a very famous Soviet dissident and now you are drawing a parallel between the European Union and the Soviet Union. Can you explain this?

Vladimir Bukovsky: I am referrring to structures, to certain ideologies being instilled, to the plans, the direction, the inevitable expansion, the obliteration of nations, which was the purpose of the Soviet Union. Most people do not understand this. They do not know it, but we do because we were raised in the Soviet Union where we had to study the Soviet ideology in school and at university. The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new historic entity, the Soviet people, all around the globe. The same is true in the EU today. They are trying to create a new people. They call this people “Europeans”, whatever that means.

PB: But we have a European Parliament which is chosen by the people.

VB: The European Parliament is elected on the basis of proportional representation, which is not true representation. And what does it vote on? The percentage of fat in yoghurt, that kind of thing. It is ridiculous. It is given the task of the Supreme Soviet. The average MP can speak for six minutes per year in the Chamber. That is not a real parliament.”

Mr Bukovsky called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state.

“It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similary, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all. When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan. We used to have an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865

And some citations from the leading figures behind the Lisbon Treaty:

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens 

Jean Claude Juncker – Prime Minister of Luxembourg

”Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?

There is a single legal personality for the EU, the primacy of European law, a new architecture for foreign and security policy, there is an enormous extension in the fields of the EU’s powers,”

– Daily Telegraph 3 July 2007

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1556400/Dont-tell-British-about-the-EU-treaty.html

Karel de Gucht, Belgian Foreign Minister

“The aim of the Constitutional treaty was to be more readable; the aim of this treaty is to be unreadable…The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear. It is a success.”

Flandreinfo, 23 June 2007.

Jean-Luc Dehaene,  former Belgian prime minister, and former Vice President of the Convention which wrote the EU Constitution

The Economist of 9 August 2007 quoted some revealing remarks by Jean-Luc Dehaene. The Economist said that in an interview in Le Soir, he said it was “dangerous talk” to want “too much transparency and clarity” in the EU. On 17 October 2007 European Voice quoted him as saying, “The paper [the Reform Treaty] is incomprehensible. Good! We need incomprehensible papers if we are to make progress . . . We have to be realistic.”

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9619050

Giuliano Amato, former Italian Prime Minister and the other former Vice President of the Convention which wrote the EU Constitution.

He said, at a meeting of the Centre for European Reform, recorded by Open Europe, on 12 July 2007 that EU leaders “decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception… . In order to make our citizens happy, to produce a document that they will never understand! But, there is some truth [in it]... any Prime Minister – imagine the UK Prime Minister – can go to the Commons and say ‘Look, you see, it’s absolutely unreadable, it’s the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum’ Should you succeed in understanding it at first sight there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new..”

The good thing about not calling it a Constitution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it.” – 21 February 2007.

Valerie Giscard d’Estaing, former president of France and president of the Convention which wrote the EU Constitution

Writing in Le Monde on 14 June 2007, a few days before the form of the “reform” proposals had been settled: ”A last good idea consists of wanting to preserve part of the Constitution and camouflaging this by distributing it among several texts. The more innovative provisions [of the Constitution] would be simple amendments to the Nice and Maastricht treaties. The technical improvements would be gathered together in a bland and uncontroversial treaty. These texts would be put to Parliaments to vote on them one at a time. Thus public opinion would be led to accept, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly….All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.”

http://www.lemonde.fr/cgi-bin/ACHATS/acheter.cgi?offre=ARCHIVES&type_item=ART_ARCH_30J&objet_id=993865&clef=ARC-TRK-D_01

On 26 October 2007, writing again in Le Monde he said, “The Lisbon Treaty itself cannot be understood by ordinary citizens since it can be understood only by also reading the treaties which it amends. . . The institutional proposals of the constitutional treaty – the only things which mattered for the members of the European Convention – are in the Lisbon treaty in their entirety but in a different order and inserted into previous treaties. – What is the purpose of this subtle manoeuvre? First and above all to escape from the constraint of having to hold a referendum by dispersing the articles and by renouncing the constitutional vocabulary.”

http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2007/10/26/la-boite-a-outils-du-traite-de-lisbonne-par-valery-giscard-d-estaing_971616_3232.html

Dr Garret FitzGerald, former Irish Prime Minister

”The most striking change (between the EU Constitution in its older and newer version ) is perhaps that in order to enable some governments to reassure their electorates that the changes will have no constitutional implications, the idea of a new and simpler treaty containing all the provisions governing the Union has now been dropped in favour of a huge series of individual amendments to two existing treaties. Virtual incomprehensibility has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum.” – Irish Times, 30 June 2007.

Angela Merkel, current Chancellor of Germany and president of the EU from 1 January 2007 to 30 June 2007

We have renounced everything that makes people think of a state.” Gone are the words, constitution, flag, anthem and motto.

Speaking to the European Parliament, on 27 June, Angela Merkel was keen to point out, “The agreement reached in Brussels [23 June 2007] enables us to retain the substance of the Constitutional Treaty. ”  “At the same time, the Reform Treaty contains major advances for the European Union’s capacity to act. Indeed, in some areas we even went further than in the Constitutional Treaty.”

“European integration has to be striven for and consolidated time and again.”

http://www.eu2007.de/en/News/Speeches_Interviews/Juni/0628BKinEP.html

And all this striving for Grandeur and Pomp by the leaders of EU, they Demand Obedience and Attention as if they think they where ancient emperors. Not, as they are supposed to be, servants of the people of Europe

All paid by the taxes from the common people.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/156108/European-President-Herman-Van-Rom

EUROPEAN PRESIDENT HERMAN VAN ROMPUY SLAMMED FOR ‘ACTING LIKE A KING’ 

Thursday February 4,2010 , By Martyn Brown

THE new European President Herman Van Rompuy was slammed yesterday for “acting like a king” after trying to host his first EU summit in a palace.

Mr Van Rompuy originally wanted to hold the gathering in the 18th Century Palais d’Egmont in Brussels.

But after pressure from Europe’s capitals, he switched the Brussels meeting to another prestigious, but less regal, building hundreds of yards away from the usual office block venue where EU leaders meet.

Diplomats are still predicting “chaos” when EU leaders get together next week in the Bibliotheque Solvay, a cramped 100-year-old library that does not even include interpreter booths.

Far from being a king, Mr Van Rompuy, 62, has been dismissed by his sister Christine, a member of a rival political party, as a clown.

She helped produce a mocking poster last year of her brother sporting a red nose and clown’s hat in an election. Next week’s talks will focus on proposals from Mr Van Rompuy to give the EU more “economic governance” powers in the aftermath of the recession and after implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, which came into force last month.

A diplomat said the palace plan “had to be stopped,” adding: “Who does he think he is, some kind of king?”

Mr Van Rompuy’s spokesman said that the idea was to move to a venue reminiscent of the Union’s original informal “fireside” meetings of leaders. He said: “The President wants to create a more intimate atmosphere for dialogue.”

Diplomats are concerned Mr Van Rompuy might be trying to push EU leaders into agreeing economic proposals without support from national delegations – housed in a different building without communication links.

He has already insisted he alone will draw up a paper proposing economic targets and policy for the year 2020 to be set at the EU level.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

EU: s foreign minster performance so far – lacklustre and a pushover

5 februari, 2010

As a complement to my previous post about EU, EEAS and Haiti here is some more on EEAS or the EU foreign service and the new foreign minister.

As I wrote in my post:

The New EU foreign minister – An undemocratic appointment to an undemocratic post created by an undemocratic treaty

“And the background of the new EU foreign minister (the High Representative for Foreign Affairs). Here main qualification seems to have been here lack of diplomatic experience. And that she is a Labour Baroness (she worked with business to abolish inequality), and has never held an elected office before. As the Gerald Warner so aptly point out: “this serial appointee is custom-made for high EU office”.

As Peter Ludlow, the European Strategy Forum, a Brussels think-tank put it: ”She would be a first rate disaster”.

Or as a French official said: ”She has little experience and is a bizarre choice”.

But they always complain don’t they.

And as Andrew Duff, a Liberal Democrat MEP, described her ”reassuringly dull.”

European people – You have been forewarned.”

Well it seems that the commission acted very quickly. As expected. And which they have prepared for even if they where not officially allowed to do that before the Lisbon Treaty went into force.

The commission also made a power grab, as expected, to even further strengthen it’s power over foreign policy. And of course “lady” Ashton was no match for them.

Well, she has lived up to all these “expectations”.

Ant the British are VERY Worried that EEAS is going to take over. Especially since the Britain’s Foreign Office is in financial and budget crisis and is scaling back representation abroad.

But the Swedish Foreign Office is NOT worried or concerned. We apparently have MUCH MORE INFLUENCE AND RESOURCES THAN THE BRITISH.

And the Germans are also worried. But don’t worry, be happy!

“The decision to give 54 of the European Commission’s 136 delegations full ambassadorial status was taken without any public announcement when the Lisbon Treaty entered into force three weeks ago. “

“Mats Persson, director of the Open Europe think tank, said the new EU embassies would, for ”all practical purposes”, take over the job of representing Britons on the world stage.

Common EU embassies means that Britain can be overruled on crucial diplomatic matters, such as on how to respond to human rights abuses in a conflict-ridden country,” he said.

“Mark Francois, the Conservative spokesman on Europe, said: ”It is crucial that these new EU delegations do not try to stray into the work of national embassies. The growth of the EU’s diplomatic representation presents a stark and regrettable contrast to the financial crisis facing Britain’s Foreign Office.”

“Geoffrey Van Orden, a Conservative MEP on the parliament’s foreign affairs committee, warned the commission was using the Lisbon Treaty and Lady Ashton’s dual role as a commissioner and foreign minister to undermine national sovereignty.

”The Eurocrats want to shift foreign policy away from the nation states to the commission. She is the instrument for this,” he said.

”Her whole thrust is in the direction of the commission. Her office is in the commission. It is providing the resources. Her power base is there. I would say to national governments – beware your foreign policy is at risk.”

“Many larger EU member states, including Britain and Germany, are concerned that José Manuel Barroso, the commission president, is plotting to keep national diplomats out of senior European diplomatic corps jobs.

Mr Barroso’s decision, late last year, to remove ”neighbourhood” affairs, EU foreign policy for neighbouring countries such as Ukraine and the Balkans, from Lady Ashton’s brief as commissioner was widely seen as a power grab. “

Ashton is not a strong figure politically and her weakness is allowing the commission to empire build – which was not the idea behind her post,” said one diplomat. “

“The European Union’s High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy was in Washington yesterday to meet with Hillary Clinton at the State Department, but she was barely a blip on the Beltway radar screen. Even the underwhelming David Miliband, hardly a household name on this side of the Atlantic, managed to significantly overshadow the visit of his EU counterpart when he delivered an exceedingly dull and unimaginative statement on the forthcoming London conference on Afghanistan before the Senate Foreign Relations committee.

There was virtually no US press coverage at all of Catherine Ashton’s first trip to the United States as the EU foreign policy supremo, and she hardly set Foggy Bottom alight. Almost every major American news outlet ignored her presence in Washington, which is hardly surprising given that few reporters here would have any idea who she was.

Even her remarks at a joint press conference with the Secretary of State merited barely any attention, with the major press focus upon Clinton’s views on Haiti and Iran. Ashton’s comments were lacklustre and flat, betraying a striking dearth of foreign policy experience and knowledge. She also clearly lacks the presence, gravitas and charisma to be an international statesman, and bears all the hallmarks of a spectacularly unqualified apparatchik appointed way above her station as part of a cynical backroom deal between Europe’s big players.”

See also:

Den svenska utrikesförvaltningens död

See also my other post on the Lisbon Treaty:

EU – The inner game and the Corruption that Cost £684 931,5 per hour EVERY hour EVERY day EVERY year. And is increasing

EU – The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable and unclear AND it can not be understood by ordinary citizens

The EU Auditors have, for the 15th year in a row, refused to sign off the EU’s accounts owing to Fraud and Mismanagement in the budget

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/7045354/More-than-50-EU-embassies-open-across-the-world.html

More than 50 EU embassies open across the world

More than 50 European Union embassies have opened across the world since the Lisbon Treaty came into force three weeks ago.

By Bruno Waterfield

Published: 7:00AM GMT 22 Jan 2010

The move has led to fears that British consular facilities could be shut down as Brussels establishes itself as a world power.

Critics say the 54 new embassies in countries including Afghanistan, China, India and 33 African nations will shift power away from the British foreign office towards a new EU diplomatic service.

Embassies in the key capitals of Beijing, Kabul and Addis Ababa, the seat of the African Union, are regarded as marking a major shift to giving the EU a role as a global player to rival nation states.

The embassies will takeover national bilateral missions in the 54 countries where they are set up, headed by ambassadors who are empowered to speak on behalf of the EU as a whole.

”They are going to be a bit more political,” a Brussels official told the EU observer website.

The decision to give 54 of the European Commission’s 136 delegations full ambassadorial status was taken without any public announcement when the Lisbon Treaty entered into force three weeks ago.

Twelve of the embassies are in Asia and the Pacific Ocean, including Australia, China, India, Indonesia and Vietnam. A network of 33 in Africa will cover countries ranging across the continent from Ghana to Kenya and South Africa to Zimbabwe. Eight of the new-model units are in Europe in Armenia, Georgia, Macedonia, Moldova, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland and Ukraine.

A decisions over New York has been delayed amid a fierce political battle over the EU’s role in the United Nations Security Council.

Mats Persson, director of the Open Europe think tank, said the new EU embassies would, for ”all practical purposes”, take over the job of representing Britons on the world stage.

Common EU embassies means that Britain can be overruled on crucial diplomatic matters, such as on how to respond to human rights abuses in a conflict-ridden country,” he said.

In order for common embassies to work, EU member states must have shared national interests. This simply isn’t the case, particularly in Africa where the EU has consistently failed to act in a unified manner in the past.”

The Lisbon Treaty has created an embryonic diplomatic corps, the European External Action Service, under the control of an EU foreign minister, a post held by Baroness Ashton.

A text, agreed by European leaders, including Gordon Brown, last October gives the EU ”delegations” the objective of taking over consular work, a new role that could lead to British consulates being closed in remote countries to make cash savings.

EU delegations could gradually assume responsibility, where necessary, for tasks related to diplomatic and consular protection of Union citizens in third countries, in crisis situations,” the text states.

Mark Francois, the Conservative spokesman on Europe, said: ”It is crucial that these new EU delegations do not try to stray into the work of national embassies. The growth of the EU’s diplomatic representation presents a stark and regrettable contrast to the financial crisis facing Britain’s Foreign Office.”

The Conservatives have accused the government of drafting plans to close overseas embassies and consulates as part of a wider programme of spending cuts.

An internal Foreign Office memorandum, leaked to the Tories, has urged diplomats to fire staff and close some overseas posts.

The Foreign Office has defended the new EU embassies.

”The EU’s foreign policy will become more consistent and effective, without costing the British taxpayer anymore because this is about redeploying existing resources,” said a British diplomat

”We are rightly proud of the consular service we offer to British and indeed EU nationals around the globe and there are currently no plans for the EU to take on that role.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/6968450/Ashton-has-lost-control-of-EU-foreign-policy.html

Baroness Ashton ‘has lost control of EU foreign policy’

Baroness Ashton’s political inexperience has allowed the European Commission to seize control of Europe’s foreign policy from national governments, MEPs and diplomats have warned.

By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels

Published: 6:24PM GMT 11 Jan 2010

During a hearing in the European Parliament on Monday, Lady Ashton faced repeated questions over who was really in charge of Europe’s foreign affairs and security policy.

The Labour life peer, who has never held elected public office or a post as a diplomat, has been instructed by national governments to set up a new diplomatic corps, the European External Action Service (EEAS), to carry out EU foreign policy independently of the commission.

As High Representative, or foreign minister, a post created under the Lisbon Treaty, Lady Ashton, 53, is also supposed to preserve the control of the Council of the EU, representing national governments, over foreign policy while also being a commission vice-president.

But since taking up her post on January 1, she has been criticised for failing to assert her own authority, for basing her office in the Brussels executive’s headquarters and for using commission officials as her key advisers.

Geoffrey Van Orden, a Conservative MEP on the parliament’s foreign affairs committee, warned the commission was using the Lisbon Treaty and Lady Ashton’s dual role as a commissioner and foreign minister to undermine national sovereignty.

”The Eurocrats want to shift foreign policy away from the nation states to the commission. She is the instrument for this,” he said.

”Her whole thrust is in the direction of the commission. Her office is in the commission. It is providing the resources. Her power base is there. I would say to national governments – beware your foreign policy is at risk.”

Following the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty at the end of last year, a turf war has broken out between commission officials and diplomats over control of the foreign minister and EEAS.

Many larger EU member states, including Britain and Germany, are concerned that José Manuel Barroso, the commission president, is plotting to keep national diplomats out of senior European diplomatic corps jobs.

Mr Barroso’s decision, late last year, to remove ”neighbourhood” affairs, EU foreign policy for neighbouring countries such as Ukraine and the Balkans, from Lady Ashton’s brief as commissioner was widely seen as a power grab.

Diplomats have also noted the growing influence over Lady Ashton of Joao Vale de Almeida, Commission director general for external relations, who was Mr Barroso’s closest and most senior adviser until last June.

Ashton is not a strong figure politically and her weakness is allowing the commission to empire build – which was not the idea behind her post,” said one diplomat.

During Monday’s confirmation hearing in front of the parliament’s foreign affairs committee, Lady Ashton denied that she allowing the commission to take control.

”It is not a land grab. It is collaboration,” she said.

MEPs will vote on the new commission, including Lady Ashton on Jan 26. Charles Tannock, a Conservative MEP, said he was ”underwhelmed” by her performance. ”But I suspect that we will still support her,” he added.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100023314/the-eus-foreign-policy-chief-is-no-kissinger-baroness-ashton-proves-a-flop-in-washington/

Nile Gardiner is a Washington-based foreign affairs analyst and political commentator. He appears frequently on American and British television and radio, including Fox News Channel, CNN, BBC, Sky News, and NPR.

The EU’s foreign policy chief is no Kissinger: Baroness Ashton proves a flop in Washington

By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: January 22nd, 2010

The European Union’s High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy was in Washington yesterday to meet with Hillary Clinton at the State Department, but she was barely a blip on the Beltway radar screen. Even the underwhelming David Miliband, hardly a household name on this side of the Atlantic, managed to significantly overshadow the visit of his EU counterpart when he delivered an exceedingly dull and unimaginative statement on the forthcoming London conference on Afghanistan before the Senate Foreign Relations committee.

There was virtually no US press coverage at all of Catherine Ashton’s first trip to the United States as the EU foreign policy supremo, and she hardly set Foggy Bottom alight. Almost every major American news outlet ignored her presence in Washington, which is hardly surprising given that few reporters here would have any idea who she was.

Even her remarks at a joint press conference with the Secretary of State merited barely any attention, with the major press focus upon Clinton’s views on Haiti and Iran. Ashton’s comments were lacklustre and flat, betraying a striking dearth of foreign policy experience and knowledge. She also clearly lacks the presence, gravitas and charisma to be an international statesman, and bears all the hallmarks of a spectacularly unqualified apparatchik appointed way above her station as part of a cynical backroom deal between Europe’s big players.

The unaccountable mandarins of Brussels may like to see themselves as the gilded guardians of a rising superpower, but in reality the international voice of the European Union is still nowhere near as powerful as that of individual European nation states, and that is how it should stay. I was relieved therefore that the EU was not represented by a far more formidable figure with considerable weight and popularity in America, like Tony Blair. Had the former Prime Minister swanned into town as the president of the European Union, there would have been a bank of television cameras awaiting his presence, and his views would have been widely reported.

As I wrote at the time of her completely ridiculous appointment, Ashton’s ascent to power in Brussels will, temporarily, help rein in European ambitions to be a major actor on the world stage:

Anything that undermines the Lisbon vision of the EU as a powerful supranational force is a good thing, and the appointments of both Baroness Ashton and Herman Van Rompuy will do that in spades. Better a weak non-entity as foreign minister or president than a powerhouse Henry Kissinger at the helm if the nefarious European Project is to be defeated.

Baroness Ashton’s pitiful lack of impact in her first foray in America demonstrated that the EU is currently an emperor with no clothes, lacking the power to be a global political force. But, there is no room for complacency among those of us who believe in the sanctity of the nation state, and are opposed to the rise of a federal Europe.

The fundamentally undemocratic Treaty of Lisbon will dramatically erode sovereignty in Europe, and over the next few years it will significantly drive a European foreign policy and defence identity. As the euobserver has just reported, the EU has already “converted 54 out of the European Commission’s 136 foreign delegations into embassy-type missions authorised to speak for the entire union” in preparation for the creation of a new EU diplomatic corps.

There is also rising support in the White House and State Department for the European Union’s grand ambitions, an extraordinarily foolish approach for a US administration to take, but not out of character for the Obama admininistration. As Hillary Clinton made it amply clear in her press conference, Washington is now an unequivocal backer of ever-closer union in Europe. As she put it yesterday, speaking alongside Baroness Ashton, “I expect that in decades to come, we will look back on the Lisbon Treaty and the maturation of the EU that it represents as a major milestone in our world’s history, and not just in Europe and not just in the Euro-Atlantic community.”

There is a very real danger that over the next decade, Washington will increasingly do business directly with the EU, at the expense of individual European capitals. This would be a grave mistake on the part of the United States, and would result in a significant weakening, rather than strengthening, of the transatlantic alliance, as well as the further decline of the Anglo-American Special Relationship.

The next British government must firmly oppose and do all in its power to fight the rise of a European foreign and defence policy, and ensure that vital matters of national interest are decided in London and not Brussels. It must also send a clear message to Washington that American support for a federal European superstate will only serve to undermine the Anglo-American alliance.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

The HUGE difference between EU and USA in response to Haiti.

5 februari, 2010

Or the mouse that whined.

Five years ago when the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster happened, EU called for a three-minute silence (three times longer than is customary to remember the millions who died in two world wars) and proposed a ”donors’ conference” in Jakarta nearly two weeks later to discuss what might be done.”

In contrast, within hours the US took the lead in forming an alliance with Australia, India and Japan, and sent in two battle groups fully equipped to deal with such an emergency.

Now in Haiti the same pattern repeats itself again.

“Within hours of Port-au-Prince crumbling into ruins, the US had sent in an aircraft carrier with 19 helicopters, hospital and assault ships, the 82nd Airborne Division with 3,500 troops and hundreds of medical personnel. They put the country’s small airport back on an operational footing, and President Obama pledged an initial $100 million dollars in emergency aid.”

And what did EU do?  It acted as usually “very forceful” and hold a press conference. Yes, a boring press conference!

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the European Union geared itself up with a Brussels press conference led by Commission Vice-President Baroness Ashton, now the EU’s High Representative – our new foreign minister. A scattering of bored-looking journalists in the Commission’s lavishly appointed press room heard the former head of Hertfordshire Health Authority stumbling through a prepared statement, in which she said that she had conveyed her ”condolences” to the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, and pledged three million euros in aid.”

The people of Haiti MUST BEE VERY REASSURED AND COMFORTED BY THE THOUGHT THAT EU:s foreign minster had a press conference and sent her ”condolences” , NOT TO HAITI OR THE PEOPLE AFFECTED BUT TO  the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon.

This is the same EU that pride itself of being a dominant world power. And the bureaucrats in Brussels have even bigger ambitions that that.

In fact, the EU have had a ”Rapid Reaction Mechanism” since 2001 (Council Regulation (EC) No 381/2001of 26 February 2001)

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32001R0381:EN:HTML

AS WE HAVE SEEN AGAIN AND AGAIN – It’s NEITHER RAPID NOR REACTING!

And to top it off EU (the usual suspects) criticised USA for ”occupying” Haiti.

That’s how you gain respect and trust – You talk loud, do nothing and harshly criticise the ones that actually do anything.

EU in a nutshell.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7005887/Haiti-response-shows-the-difference-between-the-EU-and-a-superpower.html

Haiti response shows the difference between the EU and a superpower

The earthquake in Haiti provoked prompt and effective action from the US, and waffle from the EU, says Christopher Booker

By Christopher Booker

Published: 6:49PM GMT 16 Jan 2010

Compare and contrast the initial responses of two ”major world powers” to the Haitian earthquake disaster. Within hours of Port-au-Prince crumbling into ruins, the US had sent in an aircraft carrier with 19 helicopters, hospital and assault ships, the 82nd Airborne Division with 3,500 troops and hundreds of medical personnel. They put the country’s small airport back on an operational footing, and President Obama pledged an initial $100 million dollars in emergency aid.

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the European Union geared itself up with a Brussels press conference led by Commission Vice-President Baroness Ashton, now the EU’s High Representative – our new foreign minister. A scattering of bored-looking journalists in the Commission’s lavishly appointed press room heard the former head of Hertfordshire Health Authority stumbling through a prepared statement, in which she said that she had conveyed her ”condolences” to the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, and pledged three million euros in aid.

A gaggle of other Commision spokesmen followed, to report offers of help from individual member states, such as a few search and rescue teams, tents and water purification units. We were also told that an official EU representative would be trying to reach Haiti from the Dominican Republic, to stay for a few hours before returning to report what he had found.

Memories might have gone back to December 2004, which saw similarly contrasting responses to the Indian Ocean tsunami catastrophe which cost nearly 300,000 lives. Again, within hours the US took the lead in forming an alliance with Australia, India and Japan, and had sent in two battle groups fully equipped to deal with such an emergency, including 20 ships led by two carriers with 90 helicopters. President Bush immediately pledged $35 million, later rising to $350 million. Because they were self-sufficient, the US forces pulled off a stupendously successful life-saving operation, almost entirely ignored by the British media, notably the BBC (whose journalists on the spot were nevertheless quite happy to hitch lifts from US helicopters).

The EU, by contrast, pledged three million euros for the tsunami victims, called for a three-minute silence (three times longer than is customary to remember the millions who died in two world wars) and proposed a ”donors’ conference” in Jakarta nearly two weeks later to discuss what might be done.

The only real difference between these two episodes is that, in the five years which have elapsed since 2004, the EU has even more noisily laid claim to its status as what Tony Blair liked to call ”a world superpower”, capable of standing on the world stage as an equal of the US. Anyone who witnessed the dismal showing at Thursday’s press conference of the High Representative, which would scarcely have passed muster at a board meeting of the Hertfordshire Health Authority, might well cringe at the thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/haiti/7054716/Haiti-earthquake-Lady-Ashton-under-fire-over-EU-visibility.html

Haiti earthquake: Lady Ashton under fire over EU ‘visibility’

Baroness Ashton, the European Union’s foreign minister, has come under fire for failing to visit Haiti and letting America take command of the international aid response.

By Bruno Waterfield

Published: 5:22PM GMT 22 Jan 2010

Lady Ashton, who had little or no diplomatic experience when she took the High Representative of Foreign Affairs job last year, is in charge of the EU’s crisis and humanitarian aid response.

France, which accused the United States of ”occupying” Haiti earlier this week, has been dismayed by the EU’s lack of ”visibility” during international relief efforts over the last 10 days.

Michel Barnier, the French internal market commissioner, is said to have briefed against Lady Ashton by pointing out France’s foreign minister was ”immediately available” on the ground following the Asian Tsunami in 2004.

He denied the claim and insisted ”she can count on me to work with her on strengthening Europe’s foreign and defence policy – an area of work I have always been interested in”. But French press reports have described Mr Barnier as ”seething” and ”enraged” that EU had not acted on his ideas, a failing emphasised by US control of the Haiti relief operation.

Following the tsunami, Mr Barnier wrote an influential report calling for the creation of an EU civil protection force called ”Europe Aid”.

Joseph Daul, a senior centre-right MEP and a close ally of Nicolas Sarkozy, expressed regret that Lady Ashton was absent when Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, visited Haiti at the weekend.

Just about everybody was in Haiti at the moment when these people are suffering, and Europe was not present,” he said. ”If it would have been in our hands, we would have sent someone.”

Daniel Cohn-Bendit MEP, the former French student radical and leader of the European Greens also attacked her.

”I am very sceptical about Lady Ashton,” he said.

A spokesman for Lady Ashton said she had organised an emergency meeting of EU aid ministers that raised over £350 million in pledges for Haiti.

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/01/talk-talk.html

Talk, talk

Posted by Richard Tuesday, January 19, 2010

The EU should consider forming a rapid reaction force to deal with future emergencies like the Haiti earthquake. This is according to ”the EU’s new president,” retailed to us by the ever diligent BBC.

”We have to reflect about a better instrument for reaction,” says Herman Van Rompuy. After providing emergency aid to Haiti the EU should consider a ”humanitarian rapid reaction force”, he said.

In fact, the EU set up a ”Rapid Reaction Mechanism” in 2001, under Council Regulation (EC) No 381/2001 – with the intention of dealing with precisely the eventualities that Rompuy is setting out, and which so lamentably failed in the 2004 Tsunami and again in Haiti.

In fact, the initiative goes way back to the European Council meeting in Helsinki on 10 and 11 December 1999, when the member state leaders gathered to discuss the European Union’s ”non-military crisis-management capability.”

More than ten years on and we are no further forward than we were then – countless reports and study groups have been commissioned, there have been countless meetings, working groups and conferences, with millions of euros having been spent. Yet, when the chips are down, the EU is nowhere to be seen.

It was ever thus, and will always be so. All the EU is ever good for, when it comes to action on its own part, is talk. But this is not ”victimless” state of affairs. Because the issue is being dealt with at a ”European level”, member states are actively discouraged from making their own plans and arrangements.

Thereby, national capabilities are wound down yet, in the lethargic, inept grip of the EU institutions, nothing is done to replace those capabilities – still less to enhance the overall effort. And, when there is a crisis, because the EU claims the lead role in responding, no member state can step forward to fill the vacuum created by the EU’s painfully obvious inadequacies.

Thus, once again we get clarion calls (if anything Rompuy says could be called ”clarion”), dusting off ancient press releases to demand yet again a ”humanitarian rapid reaction force”. In ten