Saturday, 9 August 2014

PART 3: Growth Trumps Freedom OF AFRICANS.



 Growth Trumps Freedom





By Bartholomäus Grill in Bagamayo, Tanzania
Photo Gallery: African Ambivalence About Chinese Investments
REUTERS
Chinese companies have pumped billions into Africa to secure access to natural resources, boosting countries' economies along the way. Ordinary citizens aren't reaping the benefits, though, and have become increasingly wary of the new investors.
In a three-part series, SPIEGEL is exploring fundamental changes occurring in Africa -- a continent the West has long written off, but is now being embraced by other countries. This is Part I of the series. An introduction can be read here, while Part II explores the digital revolution's tranformative impact on the continent and Part III shows how women in Africa are making great strides.


The concept of "West is best" is now a thing of the past. Disappointed by Europe and America, where their continent has often been written off as a hopeless case, Africans have instead looked to the Far East. There, they have found a strong ally, one that is mainly interested in doing business and doesn't interfere in their internal affairs. China attaches no political conditions to economic cooperation, unlike the West, which, at least on paper, demands good governance, the rule of law, anti-corruption measures and protections for human rights.
This is one of the reasons that despots like Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe hold the Chinese in such high regard. Cooperating with China fills their empty coffers and enables them to secure their hold on power. And Africa's dictators are not badgered when they oppress and prey on their own people.
For example, Beijing wasn't overly troubled when the regime in Sudan waged a criminal war of forced displacement in Darfur. It continued to supply the Sudanese government with weapons and blocked resolutions in the United Nations Security Council. Beijing's primary concern was that Sudanese oil would continue to flow. Next to Angola, Sudan is China's second-most important source of oil in Africa.
With Chinese economic dominance, the West's political influence is gradually being eroded. In authoritarian countries like Ethiopia, Rwanda and Uganda, the model of the Chinese development dictatorship, which prioritizes growth over freedom, has long been a welcome alternative to liberal democracy.
At the same time, Europe's and America's cultural influence is waning. China's Xinhua state news agency now has 28 offices in Africa, more than any Western competitor. The state television broadcaster CCTV, which opened a new headquarters in Nairobi last year, is gaining more and more viewers. Instead of airing the usual disaster reports, the station tends to broadcast "good news" from Africa and portrays China as a "true friend."
Growing Resentment and Violence
Nevertheless, there is growing resentment in South Africa, where there are reportedly already 250,000 Chinese. In the townships, the new immigrants are berated as "yellow masters." Among South Africans, the Chinese are often seen as greedy, ruthless and racist, as people who are exploiting Africa, flooding its markets with cheap products and ruining an already weak domestic industry.
Union leaders in Angola complain that Chinese companies are creating too few jobs for local workers. There are rumors in the capital, Luanda, that the Chinese are using prisoners as forced laborers on construction sites.

WAKE WENZA WA KUTANA:Wema Sepetu na KIDOTI ndani ya SELFIE

Wema na Jokate walipokutana kwenye ndege  leo


Jokate aliwahi kukiri kwenye exclusive na millard ayo kwamba aliwahi kuwa na uhusiano wa kimapenzi na Diamond kwa muda usiozidi miezi miwili ambapo wakati yuko na Diamond zilitoka stori nyingi pia kuhusu uhusiano wa Wema na Jokate kuingia matatizoni.
Ni stori ambazo ziliandikwa sana na inawezekana mpaka leo watu wengine walikua wanaamini Jokate na Wema hawawezi kukaa meza moja ila Aug 9 2014 Wema Sepetu baada ya kuwasili Mwanza kwa ajili ya show ya Serengeti Fiesta 2014 baadae CCM Kirumba amepost hii picha.
Screen Shot 2014-08-09 at 2.25.00 PM
Wakiwa kwenye ndege ya Fastjet Wema na Jokate wakitokea Dar es salaam walipiga selfie ambayo Wema ameipost kwenye instagram page yake na kuandika hayo maneno hapo chini akimaanisha wako poa sasa hivi.
Screen Shot 2014-08-09 at 2.25.16 PM

Friday, 8 August 2014

Terror suspects want case heard in Zanzibar

Terror suspects want case heard in Zanzibar.

8th August 2014
Sheikh Farid Hadi Ahmed
Describing the justice system as unfair, suspected terrorists held in Dar es Salaam want their case to be heard in Zanzibar, where they were arrested.
 
Before Magistrate Riwa of the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in Dar es Salaam, the terror suspects mid this week also claimed that they are denied visitation rights and being unjustly interrogated.
 
The development comes as the prosecution in the case added four more suspects to the suspect list bringing it to 20 persons, all Tanzanians and most being residents of the Isles.
 
The prosecution has also added at least two more charges to their charge sheet. The 16 were first charged with conspiracy and recruiting of persons to take part in terrorism contrary to section 21 (b) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002 but now the 20 are charged under section 27 the same Act.
 
In addition to the said charges one accused – Farid Had Ahmed - is also charged with recruitment of persons to participate in terrorism and harbouring of terrorists. 
 
The accused are Farid Had Ahmed, Nassoro Abdallah, Hassan Suleiman, Anthari Ahmed, Mohamed Yusuph, Abdalah Hassani, Hussein Ally, Juma Juma and Said Ally.
Others are Hamis Salum, Said Salum, Abubakar Mngodo, Salum Salum, Salum Amour Salum, Alawi Amir, Rashid Nyange, Amir Juma, Jamal Swalehe, Kassim Nassoro and Said Sharifu.
 
The prosecution, led by Senior State Attorney Prosper Bernad Kongola and assisted by State Attorneys, George Barasa and Peter Njike alleged before Senior Resident Magistrate Hellen Riwa that the accused committed the offences on diverse dates between January 2013 and June 2014 in parts of the country.
 
It was alleged that on the said dates the accused conspired to commit an office in violation of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 by recruiting people to participate in terrorism.
 
 
SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

PART TWO: Tanzania is one of the focal points of the Chinese globalization strategy in Africa.

PART TWO: Tanzania is one of the focal points of the Chinese   globalization strategy in Africa.

By Bartholomäus Grill in Bagamayo, Tanzania
Photo Gallery: African Ambivalence About Chinese Investments
REUTERS
Chinese companies have pumped billions into Africa to secure access to natural resources, boosting countries' economies along the way. Ordinary citizens aren't reaping the benefits, though, and have become increasingly wary of the new investors.
In a three-part series, SPIEGEL is exploring fundamental changes occurring in Africa -- a continent the West has long written off, but is now being embraced by other countries. This is Part I of the series. An introduction can be read here, while Part II explores the digital revolution's tranformative impact on the continent and Part III shows how women in Africa are making great strides.
Tanzania is one of the focal points of the Chinese globalization strategy in Africa. In 2011, a large Chinese company invested $3 billion in coal and iron ore mines in the country. The enormous natural gas reserves off the Tanzanian coast -- an estimated 40 trillion cubic feet -- are of strategic interest. The China National Petroleum Company is currently installing a 532-kilometer (333-mile) pipeline from Mtwara, a port city in southeastern Tanzania, to Dar es Salaam. When the pipeline is finished, supertankers docking at the new Bagamayo port will load liquefied natural gas, cooled to temperatures of minus 164 degrees Celsius (minus 263 degrees Fahrenheit), and transport it to the Far East. Mineral ores and agricultural products from Tanzania, Zambia and Congo will also be shipped from the port. The Chinese are also reportedly planning to build a naval base to protect their economic interests along the Indian Ocean. "History is repeating itself," says Shaba, the journalist and cultural activist. "In the past, ivory and slaves were exported through Bagamayo. Today, it's natural resources." Slaves once dubbed this town Bagamayo, which means "throw your heart away." Anyone who had not managed to escape the slave traders en route to the coast was lost by the time they reached Bagamayo. China's economic offensive in Africa began before the turn of the millennium. At first, it was very gradual and inconspicuous. But, since 2000, trade volumes between China and Africa have grown twentyfold, reaching $200 billion in 2012. China has surged ahead of the old major powers - France, the United Kingdom and the United States -- to become Africa's most important trading partner. A Chinese 'Irruption' For years, China has engaged in an intensive campaign of visiting the continent. Presidents, heads of the government and ministers have traveled to almost all sub-Saharan countries that support China's policies and do not recognize Taiwan. They have forgiven debt, granted billions in loans, sealed defense deals and handed out generous aid packages. Most of all, however, they have secured access to Africa's natural resources. China's "irruption onto the African scene has been the most dramatic and important factor in the external relations of the continent -- perhaps in the development of Africa as a whole -- since the end of the Cold War," wrote Christopher Clapham of Cambridge, England-based Center of African Studies. There are now more than 2,000 Chinese companies and well over a million Chinese citizens in sub-Saharan Africa. They can be encountered in the major cities, in mining centers and oil fields, on plantations and even in the most remote jungle villages. They include managers and military advisers, doctors and agronomists, engineers and importers, itinerant traders, small business owners and contract workers employed on countless construction sites. The Chinese are building conspicuous signs of their presence everywhere: presidential palaces, ministries, military barracks, conference centers, museums, stadiums, broadcasting companies, hotel complexes and large-scale agricultural operations. They are renovating railroad lines, paving thousands of kilometers of roads and building airports, dams, power plants and hospitals. Indeed, the Chinese are modernizing a large segment of the continent's infrastructure. The Washington-based Center for Global Development estimates that, between 2000 and 2011, China provided about €75 billion in aid to Africa for a total of 1,673 projects, or roughly as much as the United States did in the same period. However, it is sometimes hard to tell where profitable investment ends and altruistic initiatives begin. The competition from the West is often left empty-handed. Chinese state-owned companies operate with less bureaucracy, are faster and cheaper and, as a rule, provide financing for projects with low-interest loans from state-owned banks. In return for developing the infrastructure, the Chinese receive lucrative licenses to exploit natural resources and fossil fuels. For instance, Angola, a war-torn and marginalized country until not too long ago, has become one of China's key oil suppliers, competing with Saudi Arabia for the top position. An Unequal 'Marriage' Other newly industrialized countries -- such as Brazil, India and Turkey -- have also discovered or rediscovered Africa. But no country is making its presence felt as strongly, from Khartoum to Cape Town, as China. Lamido Sanusi, the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, already sees a "whiff of colonialism" in China's activities. Senegalese intellectual Adama Gaye is even more concerned, warning of a second wave of conquest. In his polemic "China-Africa: The Dragon and the Ostrich," China, the voracious dragon, and Africa, the naïve ostrich, face off as an extremely unevenly matched duo. "They take what they can get," says Gaye, referring to the Chinese. He even accuses them of creating "an apartheid-like culture" through social segregation. Azaveli Lwaitama, 61, takes a more relaxed view. "The Chinese keep to themselves and are just doing their thing," he says. A lecturer in philosophy, Lwaitama speaks on behalf of the Vision East Africa Forum, a think thank dedicated to the future of East Africa. "We are being globalized at the moment and are experiencing an accelerated battle for a share of our resources." In his view, this is merely capitalism with a different, "Chinese face." It's hard to understand what Lwaitama is saying due to the deafening noise coming from a nearby Chinese construction site, where pile drivers are pounding steel posts into the ground. Dar es Salaam is one big construction site, with skyscrapers, office complexes and bank towers sprouting up from the ground. The streets are constantly congested, and half of the pedestrians are walking around with mobile phones in their hands. "We have arrived in the modern world. It all looks promising, but we shouldn't be fooled," says Lwaitama. Despite an economic growth rate of about 7 percent in 2012, the majority of the 45 million Tanzanians haven't benefited much from the upturn. On the contrary, Lwaitama says, the gap between rich and poor has only grown wider. "The African leaders have married China, the most attractive bride on the world market, and now the West is complaining about its unwanted rival," says Lwaitama. But, he adds, the Chinese are just as motivated by profit as the Americans and the Europeans. "However, they have a key advantage: They are tougher than the whites. They come from poverty and can survive under the most difficult conditions.

PEACE & STABILITY: THE U.S. RANKS LAST

For Peace & Stability, The U.S. Ranks Last.

Kenneth Rapoza
Kenneth Rapoza, Contributor
I cover Brazil, Russia, India & China

Despite ranking dead last among rich developed countries, the U.S. ranks high for civil liberties.
Gun violence, the war on terrorism, and political divisions in Washington make the United States rank dead last in peace and stability compared to every rich developed nation. According to the Global Peace Index, released on Tuesday, the U.S. ranks even worse than African nations like Tanzania.
If you want peace of mind, dear immigrants, don’t come here, might be the message.
The Index measures the state of peace in 162 countries and is conducted by the Institute for Economics and Peace in New York. The index uses qualitative and quantitative data to gauge internal and external levels of peace on matters such as number of jailed citizens, militarization, political participation and freedom of the press, among other things.
The GPI Report provides an analysis of the Institute’s data, identifying trends in peace over time, as well as the key drivers of peace and an economic calculation of the impact of violence to the global economy.
War and political violence have placed a target on America’s collective backs.  The United States surely isn’t licked yet in comparison to its wealthy friends in Europe, Canada and in the Asian-Pacific rim.
On individual matters, the U.S. scores quite high. On a scale of one to five, with five being least secure, the U.S. scores poorly on gun-related violence, terrorism, overseas conflicts, education spending, and militarization. It does best on adult literacy, civil liberties and — to some this may seem totally ironic, but — the electoral process.
The slideshow below shows the 10 most peaceful countries in the GPI.
Here’s a look at the most peaceful and the least peaceful in certain parts of the world.
North America
Most Peaceful:   Canada                                Most Stressed:  The United States
Latin America
Most Peaceful: Uruguay                                Most Stressed: Colombia
Continental Europe
Most Peaceful: Denmark                               Most Stressed: Russia
Middle East

Most Peaceful: Qatar                                      Most Stressed: Syria
Africa
Most Peaceful: Botswana                              Most Stressed: Somalia
Asia Sub-Continent
Most Peaceful: Bhutan                                   Most Stressed: Afghanistan
Asia-Pacific
Most Peaceful: New Zealand                       Most Stresssed: North Korea.

Thursday, 7 August 2014

THIS IS HOW YOUR SMARTPHONE DATA IS ACCESSED BY NSA.

iSpy: How the NSA Accesses Smartphone Data

By Marcel Rosenbach, Laura Poitras and Holger Stark
Photo Gallery: Spying on Smartphones
The US intelligence agency NSA has been taking advantage of the smartphone boom. It has developed the ability to hack into iPhones, android devices and even the BlackBerry, previously believed to be particularly secure.
Michael Hayden has an interesting story to tell about the iPhone. He and his wife were in an Apple store in Virginia, Hayden, the former head of the United States National Security Agency (NSA), said at a conference in Washington recently. A salesman approached and raved about the iPhone, saying that there were already "400,000 apps" for the device. Hayden, amused, turned to his wife and quietly asked: "This kid doesn't know who I am, does he? Four-hundred-thousand apps means 400,000 possibilities for attacks."
ANZEIGE
Hayden was apparently exaggerating only slightly. According to internal NSA documents from the Edward Snowden archive that SPIEGEL has been granted access to, the US intelligence service doesn't just bug embassies and access data from undersea cables to gain information. The NSA is also extremely interested in that new form of communication which has experienced such breathtaking success in recent years: smartphones. In Germany, more than 50 percent of all mobile phone users now possess a smartphone; in the UK, the share is two-thirds. About 130 million people in the US have such a device. The mini-computers have become personal communication centers, digital assistants and life coaches, and they often know more about their users than most users suspect.
For an agency like the NSA, the data storage units are a goldmine, combining in a single device almost all the information that would interest an intelligence agency: social contacts, details about the user's behavior and location, interests (through search terms, for example), photos and sometimes credit card numbers and passwords.
New Channels
Smartphones, in short, are a wonderful technical innovation, but also a terrific opportunity to spy on people, opening doors that even such a powerful organization as the NSA couldn't look behind until now.
From the standpoint of the computer experts at NSA headquarters in Fort Meade, Maryland, the colossal success of smartphones posed an enormous challenge at first. They opened so many new channels, that it seemed as if the NSA agents wouldn't be able to see the forest for the trees.
According to an internal NSA report from 2010 titled, "Exploring Current Trends, Targets and Techniques," the spread of smartphones was happening "extremely rapidly" -- developments that "certainly complicate traditional target analysis."
The NSA tackled the issue at the same speed with which the devices changed user behavior. According to the documents, it set up task forces for the leading smartphone manufacturers and operating systems. Specialized teams began intensively studying Apple's iPhone and its iOS operating system, as well as Google's Android mobile operating system. Another team worked on ways to attack BlackBerry, which had been seen as an impregnable fortress until then.
The material contains no indications of large-scale spying on smartphone users, and yet the documents leave no doubt that if the intelligence service defines a smartphone as a target, it will find a way to gain access to its information.
Still, it is awkward enough that the NSA is targeting devices made by US companies such as Apple and Google. The BlackBerry case is no less sensitive, since the company is based in Canada, one of the partner countries in the NSA's "Five Eyes" alliance. The members of this select group have agreed not to engage in any spying activities against one another.
Exploiting 'Nomophobia'
In this case, at any rate, the no-spy policy doesn't seem to apply. In the documents relating to smartphones that SPIEGEL was able to view, there are no indications that the companies cooperated with the NSA voluntarily.
When contacted, BlackBerry officials said that it is not the company's job to comment on alleged surveillance by governments. "Our public statements and principles have long underscored that there is no 'back door' pipeline to our platform," the company said in a statement. Google issued a statement claiming: "We have no knowledge of working groups like these and do not provide any government with access to our systems." The NSA did not respond to questions from SPIEGEL by the time the magazine went to print.
In exploiting the smartphone, the intelligence agency takes advantage of the carefree approach many users take to the device. According to one NSA presentation, smartphone users demonstrate "nomophobia," or "no mobile phobia." The only thing many users worry about is losing reception. A detailed NSA presentation titled, "Does your target have a smartphone?" shows how extensive the surveillance methods against users of Apple's popular iPhone already are.
In three consecutive transparencies, the authors of the presentation draw a comparison with "1984," George Orwell's classic novel about a surveillance state, revealing the agency's current view of smartphones and their users. "Who knew in 1984 that this would be Big Brother …" the authors ask, in reference to a photo of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs. And commenting on photos of enthusiastic Apple customers and iPhone users, the NSA writes: "… and the zombies would be paying customers?"
In fact, given the targets it defines, the NSA can select a broad spectrum of user data from Apple's most lucrative product, at least if one is to believe the agency's account.
The results the intelligence agency documents on the basis of several examples are impressive. They include an image of the son of a former defense secretary with his arm around a young woman, a photo he took with his iPhone. A series of images depicts young men and women in crisis zones, including an armed man in the mountains of Afghanistan, an Afghan with friends and a suspect in Thailand.
No Access Necessary
All the images were apparently taken with smartphones. A photo taken in January 2012 is especially risqué: It shows a former senior government official of a foreign country who, according to the NSA, is relaxing on his couch in front of a TV set and taking pictures of himself -- with his iPhone. To protect the person's privacy, SPIEGEL has chosen not to reveal his name or any other details.
The access to such material varies, but much of it passes through an NSA department responsible for customized surveillance operations against high-interest targets. One of the US agents' tools is the use of backup files established by smartphones. According to one NSA document, these files contain the kind of information that is of particular interest to analysts, such as lists of contacts, call logs and drafts of text messages. To sort out such data, the analysts don't even require access to the iPhone itself, the document indicates. The department merely needs to infiltrate the target's computer, with which the smartphone is synchronized, in advance. Under the heading "iPhone capability," the NSA specialists list the kinds of data they can analyze in these cases. The document notes that there are small NSA programs, known as "scripts," that can perform surveillance on 38 different features of the iPhone 3 and 4 operating systems. They include the mapping feature, voicemail and photos, as well as the Google Earth, Facebook and Yahoo Messenger applications.
The NSA analysts are especially enthusiastic about the geolocation data stored in smartphones and many of their apps, data that enables them to determine a user's whereabouts at a given time.
According to one presentation, it was even possible to track a person's whereabouts over extended periods of time, until Apple eliminated this "error" with version 4.3.3 of its mobile operating system and restricted the memory to seven days.
Still, the "location services" used by many iPhone apps, ranging from the camera to maps to Facebook, are useful to the NSA. In the US intelligence documents, the analysts note that the "convenience" for users ensures that most readily consent when applications ask them whether they can use their current location.
Cracking the Blackberry
The NSA and its partner agency, Britain's GCHQ, focused with similar intensity on another electronic toy: the BlackBerry.
This is particularly interesting given that the Canadian company's product is marketed to a specific target group: companies that buy the devices for their employees. In fact, the device, with its small keypad, is seen as more of a manager's tool than something suspected terrorists would use to discuss potential attacks.
The NSA also shares this assessment, noting that Nokia devices were long favored in extremist forums, with Apple following in third place and BlackBerry ranking a distant ninth.
According to several documents, the NSA spent years trying to crack BlackBerry communications, which enjoy a high degree of protection, and maintains a special "BlackBerry Working Group" specifically for this purpose. But the industry's rapid development cycles keep the specialists assigned to the group on their toes, as a GCHQ document marked "UK Secret" indicates.
According to the document, problems with the processing of BlackBerry data were suddenly encountered in May and June 2009, problems the agents attributed to a data compression method newly introduced by the manufacturer.
In July and August, the GCHQ team assigned to the case discovered that BlackBerry had previously acquired a smaller company. At the same time, the intelligence agency had begun studying the new BlackBerry code. In March 2010, the problem was finally solved, according to the internal account. "Champagne!" the analysts remarked, patting themselves on the back.
Security Concerns
The internal documents indicate that this was not the only success against Blackberry, a company that markets its devices as being surveillance-proof -- and one that has recently lost substantial market share due to strategic mistakes, as the NSA also notes with interest. According to one of the internal documents, in a section marked "Trends," the share of US government employees who used BlackBerry devices fell from 77 to less than 50 percent between August 2009 and May 2012.
The NSA concludes that ordinary consumer devices are increasingly replacing the only certified government smartphone, leading the analysts to voice their concerns about security. They apparently assume that they are the only agents worldwide capable of secretly tapping into BlackBerrys.
As far back as 2009, the NSA specialists noted that they could "see and read" text messages sent from BlackBerrys, and could also "collect and process BIS mails." BIS stands for BlackBerry Internet Service, which operates outside corporate networks, and which, in contrast to the data passing through internal BlackBerry services (BES), only compresses but does not encrypt data.
But even this highest level of security would seem not to be immune to NSA access, at least according to a presentation titled, "Your target is using a BlackBerry? Now what?" The presentation notes that the acquisition of encrypted BES communications requires a "sustained" operation by the NSA's Tailored Access Operation department in order to "fully prosecute your target." An email from a Mexican government agency, which appears in the presentation under the title "BES collection," reveals that this is applied successfully in practice.
Relying on BlackBerry
In June 2012, the documents show that the NSA was able to expand its arsenal against BlackBerry. Now they were also listing voice telephony among their "current capabilities," namely the two conventional mobile wireless standards in Europe and the United States, "GSM" and "CDMA."
But the internal group of experts, who had come together for a "BlackBerry round table" discussion, was still not satisfied. According to the documents, the question of which "additional enrichments would you like to see" with regards to BlackBerry was also discussed.
Even if everything in the materials viewed by SPIEGEL suggests the targeted use of these NSA surveillance options, the companies involved are not likely to be impressed. BlackBerry is faltering and is currently open to takeover bids. Security remains one of its top selling points with its most recent models, such as the Q10. If it now becomes apparent that the NSA is capable of spying on both Apple and BlackBerry devices in a targeted manner, it could have far-reaching consequences.
Those consequences extend to the German government. Not long ago, the government in Berlin awarded a major contract for secure mobile communications within federal agencies. The winner was BlackBerry.

INSIDE GAZA:what you don't see can't hurt you.

Medics carry a wounded Palestinian man [Reuters]



War and the US –what you don’t see can't hurt

The US media's exclusion of graphic images fails to convey the reality of war and allows its glorification.
Last modified: 21 Jul 2014 03:41
I’ve never understood the people who don’t watch or read the news.  Obviously, I believe what we do is important, so I’ve always been a bit baffled.  I get it now.  I have been so overwhelmed with emotion watching the Gaza conflict unfold that it has in many ways consumed me from thousands of miles away.
That means I’ve been doing a lot of walking around D.C. to try and get the pictures out of my head at least temporarily.  I was struck by a couple of things during my walks.  First, there are a lot of tourists in this town.  Second, they are here to see some very beautiful memorials.  And then I realized the old memorials here in Washington are all to war and to President’s that are associated with war.
That made me ask myself, is war at the heart of the American identity? Much of what is left of this country’s manufacturing base is to make tools of war, the planes, the bombs and the ships that carry them.  The United States spends more on defense than the next 13 countries combined.  At the heart of America’s foreign policy are weapons, they allow some to buy them and pay for others to have them as well.  The video game industry survives on make believe war and Hollywood benefits from it as well.  The one place you would be hard pressed to find graphic images of war – on television news.
I’ve been watching the domestic coverage very carefully.  I’ve written about the bias that I see in some of the reporting.  It’s been fairly blatant in many cases, but there is a subtler form of bias and that is in choosing what pictures to show.
No dead or dying
I watched the 3 network evening broadcasts the other night.  One talked to injured children but no one showed any of the dead or dying.  They showed bombs from far away, toppled buildings, most didn’t show close ups of mourning and not once did I hear the death toll.
I’m not saying this is being done on purpose although that is always a possibility.  I was brought up in American television and quite frankly I never really questioned the practice of not showing graphic images.  In local news if a murder victim wasn’t covered up with a white sheet, you usually didn’t even take video of it until the coroner arrived.  It just isn’t what is done.  I remember when I first came to Al Jazeera English; I was very surprised, even mildly shocked, to see the footage we aired.  We are always careful to not cross that hard to define line, but we don’t censor ourselves the way the American media does.  In essence, we don’t sanitize the scene for our viewers to a point that it distorts the reality.
The images of the grief in Gaza and Israel are just powerful.  The video of the dead, the grieving and destruction stays with you.  The Pentagon knows this, which is why for years no one was allowed to take any video of the caskets of fallen soldiers being returned home.  The loss becomes real.  War becomes real.
I just watched video of a father being told his baby girl was dead.  And his pain seared my heart.  In many ways I wish I had never seen that, but to me, turning away would in some ways insult her memory.  I have to watch this to really know what is happening.  Information that makes us more empathetic humans cannot be a bad thing, even if it is so terribly hard at times.
With this heavy heart, I think I might take another walk.  This time, I might go see the newest memorial; it honors the life of Martin Luther King Junior.  He spent his life in the search for justice through the use of non-violent resistance.  It will be good to be in the one place here where non-violence is held up as something worth honoring, something worth remembering.

IS TRUE? IF AFRICANS DIVIDED OVER CHINESE PRESENCE

Billions from Beijing: Africans Divided over Chinese Presence

By Bartholomäus Grill in Bagamayo, Tanzania
Photo Gallery: African Ambivalence About Chinese Investments
REUTERS
Chinese companies have pumped billions into Africa to secure access to natural resources, boosting countries' economies along the way. Ordinary citizens aren't reaping the benefits, though, and have become increasingly wary of the new investors.
In a three-part series, SPIEGEL is exploring fundamental changes occurring in Africa -- a continent the West has long written off, but is now being embraced by other countries. This is Part I of the series. An introduction can be read here, while Part II explores the digital revolution's tranformative impact on the continent and Part III shows how women in Africa are making great strides.

Everything is as it has always been: decayed rows of houses, weathered doorframes with intricate carvings, potholed dirt roads, fishing boats rotting on the beach and, in the middle of it all, the Boma, a stone fortress built by the former German conquerors in Bagamayo, a sleepy coastal town in Tanzania.
ANZEIGE
Bagamayo was the capital of the colony of German East Africa from 1888 to 1891, when the administrative seat was moved to Dar es Salaam because the shore in Bagamayo was too shallow for a real seaport. Since then, time seems to have stood still. "But soon nothing will be as it once was in Bagamayo," says Marie Shaba, "because now the new rulers of the world, the Chinese, are coming."
The 65-year-old radio journalist is wearing a bright, mango-yellow kitenge, the traditional dress worn by Tanzanian women. She calls herself a cultural activist. For years, Shaba has been fighting to have Bagamayo, an important arena for the slave trade in the 19th century and for colonial history, declared a United Nations World Heritage Site.
But now Shaba fears that the sleepy town will disappear in the waves of progress.
This spring, Bagamayo was the focus of a story in international business news, when more than 400 newspapers worldwide reported that China was making a low-interest loan of $10 billion (€7.4 billion) available for the construction of a modern container terminal 15 kilometers (9 miles) south of the city, and also planned to fund the establishment of a special economic zone in the hinterlands behind the port.
"This is good for Tanzania, very good. It's a poor country that will be making a giant step forward," says Janson Huang, 36. It's also good for him and his company. Huang manages the local office of Chinese construction company Group Six International in Dar es Salaam. A short, wiry man with a sparse moustache, he is dressed casually in an open, gray-and-white striped shirt and dark slacks. Huang speaks English well, and he speaks openly and directly.
This is unusual, as Chinese investors tend to shy away from the media. All other inquiries SPIEGEL made with Chinese companies registered in Tanzania were either rejected or not answered at all.
A Win-Win Situation?
The Group Six headquarters, in the Mikocheni industrial area, was not easy to find. The unpaved access road hadn't been named yet. The company is housed in an inconspicuous complex behind high walls topped with barbed wire. Across from the materials warehouse are two red Chinese lanterns, marking the entrance to the uninviting dormitory for the Chinese foremen. The manager's office next door is sparsely furnished with imitation leather armchairs and filing cabinets.
Huang, an engineer, has been working in East Africa for a decade, first in Kenya and then in Tanzania. He likes his new home and wants to stay here with his family. He would like to have a second child, preferably a son.
It wasn't easy to gain a foothold in Tanzania, he says, "but we Chinese are not afraid of taking risks. We see Africa with different eyes than the West, not as a rotten continent, but as an economic region with enormous potential."
Huang's privately owned company has had a hand in constructing many buildings. Most recently, it built the Crystal Tower in downtown Dar es Salaam. "We invest and create jobs. It's a win-win situation for both sides," he says.
The only decoration in Huang's office consists of framed photographs on the wall, which depict him during the presentation of company donations for humanitarian purposes. He is especially proud of a group photo with President Xi Jinping. Huang, a young economic pioneer from China, is standing directly behind China's first lady.
'A Galloping Lion'
The photo was taken during Xi's state visit in late March, when China's newly chosen president signed the investment agreement for the Bagamayo port and special economic zone, as well as 17 other bilateral agreements. The president and party leader had just come from Moscow, and it was no accident that the second stop on his first trip abroad was in Africa.
China, Asia's economic superpower, is hungry for natural resources, energy, food and markets for its products. Africa can offer all of these things: about 40 percent of global reserves of natural resources, 60 percent of uncultivated agricultural land, a billion people with rising purchasing power and a potential army of low-wage workers.
"Our relations are at a new historic beginning," the Chinese president told his Tanzanian hosts. He noted that Africa is one of the world's fastest-growing regions, pressing forward like a "galloping lion." Xi reminded his hosts of the warm relationship between the Great Chairman Mao Zedong and Tanzania's first president, Julius Nyerere. He also praised the two countries' shared struggle against imperialism and invoked the common interests of all developing countries. "We are true friends," he said. "We treat each other as equal partners."
Before giving his speech, Xi had made a symbolic gesture of handing over a monumental conference center, built by a Chinese construction company in the commercial capital Dar es Salaam, to the Tanzanian president. After his visit, he traveled to the BRICS summit in Durban, South Africa, to do business with representatives from the other states in this group: Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa.

UKAWA MEMBERS:are they after ALLOWANCE payment or ?

 Tanzania: Some Ukawa Members in U-Turn Stance

Dodoma — AS Members of the Coalition of Defenders of People's Constitution (UKAWA) maintain that they will not attend the ongoing Constituent Assembly (CA) sessions to discuss the draft constitution, a few of them have been seen registering Reporters on CA witnessed Ms Leticia Nyerere (Special Seats - Chadema) registering at the Parliament Grounds.
She refused to comment or be photographed when approached. "I don't want to comment anything. It is also illegal to take my photo without my consent," Ms Nyerere, who was trying to get away, said as photographers jostled to get a good angle of her.
Dressed in a grey suit and white and black scarf, Ms Nyerere hurriedly walked away when she spotted reporters walking towards her with a view to getting her comment. Another member who also registered for the CA session is Mr John Shibuda (Maswa West-Chadema) on Tuesday but did not attend.
Ms Clara Mwatuka (Special Seats - CUF) also registered but did not attend. There were reports that Mr Said Arfi of Chadema had also registered. However, when this reporter contacted him, he denied the claims, saying that he had arrived in Dodoma late.
When asked if he would register, he said that he has not made up his mind yet and when he does, he will make it known.
About four days before the CA resumed its duties, UKAWA, whose members who constituted Chadema, CUF and NCCR-Mageuzi, announced it will not participate in the special assembly's sessions.
According to unconfirmed reports, members who register but do not attend the sessions receive 230,000/- out of the 300,000/- daily stipend.

Wednesday, 6 August 2014

Islanders Blamed for Delaying Process of Creating New Union Constitution.

Islanders Blamed for Delaying Process of Creating New Union Constitution.

Zanzibar — AS the Constitution Assembly (CA) resumes its session, members of the assembly from Zanzibar are to blame for the delays and disputes over the constitution, a report says.
The Zanzibar Institute for Research and Public Policy (ZIRPP) says in its report after series of forums in the islands on 'how to resolve constitution stalemate', "it is unfortunate that division within CA members from Zanzibar was a drawback in the process."
"Reckless and emotional debate from Zanzibaris during the CA meeting in Dodoma was the main cause of the row between CA members forming UKAWA and the CCM group," reads the report made public in Zanzibar.
Mr Ali Abdulla Suleiman, Chairperson of the ZIRPP Special Committee, formed during the fora, read the report at a press conference convened in Zanzibar town.
The fora held on both Unguja and Pemba islands, attracted different type of the people including students, retired civil servants, politicians, academicians, and members from NGOs.
ZIRPP which functions as a think-tank, consultancy and research-to-policybased Institute, is a Non- Governmental Organization (NGO) which aims at mobilising untapped human resources of Zanzibaris from within Zanzibar and in the Diaspora.
"According to the views collected during our fora, people have been so disappointment with how CA members from Zanzibar behaved. Unnecessary use of hate speech and abusiveness were also the source of the problems," said Suleiman.
ZIRPP fora special committee members, who include Mr Ali Hassan Khamis, Mr Msellem Khamis Msellem, Ms Naila Majid Jidawi, Mr Enzi Talib Aboud, and Mr Abbasi Juma Mhunzi, recommend in their reports that all CA members from Zanzibar, including those forming UKAWA, should go back to the assembly.
"It is never too late; we kindly ask both President Ali Mohammed Shein and President Jakaya Kikwete to initiate a discussion that will lead to reconciliation of UKAWA and other group in the assembly," it recommends.
The speaker of the Zanzibar House of representatives, Mr Pandu Ameir Kificho, has been also asked to convince all the members from Zanzibar to take part in the CA session for the interest of Zanzibar.
"This is an important opportunity for Zanzibaris to raise our demands so that included in the new union constitution. Politicians from Zanzibar should put national interest first, before personal and political interest," ZIRPP says.
It says people in Zanzibar want full autonomy in managing its economical affairs, establishing its own state bank, union president on rotation between Zanzibaris and Tanganyika, and that Zanzibar should enjoy complete legal freedom to join or work together with regional and international organizations such as EAC, SADC, UNESCO, WHO, and FAO.
According to ZIRPP Zanzibaris want Zanzibar's president to become a permanent union vice president as it used to be when Tanganyika and Zanzibar merge to form the United Republic of Tanzania. Zanzibar should have its own police and own intelligence department, and proportion for the job opportunities in the union.
ZIRPP, arguably the first NGO in the islands to organise fora involving all groups of people in Zanzibar and come up with recommendations, says Zanzibaris stand a good chance to have their voice heard, should they work together.

Obama Announces $33bn in Investment Commitments to Africa

Obama Announces $33bn in Investment Commitments to Africa

06 Aug 2014
1802F02.Barack-Obama.jpg - 1802F02.Barack-Obama.jpg
US President Barack Obama

Zacheaus Somorin
with agency report  
US President Barack Obama yesterday announced $33 billion in new investment and financing commitments to Africa during a three-day summit with dozens of leaders from the continent.
“That will support development across Africa and jobs in the United States,” Obama said, according to AFP. “The bottom line is that the United States is making a major long-term investment in African progress.”
The $33 billion included $12 billion in new money for the power sector, seen as crucial to building up the African economy, and another $14 billion in investments in other sectors by US companies.
The bulk of the commitments came from private-sector companies, including Coca-Cola and General Electric, underscoring Africa's growing appeal to businesses.
The continent is home to six of the world's fastest-growing economies and a rapidly expanding middle class with increased spending power.
The announcement was aimed at convincing some 45 African heads of state and government gathered in Washington that the United States is committed to participating in Africa’s economic emergence, despite having fallen behind competitors in China and Europe.
Obama also called Republican members of Congress not to close down the US Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank), as it remains a vital source of funding America’s export industry, especially for US companies seeking to invest in Africa.
The Ex-Im Bank is at the centre of a political controversy in Washington, with some Republicans seeking to shut the bank and threatening to block its reauthorisation when Congress returns from recess this fall. The GOP lawmakers seeking to shut down the bank argue that its spending is politically motivated and unnecessary.
Yet Obama noted that US trade with the entire African continent was about the same as its trade ties with Brazil and that just about one per cent of US exports go to sub-Saharan Africa.
“We've got to do better, much better,” he said during closing remarks at a day-long session that brought together U.S. and African politicians and business leaders.
“I want Africans buying more American products and I want Americans buying more African products."
The US is hardly alone in seeing economic potential in Africa, with China, Europe and India moving aggressively to tap into Africa's growing markets. China in particular is hungry for oil, coal and other resources and is eager to develop the roads, bridges and ports needed to pull them out of Africa.
“We also realise we have some catching up to do,” said Michael Bloomberg, the former New York mayor and billionaire businessman who opened the summit yesterday. “We are letting Europe and China go faster than the US.”
Obama has sought to cast the US as a better partner for African nations than China, arguing that his administration has a long-term interest in the continent's success and is not simply seeking to extract resources for its own purposes.
“The United States is determined to be a partner in Africa's success,” he said. “We don't look to Africa simply for its natural resources. We recognise Africa for its greatest resource, which is its people, their talents and their potential.”
The business forum is part of an unprecedented three-day summit underway in Washington, with nearly 50 African heads of state in attendance. Obama hosted the leaders at a White House dinner yesterday night.
About 100 US companies were represented at yesterday’s conference. Vice-President Joe Biden and Secretary of State, John Kerry also addressed the attendees, as did former President Bill Clinton, who declared that the US has “only barely scratched the surface” of Africa's economic potential.
In conjunction with the meeting, US companies announced $14 billion in investments for Africa. Among them: a $5 billion investment from Coca-Cola to fund manufacturing lines and production equipment; $2 billion investment from GE by 2018; $200 million in investments across Africa by Marriott, and a $66 million commitment by IBM to provide technology services to Ghana's Fidelity Bank.
The White House also touted another $12 billion in new commitments for Obama's Power Africa initiative from the private sector, World Bank and the government of Sweden. Obama announced the Power Africa initiative last summer, setting a goal of expanding electricity access to at least 20 million new households and commercial entities.
The president said that with the new financial commitments, he was boosting that goal to 60 million homes and businesses.
Obama also announced $7 billion in new government financing to promote US exports to and investments in Africa. That includes $3 billion in financing from the US Export-Import Bank aimed at supporting American exports to Africa over the next two years.
GE CEO Jeff Immelt, who was among the business leaders participating at the summit, also appealed to Congress to renew the bank's charter, saying its existence signals to other countries that the US government believes in investing overseas.
“The fact that we have to sit here and argue for it is just wrong,” Immelt said.
Obama also signed an executive order creating an advisory committee which comprised private sector representatives who will advise the White House on ways to boost economic ties with Africa.
The first day of the meeting, which was on Monday, saw US officials chiding their guests over democratic reform and civil rights. But by yesterday, Obama and US titans of commerce and industry were trying to convince their counterparts that America is as determined to take part in Africa's growth story as China or Europe.
Hundreds of US and African business chiefs joined political leaders in different fora on Monday including the top executives of General Electric, Coca-Cola and Walmart, as well as African billionaires such as Nigerian commodities king, Aliko Dangote, telecoms tycoon Mo Ibrahim, and Ashish Thakkar, the young founder of the tech-focused Mara Group.
But outside of a few top companies, US businesses faced criticism that they are less knowledgeable and more afraid of risks on the continent than their European and Asian rivals.
The US remains the largest source of investment but most of that has been in the oil and gas sector.
Meanwhile, China and Europe have built stronger positions in infrastructure, manufacturing and trade, with China’s trade with Africa more than double that of the US.

American companies “are still thinking about Africa as a decade ago... whereas things have really changed dramatically. Africa now has been growing at about 5.5 per cent on average in the last decade,” said Dangote, Africa's richest man whose fortune is estimated at more than $20 billion.
“There is a lot of perceived risk. People only talk about risk. But the majority of those who perceive risk don't know the story. They have not really been there,” he added.
US Commerce Secretary, Penny Pritzker, said Washington would boost efforts to build commercial ties, with more government help on financing and more trade missions going both ways. “The time to do business in Africa is no longer five years away. The time to do business is now,” she added.
Pritzker stressed that building trade and investments with Africa would be good for both sides, helping African countries develop and creating jobs in the United States. “As Africa's middle class continues to expand, we hope to see our export numbers grow,” she said.

Tuesday, 26 November 2013

NUKE TALKS cartoon....U.S vs IRAN

Is the U.S. Right to Agree to a Deal on Iran's Nuclear Program?


Is the U.S. Right to Agree to a Deal on Iran's Nuclear Program?

The country will temporarily freeze nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief

November 24, 2013Share
Iran has agreed to temporarily suspend its nuclear program as a part of a six-month deal reached with the United States and its allies. The accord is the product of recent diplomatic talks with the Middle Eastern country attempting to curb Iran's nuclear activities in exchange for easing economic sanctions.
Signed early Sunday morning in Geneva, the agreement restricts Iran from enriching uranium beyond five percent. This level is too low to fuel a nuclear bomb but is enough for energy production. Iran will also dismantle links between networks of existing centrifuges, and will not build any new centrifuges or enrichment plants. Its stockpile of 20-percent enriched uranium will be diluted or converted to oxide so it cannot be used for bomb production.
President Barack Obama said the agreement is the first step to ensuring Iran's nuclear program is peaceful and not intended for weapons production. In a statement from the State Dining Room Saturday night, Obama said the agreement will also allow inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities to verify compliance. He emphasized that a more permanent deal will be pursued during further negotiations over the next six months, but in the meantime Iran will be unable to use those talks "as cover to advance its program."
[See a collection of political cartoons on Iran.]
"In these negotiations, nothing will be agreed to unless everything is agreed to.  The burden is on Iran to prove to the world that its nuclear program will be exclusively for peaceful purposes," Obama said.
In exchange for the nuclear program restrictions, the United States will provide between $6 and $7 billion in sanctions relief. Iran has been subject to tough economic sanctions for its repeated refusal to comply with international law regarding its nuclear activities, as the country maintains it has the right to such technology.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been publicly critical of the recent negotiations, said his country did not accept the deal. He said the international community was wrong to provide sanctions relief to Iran in exchange for an accord that did not entirely curb nuclear production.
"Israel is not bound by this agreement," Netanyahu said. "As prime minister of Israel, I would like to make it clear: Israel will not allow Iran to develop a military nuclear capability."
[Check out our editorial cartoons on President Obama.]
Some members of Congress too have been wary of the diplomatic talks, pressing instead for further sanctions on Iran. They argued this would give the United States more leverage in negotiating an end to Iran's nuclear production.
President Obama can use an executive order to enact the sanctions relief included in the agreement, so no action from Congress will be required to approve it.

Sunday, 17 November 2013

Who Benefits From A War Between The United States And Syria?

Who Benefits From A War Between The United States And Syria?

Tyler Durden's picture





 
Submitted by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,
Someone wants to get the United States into a war with Syria very, very badly.  Cui bono is an old Latin phrase that is still commonly used, and it roughly means "to whose benefit?"  The key to figuring out who is really behind the push for war is to look at who will benefit from that war.  If a full-blown war erupts between the United States and Syria, it will not be good for the United States, it will not be good for Israel, it will not be good for Syria, it will not be good for Iran and it will not be good for Hezbollah.  The party that stands to benefit the most is Saudi Arabia, and they won't even be doing any of the fighting. 
They have been pouring billions of dollars into the conflict in Syria, but so far they have not been successful in their attempts to overthrow the Assad regime.  Now the Saudis are trying to play their trump card - the U.S. military.  If the Saudis are successful, they will get to pit the two greatest long-term strategic enemies of Sunni Islam against each other - the U.S. and Israel on one side and Shia Islam on the other.  In such a scenario, the more damage that both sides do to each other the happier the Sunnis will be.
There would be other winners from a U.S. war with Syria as well.  For example, it is well-known that Qatar wants to run a natural gas pipeline out of the Persian Gulf, through Syria and into Europe.  That is why Qatar has also been pouring billions of dollars into the civil war in Syria.
So if it is really Saudi Arabia and Qatar that want to overthrow the Assad regime, why does the United States have to do the fighting?
Someone should ask Barack Obama why it is necessary for the U.S. military to do the dirty work of his Sunni Muslim friends.
Obama is promising that the upcoming attack will only be a "limited military strike" and that we will not be getting into a full-blown war with Syria.
The only way that will work is if Syria, Hezbollah and Iran all sit on their hands and do nothing to respond to the upcoming U.S. attack.
Could that happen?
Maybe.
Let's hope so.
But if there is a response, and a U.S. naval vessel gets hit, or American blood is spilled, or rockets start raining down on Tel Aviv, the U.S. will then be engaged in a full-blown war.
That is about the last thing that we need right now.
The vast majority of Americans do not want to get embroiled in another war in the Middle East, and even a lot of top military officials are expressing "serious reservations" about attacking Syria according to the Washington Post...
The Obama administration’s plan to launch a military strike against Syria is being received with serious reservations by many in the U.S. military, which is coping with the scars of two lengthy wars and a rapidly contracting budget, according to current and former officers.

Having assumed for months that the United States was unlikely to intervene militarily in Syria, the Defense Department has been thrust onto a war footing that has made many in the armed services uneasy, according to interviews with more than a dozen military officers ranging from captains to a four-star general.
For the United States, there really is no good outcome in Syria.
If we attack and Assad stays in power, that is a bad outcome for the United States.
If we help overthrow the Assad regime, the rebels take control.  But they would be even worse than Assad.  They have pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda, and they are rabidly anti-American, rabidly anti-Israel and rabidly anti-western.
So why in the world should the United States get involved?
This war would not be good for Israel either.  I have seen a number of supposedly pro-Israel websites out there getting very excited about the prospect of war with Syria, but that is a huge mistake.
Syria has already threatened to attack Israeli cities if the U.S. attacks Syria.  If Syrian missiles start landing in the heart of Tel Aviv, Israel will respond.
And if any of those missiles have unconventional warheads, Israel will respond by absolutely destroying Damascus.
And of course a missile exchange between Syria and Israel will almost certainly draw Hezbollah into the conflict.  And right now Hezbollah has 70,000 rockets aimed at Israel.
If Hezbollah starts launching those rockets, thousands upon thousands of innocent Jewish citizens will be killed.
So all of those "pro-Israel" websites out there that are getting excited about war with Syria should think twice.  If you really are "pro-Israel", you should not want this war.  It would not be good for Israel.
If you want to stand with Israel, then stand for peace.  This war would not achieve any positive outcomes for Israel.  Even if Assad is overthrown, the rebel government that would replace him would be even more anti-Israel than Assad was.
War is hell.  Ask anyone that has been in the middle of one.  Why would anyone want to see American blood spilled, Israeli blood spilled or Syrian blood spilled?
If the Saudis want this war so badly, they should go and fight it.  Everyone knows that the Saudis have been bankrolling the rebels.  At this point, even CNN is openly admitting this...
It is an open secret that Saudi Arabia is using Jordan to smuggle weapons into Syria for the rebels. Jordan says it is doing all it can to prevent that and does not want to inflame the situation in Syria.
And Assad certainly knows who is behind the civil war in his country.  The following is an excerpt from a recent interview with Assad...
Of course it is well known that countries, such as Saudi Arabia, who hold the purse strings can shape and manipulate them to suit their own interests.

Ideologically, these countries mobilize them through direct or indirect means as extremist tools. If they declare that Muslims must pursue Jihad in Syria, thousands of fighters will respond.

Financially, those who finance and arm such groups can instruct them to carry out acts of terrorism and spread anarchy. The influence over them is synergized when a country such as Saudi Arabia directs them through both the Wahhabi ideology and their financial means.
And shortly after the British Parliament voted against military intervention in Syria, Saudi Arabia raised their level of "defense readiness" from "five" to "two" in a clear sign that they fully expect a war to happen...
Saudi Arabia, a supporter of rebels fighting to topple President Bashar al-Assad, has raised its level of military alertness in anticipation of a possible Western strike in Syria, sources familiar with the matter said on Friday.

The United States has been calling for punitive action against Assad's government for a suspected poison gas attack on a Damascus suburb on August 21 that killed hundreds of people.

Saudi Arabia's defense readiness has been raised to "two" from "five", a Saudi military source who declined to be named told Reuters. "One" is the highest level of alert.
And guess who has been supplying the rebels in Syria with chemical weapons?
According to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak, it has been the Saudis...
Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak.
And this is someone that isn't just fresh out of journalism school.  As Paul Joseph Watson noted, "Dale Gavlak’s credibility is very impressive. He has been a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press for two decades and has also worked for National Public Radio (NPR) and written articles for BBC News."
The Voice of Russia has also been reporting on Gavlak's bombshell findings...
The rebels noted it was a result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them.

“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

As Gavlak reports, Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels died in a weapons storage tunnel. The father stated the weapons were provided to rebel forces by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K’. “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.

Gavlak also refers to an article in the UK’s Daily Telegraph about secret Russian-Saudi talks stating that Prince Bandar threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin with terror attacks at next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if Russia doesn’t agree to change its stance on Syria.

“Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord,” the article stated.

“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” Saudi Prince allegedly told Vladimir Putin.
Yes, the Saudis were so desperate to get the Russians to stand down and allow an attack on Syria that they actually threatened them.  Zero Hedge published some additional details on the meeting between Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan and Russian President Vladimir Putin...
Bandar told Putin, “There are many common values and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring. We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya. ... As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

It is good of the Saudis to admit they control a terrorist organization that "threatens the security" of the Sochi 2014 Olympic games, and that house of Saud uses "in the face of the Syrian regime." Perhaps the next time there is a bombing in Boston by some Chechen-related terrorists, someone can inquire Saudi Arabia what, if anything, they knew about that.

But the piece de resistance is what happened at the end of the dialogue between the two leaders. It was, in not so many words, a threat by Saudi Arabia aimed squarely at Russia:

As soon as Putin finished his speech, Prince Bandar warned that in light of the course of the talks, things were likely to intensify, especially in the Syrian arena, although he appreciated the Russians’ understanding of Saudi Arabia’s position on Egypt and their readiness to support the Egyptian army despite their fears for Egypt's future.

The head of the Saudi intelligence services said that the dispute over the approach to the Syrian issue leads to the conclusion that “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

At the end of the meeting, the Russian and Saudi sides agreed to continue talks, provided that the current meeting remained under wraps. This was before one of the two sides leaked it via the Russian press.
Are you starting to get the picture?
The Saudis are absolutely determined to make this war happen, and they expect us to do the fighting.
And Barack Obama plans to go ahead and attack Syria without the support of the American people or the approval of Congress.
According to a new NBC News poll that was just released, nearly 80 percent of all Americans want Congress to approve a strike on Syria before it happens.
And according to Politico, more than 150 members of Congress have already signed letters demanding that Obama get approval from them before attacking Syria...
Already Thursday, more than 150 members of Congress have signaled their opposition to airstrikes on Syria without a congressional vote. House members circulated two separate letters circulated that were sent to the White House demanding a congressional role before military action takes place. One, authored by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), has more than 150 signatures from Democrats and Republicans. Another, started by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), is signed by 53 Democrats, though many of them also signed Rigell’s letter.
However, is is clear that he is absolutely determined to attack Syria, and he is not going to let the U.S. Congress - even if they vote against it - or the American people stop him.
Let's just hope that he doesn't start World War III in the process.

The Real Reason Why The US Wants To Invade Syria

The Real Reason Why The US Wants To Invade Syria

The Real Reason Why The US Wants To Invade Syria
Politics
It looks like America is once again going to be waging war. This should not come as much of a surprise, seeing as how the U.S. is known for getting its hands dirty in the soil of other countries. The Iraq war was the latest of blemishes to be self-imposed upon the reputation of the United States. In fact, many of the U.S./CIA operations that were carried out in the last few decades have been leaked and now have people questioning the decisions made by the U.S. government. Nevertheless, the U.S., along with France and the UK, are strongly urging punishment for the alleged illegal chemical warfare that they believe has taken place in Syria just days before, killing hundreds of Syrians — many of them children.
AP recently reported that due to the UN’s division on the issue, the U.S., Britain and France will try to go around the international committee in order to give Syrian Rebels support in their civil war. Because China and Russia continue to use their vetoing power to suppress any response to the Syrian conflict that has already lasted over 2 years, these three countries and their leaders are contemplating action that would sidestep the UN’s procedures.
The task would require achieving support of key international organizations that work outside of the United Nations. One option would be to persuade NATO to get involved — possibly leading to military action.
Ken Pollack, an expert on Middle Eastern military/political affairs told AP that, “Very famously, the Kosovo war was not a legal. Yet… you don’t have people running around screaming that the Kosovo war was illegal. That is because the U.S. did a good job building a case for it.”
In other words, although technically the U.S. should go through the UN before making any decisions regarding its involvement in Syria, there are other means to the same end. The U.S.-led coalition is certain to adduce the international doctrine: Responsibility to Protect — which states that the international community is obligated to prevent crimes on humanity on an international level.
US President Barack Obama, The First Lady and their children arrive on Air Force One in Dakar
Stephen Biddle, an expert on foreign policy and U.S. Military at George Washington University, notes that the doctrine is often perceived to supersede the need to respect a country’s sovereignty. “The two natural avenues are NATO and the doctrine of responsibility to protect,” Biddle tells AP.
Whichever way you look at it, it’s clear that the U.S. wants to get involved in Syria. The question is: why? The game that is politics has never been my forte — yet logic has to play some sort of role in the decision-making, so I’d be happy to take a stab at it, at the very least presenting a few options. Let’s start with the reason most popular among the masses: money. Now, it’s important to remember that in order to make money, you have to bring in more than you spend — as would any other business.
So, the U.S. would have to make more money off the war than they would have to spend fighting it. The cost of the Iraq war is nearing the $1 trillion mark. Yes, a whole lot of taxpayer money went into that war. On a side note, imagine a world where human beings would stop killing each other and, instead of spending the money on wars, spend it on food and clean water for those in need…
So, in order for the math to make sense, America would need to make well over $1 Trillion in profit from the war. The best way for a country to make money off a war directly is by selling weapons and equipment to the side it supports. A more indirect way would be to allow companies to provide support services, such as feeding the troops, working on buildings’ infrastructures, providing private security… These companies would get paid handsomely for their work (many times more handsomely than they deserve). After that, the money somehow would have to trickle down back to the government — but, unfortunately, I can only guess how. Maybe the companies simply support the government by returning the money in form of a “donation.”
tumblr_mbzpq0WrI81ripxjvo1_500
Let’s take an example from the Iraq and Afghan wars, which allocated some $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money to such companies, according to International Business Times. The number one recipient of such governmental contracts is KBR, Inc., a Houston-based engineering and construction firm focusing on energy — a firm that is the sister company of Halliburton Co.. The company received $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts — including a good amount of deals done without competing bids. Who was the CEO of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000 and was later our country’s VP? Dick Cheney. I think you get the picture.
The only problem lies in whether or not enough money would be made off the war to cover the hundreds of billions of dollars that would simultaneously be spent on it. Another possible reason for deciding to be in charge of thwarting all evil, a role the U.S. has chosen to take on, is for reputation. A reputation of a country and the power they possess — or are believed to possess — is of course of the highest importance on such global chessboards. The most common belief is that a country like the U.S. (and, in this situation, Britain and France) is after two things and two things only: money and power.
This may very well be true; however, it is also a possibility that the U.S.-led coalition is actually doing its best to make the world a better place. Sure, maybe a bit of a stretch…but, if you were to throw in money and/or power into the equation in addition, then there’s no reason not to make the world a better place.
Why not do that while making money and holding on to your reputation? Making money, gaining power and emphasizing one’s reputation, while projecting an image of saintliness is a great game plan. Unfortunately, the line between moral and immoral tends to get blurred the deeper you get into politics. Again, I was never a big fan of it all, but I would like to think that behaving in a benevolent and caring manner is quickly becoming more important in our eyes — the people’s eyes.
war-pigs
We are beginning to judge a country — whether our own or other — by the actions their governmental leaders take. We are beginning to expect a certain level of, for lack of a better word, lovingness for the world and for humanity from our leaders — genuine care. We must consider the fact that as the middle class grows in size and wealth, so will the upper class. Sooner than later — unless suppressed — the citizens of the U.S., for example, will be holding a significant amount of power (a.k.a. money) that they could use in opposition to the government.
Sure, as the citizens get wealthier, so does the body governing them. However, this is not a size contest; rebellion propaganda does not take that much money to distribute. Governments will eventually have to genuinely have the peoples’ — all peoples’ — best interests at heart. Or… my thinking may be too utopian and politics will always be a hit below the belt.
UnitedStatesMilitary1
Photo courtesy WENN, Tumblr