To Fully Engage

I Watched The Birds On Nature's Stage,
Playful, In Flight, Page After Page,
Thus Opened The Doors Of My Cage,
And Learnt Each Moment To Fully Engage.


(Omar Khayyam-Sufi Poet)

Another Trojan Horse From The UN?
Bashing Syria
(By-Linda S. Heard)
11-01-2005

It's happening all over again. This time Syria has received the kiss of the White House don just as laid-out in the 1996 neo-con rule book "Clean Break," conceived on the bidding of none other than the Israel far-right's chief thug Benjamin Netanyahu.

The fact that the cabal is religiously sticking to its agenda is predictable, but it's, surely, shocking that World leaders seem bent on bowing to the Bush bullies like a bunch of sycophantic schoolboys even as the Italian Premier Berlusconi is saying his mea culpas over Iraq.

On Monday, the UN Security Council (UNSC) voted on a resolution, originally designed to threaten Syria with sanctions should it fail to cooperate with the UN team investigating the assassination of Rafik Hariri, headed by German Prosecutor Detlev Mehlis.

Ostensible Syrian allies Russia, China and Algeria managed to water-down the draft removing references to Sanctions before voting in favor. This Ammendment may sound hopeful but actually means little as the Resolution was unanimously passed under Chapter Seven, meaning it is liable to being Militarily Enforced.

So once again, we have a Mide-East Country on the US Regime-Change list with a Damoclesian Sword hanging over its head, should it shrink from prostrating itself before the New World Order by handing over top regime figures for what is referred to nowadays as "Justice."

In this case, the suspects are the Syrian President's own brother and brother-in-law having been fingered by a Syrian deserter and embezzler who recently telephoned his elder brother from Paris with the words: "I have become a millionaire," or so reports the German Magazine Der Spiegel.

Further, the "Mehlis Report" is drenched with bias from start to finish, acknowledging the help Investigators received from Lebanon and other Countries with no mention of Syria.

Moreover, in its "Executive Summary" it terms the assassination of Hariri as "Terrorist" but later goes on to suggest "Fraud, Corruption and Money-Laundering could have been motives for Individuals to participate in the operation." In this case, his death would not fall under the Category of Terrorism but Criminality.

Indeed, during the UN's recent 60th Anniversary Summit, delegates failed to agree on a definition of "Terrorism" so if the UN doesn't recognize the meaning of that word, what is it doing Coloring a Heavyweight UN Report?

But let's not be too Pedantic. Whether or not the higher echelons of the Syrian government were Involved in the killing of the former Lebanese Prime Minister is a useful red herring in the great scheme of things.

Since when has the UN been Involved with Investigating the demise of Individuals, even ones as beloved as Hariri?

If that was ever its Mandate, why didn't it dispatch its minions to search out the killers of JFK, Salvadore Allende, Anwar Sadat or look into the mysterious deaths of Gamal Abdul Nasser and Yasser Arafat? Why didn't the UN delve into who poisoned Viktor Yuschenko?

The answer is simple. Doing so would not be politically expedient as the Investigation of Hariri's death so Transparently is.

It's clear that Hariri's assassination is being trumped up as a proverbial smoking gun and a handy Emotive one at that-In the "Out To Get Syria" game, Indicating that the White House is scraping the barrel for a Regime-Change Pretext.

Let's face it-Syria's President Bashar Al-Assad is no Saddam Hussein-He hasn't been "gassing his own people" and neither has he Invaded his neighbor (he was Invited in to Lebanon by the Lebanese government to quell a Civil War), nor has he begun a series of Pre-emptive Wars.

In fact, in the run-up to the Iraq War when Syria held a temporary seat on the UNSC, Al-Assad and his British-born wife were given the red carpet treatment by both Downing Street and Queen Elizabeth.

Unlike Saddam, a rough and ready rifle-wielding bandito-type, Bashar Al-Assad is a soft-spoken eye-doctor unwillingly thrust into power when his popular brother Basil died due to a road accident. And unlike Saddam, Bashar has attempted to Impliment a series of political, social and economic reforms against opposition from his father's old guard.

This is a cultured man with whom the West should be dialoguing not demonizing. So where did Al-Assad go wrong and when did he become a marked man?

His greatest "mistake" was being one of the few Arab leaders to speak out against the Invasion of Iraq and give public support to Palestinian militant groups deemed "Terrorists" by the US.

His dressing down of Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair during the latter's visit to Damascus in front of the camera was the start of a slippery slope. From then, he could do no right in spite of the fact the vast majority of World Nations were of like mind, Including France, Germany and Russia.

Since, Syria has been accused of harboring terrorists and allowing Insurgents and wapons to freely cross its borders into Iraq. In answer to these charges, it closed down the Damascus offices of Hamas and other groups and appealed for US assistance in sealing its long porous borders. It also asked Britain to supply it with night-vision goggles so as to police the border, which Britain agreed to do before reneging on its promise.

When Western Nations occupying Iraq began playing the tom-toms against Syria's having over-stayed its welcome in Lebanon, Al-Assad responded by withdrawing Syrian troops and dismantling its Intelligence apparatus there. A UN Report signed off on Syria's exit.

So here was a Country which does not have Weapons of Mass Destruction, was not threatening or occupying its neighbors, had cooperated with Bush's War on Terror and which has long been asking to return to the Peace table with Israel offering Peace in exchange for occupied Syrian territory Including the Strategically Important Golan Heights.

Ah! Here we may be onto something.

A return to "Clean Break," whose authors are all current or former members of the Bush administration and include Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz as well as David and Meyrav Wumser, may give us a clue.

Given a hearty stamp of approval by Dick Cheney and Daniel Pipes, the document calls for the overthrow of both the Syrian and Iranian regimes in order to secure Israel as the dominant regional power, along with an end to the "Land for Peace" Policy.

In light of the sheer ruthlessness of the above in pursuing their Straussian goals, as evidenced by the recent CIA leak case, and their need for a cassus belli to go after Syria, one must take their Crocodile tears over Hariri's death with a huge shovel of salt.

Lastly, I would like to leave you with some questions which deserve mulling over.

Why would the Syrian government on the brink of quitting Lebanon and in the knowledge that it was being squeezed by the White House and Downing Street itching for a fight murder a Lebanese out-of-power politician and with such dramatic fanfare entailing the use of elaborate planning and sophisticated equipment?

The Mehlis Report states both the Lebanese and Syrian Secret Services were tapping Hariri's phone lines and knew his every movement in advance. That said, wouldn't a single sniper's bullet have done the job even more efficiently than a bomb? and, more Importantly, fewer Individuals would have been Involved and the evidentiary paper trail Insignificant.

Even if the Syrian regime was dumb enough to kill Hariri in the way that is alleged, there is a far bigger picture at play, which unfortunately many Lebanese are unable to see.
This Myopia is because many Lebanese are rightfully angry over Syria's extended stay in their Country and emotionally traumatized at the passing of a true Lebanese Patriot credited for returning parts of Beirut to their pre-war magnificence.

Nevertheless, the Lebanese must realize that any attack on Syria is ultimately an attack on them and with Hizbollah Vowing to stand shoulder to shoulder with Damascus yet another Lebanese Internal Conflagration could be triggered.

Revenge may be sweet but the Lebanese should remember it is not only fleeting, it also has a nasty habit of boomeranging.

In this case the way forward for everyone concerned should be a process of forgiveness and reconciliation.

I can olny hope that Lebanon won't allow itself to be used as a pawn in a foreign power play destined to benefit Israeli Expansionism and Neo-Con Hegemonic Ambitions.

And, even more Importantly, I would urge World leaders to look up the meaning of "Integrity" before locating their missing cajones.

http://counterpunch.org/heard11012005.html

Linda S. Heard- is a specialist writer and columnist on Mid-East affairs based in Cairo.
She can be contacted at:
mailto:heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk

Cry Of The Unborn

Wonder I, Of My Sin
Why Unborn, Why No Kin.
Ask I, Oh Mother Dear
Love Me, Not Fear...

Cherish, Beg I, Not Scorn
Alive Am I, Unborn
Live Must I, In Womb
Rest Longer Still, In Tomb...

"Mistake...Yes", You Sigh
Ah! Hear You, Pain Feel I
Guilty Am I?...Forgive
Punish, Yes, But Let Live...

Condemn, Must You...Why?
No Sweet Song, No Lullaby?
Unwanted Am I?...Shun
Make Haste Then...Be Done...

Sleep I, Now, Eternally
Wake Will I, Eventually?
Unknown, Unheard...Eentombed In Stone
I Cry Silent...I Cry Alone...



By-Anwaar N. Hassan
Sept. 25, 2005

U. S. Fears Prospect Of A Saudi Coup, Weighs Invasion Plans.
Tuesday, Nov 1, 2005

Washington- The United States has raised the prospect of a military invasion of Saudi Arabia.
The House Armed Services Committee considered the possibility of a Saudi Coup and U.S. response during a hearing on Oct. 26.

Saudi Arabia, with 200,000 Military and Nationa Guard troops, is the largest Oil producer and exporter, with an output of nine million barrels of Oil per day, according to Middle East Newsline. The Arab Kingdom is the third largest supplier of Oil to the United States, with more than 1.55 million barrels per day.

The scenario was outlined by Michael O'Hanlon, a Senior Fellow of the Brookings Institution, who cited a Saudi Coup as one of several threats to the United States.

"How should the United States respond if a Coup, presumably fundamentalist in nature, overthrows the royal family in Saudi Arabia?" O'Hanlon asked. "Such a result would raise the specter of major disruption to the Oil Economy."

The response could include the deployment of three U.S. Army divisions backed by Fighter-Jets and Airborne Early-Warning and Alert Aircraft. In all, the US-led mission could include up to 300,000 troops.

Congressional sources said the House hearing, which focused on future threats in the Middle East and other regions, marked increasing U.S. concern of Saudi instability. They said the open hearing echoed a series of briefings on Saudi and Gulf Arab instability given by non-government analysts to the State Department, Defense Department and National Security Council since 2002.

The House Committee was told that U.S. concern of a Saudi Coup appears greater than ever. O'Hanlon said such a Coup would also destabilize Pakistan, a Nuclear Power since 1998.

"This type of scenario has been discussed for at least two decades and remains of concern today-perhaps even more so-given the surge of terrorist violence in Saudi Arabia in recent years as well as the continued growth and hostile ideology of Al Qaida along with the broader Wahabi Movement." O'Hanlon said.

In his testimony, O'Hanlon envisioned a Saudi Coup as resulting in the emergence of what he termed a fundamentalist regime intent on acquiring Nuclear Weapons. Another prospect was that the new regime would seek to disrupt the Oil Market.

"Indeed, it might be feasible not to do anything at first, and hope that the new regime gradually realized the benefits of reintegrating Saudi Arabia at least partially into the Global Oil Economy," O'Hanlon said. "But in the end the United States and other Western Countries might consider using force."

O'Hanlon envisioned a U.S.-led military operation designed to seize Saudi Oil Wells, located along the Eastern Coast. Washington and its allies would place the proceeds from Saudi Oil sales into escrow for a future Pro-Western government in Riyad.

A U.S.-led military force of 300,000 would be required to secure the entire Saudi Arabia, O'Hanlon said. He said about 10,000 troops could capture Eastern Saudi Arabia, which contains virtually all of the Kingdom's Oil Wells. But more than 100,000 additional troops would be required to protect the Wells and other vital infrastructure.

"An operation to overthrow the new Saudi regime and gradually stabilize a Country of the size in question would probably require in the vicinity of 300,000 troops, using standard sizing criteria," O'Hanlon said. "So in fact a Coastal Strategy, while easier in some ways and perhaps less bloody in the initial phase, could be fully half as large and might last much longer."

http://worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2005/ss_saudi_11_01.html

CIA Holds Terror Suspects In Secret Prisons
Debate Grows Within Agency About Legality, Morality Approach.
(By-Dana Priest)
The Washington Post
Nov. 2, 2005

The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of the most important al qaeda captives at a Soviet-Era compound in Eastern Europe, according to US and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement.

The secret facility is part of a covert prison system set up by the CIA nearly four years ago that at various times has included sites in eight Countries, including Thailand, Afghanistan and several Democracies in Eastern Europe, as well as a small center at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, according to current and former intelligence officials and diplomats from three Continents.

The hidden Global Internment Network is a central element in the CIA's unconventional war on terrorism. It depends on the cooperation of foreign intelligence services, and on keeping even basic information about the system secret from the public, foreign officials and nearly all members of Congress charged with overseeing the CIA's covert actions.

The existence and locations of facilities--referred to as "black sites" in classified White House, CIA, Justice Department and Congressional Documents--are known to only a handful of officials in the United States and usually to the President and a few top intelligence officers in each host Country.

Virtually nothing is known about who is kept in the facilities, what interrogation methods are employed with them, or how decisions are made about whether they should be detained or for how long.

The CIA has not even acknowledged the existence of its black sites. To do so; say officials familiar with the program, could open the US government to legal challenges, particularly in foreign courts, and increase the risk of political condemnation at home and abroad.

But the revelations of widespread prisoner abuse in Afghanistan and Iraq by the US military have increased concern among law makers, foreign governments and human rights groups about the opaque CIA system. Those concerns escalated last month, when Vice President Cheney and CIA Director Porter J. Goss asked Congress to exempt CIA employees from legislation already endorsed by 90 Senators that would bar cruel and degrading treatment of any prisoner in US custody.

It is illegal for the government to hold prisoners in such isolation in secret prisons in the United States, which is why the CIA placed them overseas. Legal experts and intelligence officials said that the CIA's internment practices also would be considered illegal under the laws of several host Countries, where detainees have rights to have a lawyer or to mount a defense against allegations of wrongdoing.

Host countries have signed the UN Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as has the United States. Yet CIA interrogators in the overseas sites are permitted to use the CIA's approved "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques," some of which are prohibited by the UN Convention and by US Military Law.

The contours of the CIA's detention program have emerged in bits and pieces over the past two years. Parliaments in Canada, Italy, France, Sweden and the Netherlands have opened inquiries into alleged CIA operations that secretly captured their citizens or legal residents and transferred them to the agency's prisons.

The detainees break down roughly into two classes, the sources said:
about 30 are considered major terrorism suspects and have been held under the highest level of secrecy at black sites financed by the CIA and managed by agency personnel, including those in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

A second tier--which these sources believe includes more than 70 detainees--is a group considered less important, with less direct involvement in terrorism and having limited intelligence value. These prisoners, some of whom were originally taken to black sites, are delivered to intelligence services in Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Afghanistan and other Countries, a process sometimes known as "rendition."

The top 30 al qaeda prisoners exist in complete isolation from the outside world. Kept in dark,
sometimes underground cells, they have no recognized legal rights, and no one outside the CIA is allowed to talk with or even see them, or to otherwise verify their well-being, said current and former US and foreign government and intelligence officials.

The agency set up prisons under its Covert Action Authority. Under US law, only the President can authorize a covert action, by signing a document called a Presidential Finding. Findings must not break US law and are reviewed and approved by CIA, Justice and White House legal advisers.

The CIA found itself with hundreds of prisoners who were captured on battlefields in Afghanistan. A short-term solution was improvised. The agency shoved its highest-value prisoners into metal shipping containers set up on a corner of the Bagram Air Base.
Then came grisly reports, in the winter of 2001, that prisoners kept by allied Afghan Generals in cargo containers had died of asphyxiation.

The largest CIA prison in Afghanistan was code-named the Salt Pit. In November 2002, an inexperienced CIA Case Officer allegedly ordered guards to strip naked an uncooperative young detainee, chain him to the concrete floor and leave him there overnight without blankets. He froze to death, according to four US government officials. The CIA Officer has not been charged in the death.

As the volume of leads pouring into the CTC from abroad increased, and the capacity of its paramilitary group to seize suspects grew, the CIA began apprehending more people whose intelligence value and links to terrorism were less certain, according to four current and former officials.

Note:
The Washington Post is not publishing the names of the Eastern European Countries involved in the program, at the request of senior US officials.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9890829/

The Nightingale

From the Conference of the Birds
By-Farid Ud-Din Attar
-Persian Poet-
1119-1220



The nightingale raises his head, drugged with passion,
pouring the oil of earthly love in such a fashion,
that the other birds shaded with his song, grow mute.
the leaping mysteries of his melodies are acute.

"I know the secrets of love, I am their piper";
he sings, "I seek a David with broken heart to decipher,
their plaintive barbs, I inspire the yearning flute,
the daemon of the plucked conversation of the lute.
The roses are dissolved into fragrance by my song,
hearts are torn with its sobbing tone, broken along,
the fault lines of longing filled with desire's wrong.
My music is like the sky's black ocean, I steal
the listener's reason, the world becomes the seal
of dreams for chosen lovers, where only the rose
Is certain. I cannot go further, I am lame, and expose
my anchored soul to the divine way.
My love for the rose is sufficient, I shall stay
In the vicinity of its petalled image, I need
no more, it blooms for me the rose, my seed."

The hoopoe replies: "you love the rose without thought
nightingale, your foolish songs is caught
by the rose's thorns, it is a passing thing.
Velvet petal, perfume's repose bring
you pleasure, yes, but sorrow too
for the rose's beauty is shallow: few
escape winter's frost. To seek the way
release yourself from this love that lasts a day.
The bud nurtures its own demise as day nurtures night
groom yourself, pluck the deadly rose from your sight."

Danger Of U.S. Sponsored Nuclear War
More Than 470 Physicists Sign Petition To Oppose U.S. Policy On Nuclear Attack
By-Kim McDonald
November 1, 2005

More than 470 Physicists, including seven Nobel Laureates, have signed a petition to oppose a new U.S. Defense Department proposal that allows the United States to use Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear States.

The petition was started by two Physics Professors at the University of California, San Diego, Kim Griest and Jorge Hirsch, who said they felt an obligation to speak out about the Nuclear Policy change because their profession brought Nuclear Weapons into the World 60 years ago.

They and other prominent Physicists who signed the petition-which will be delivered to members of Congress, Scientific Professional Societies and the News Media-Object to the new policy because it blurs the sharp line between Nuclear Weapons and Conventional, Chemical and Biological Weapons.

"While it has long been a U.S. Policy to use Nuclear Weapons in order to respond to a nuclear attack," said Hirsch, "the new Policy allows the U.S. to use Nuclear Weapons against States that do not have Nuclear Weapons and for a host of new reasons, including rapid termination of a conflict on U.S. terms or to ensure success of the U.S. forces."

"Humanity has gone more than half a Century without using Nuclear Weapons, in large part because of the success of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty," said Griest. "the use of Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear States will destroy the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and give strong incentive for other Countries to develop and use Nuclear Weapons, thus making Nuclear War more likely. As Physicists we feel we need to bring this to the attention of Policy Makers and the Public, in order to engender discussion, debate, and hopefully repudiation of the new policy."

The two Physicists began their grass roots petition last month following reports in the New York Times and Washington Post that the Federal Government was in the final process of adopting a new U.S. Policy that would permit the use of Nuclear Weapons against an adversary for the following reasons:

• for rapid and favorable War termination on U.S. terms.
• to ensure success of U.S. amd Multinational operations.
• to demonstrate U.S. intent and capability to use Nuclear Weapons to deter adversary use of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
• against an adversary intending to use Weapons of Mass Destruction against U.S., Multinational, or Alliance forces.

Griest and Hirsch put their petition on the Internet at: http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/ invited their colleagues to sign and quickly received an avalanche of responses.

The petition is signed by two past Presidents of the American Physical Society, the Premier Professional Organization for U.S. Physicists-George Trilling of UC Berkeley and Jerome Friedman of MIT. Friedman who is also a Nobel Laureate, was joined on the petition by six other Nobel Prize Winners in Physics-Philip Anderson of Princeton University, Anthony Leggett of the University of Illinois, Douglas Osheroff of Stanford University, Daniel Tsui of Princeton University, Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas and Frank Wilczek of MIT.

Other prominent Physicists on the petition include Fields Medal Winner Edward Witten of the Institute for Advanced Study, Wolf Prize Laureates Michael Fisher of the University of Maryland and Daniel Kleppner of MIT, and Leo Kadanoff of the University of Chicago, a Recipient of the National Medal of Science and President-Elect of the American Physical Society.

"We point out in the petition that Nuclear Weapons are on a completely different scale than other Weapons of Mass Destruction and Conventional Weapons and that the underlying principle of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is that in exchange for other Countries forgoing the development of Nuclear Weapons, the Nuclear Weapon States will pursue Nuclear Disarmament," said Hirsch.

"Instead, the new U.S. Policy dramatically increases the risk of Nuclear Proliferation and, ultimately, the risk that regional conflicts will explode into all-out Nuclear War, with the potential to destroy our Civilization."

The Physicists hope to gain additional supporters before a meeting of the Executive Board of the American Physical Society on November 18 and a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency on November 24.

Comment:

Kim Griest (858) 534-0924

Jorge Hirsch (858) 534-3931

Media Contact:

Kim Mc Donald (858) 534-7572

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MCD20051101&articleId=1173

Insightful Observations By George Carlin

1. People who point at their wrist while asking for the time.
I know where my watch is buddy,
where the hell is yours?
Do I point at my zipper when I ask where the bathroom is?



2. When people say, "It's always in the last place you look."
Of course it is!
Why the hell would you keep looking after you found it?
Do people do that? Who and where are they?



3. The radio ad,
"hi, I'm Jeff Healey from the Jeff Healey Band. Don't drink and drive. I don't"
Well, I hope you don't drive sober either Mr. Healey.
You're blind for God's sake!

Spy Agency Faked Vietnam War Data
(By-Francis Harris)
Filed: 1-11-2005

One of Americas spy agencies faked key intelligence used to justify its intervention in the Vietnam war, it was disclosed yesterday.

But the revelation was kept secret by the National Security Agency, partly because of fears that it would boost criticism of the intelligence services over the war in Iraq.

According to material uncovered by the NSA's own Historian, Robert Hanyok, middle-ranking officers altered material relating to the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Two US destroyers, Maddox and Turner Joy, were attacked by North Vietnamese craft in the Gulf on Aug 2 1964.

Two days later, amid bad Weather and considerable confusion in the US Chain of Command, Maddox reported that she had been fired on a second time.

Although its commander soon cast doubt on the reports, signals intelligence reported that the North Vietnamese admitted "we sacrificed two ships."

In revenge President Lyndon Johnson ordered air raids against North Vietnamese Naval Facilities and Congress authorized "all necessary steps including the use of armed force" to defend South Vietnam.

But Mr. Hanyok found that timings on key intelligence intercepts had been changed and the "two ships" probably referred to the loss of two sailors in the first attack.

He blamed middle-ranking staff who realised the NSA's mistakes almost immediately but covered them up, not for political reasons, but to hide the original mistake.

At the time, senior administration officials cited the faked paperwork in testimony before Congress.

It has been suggested that President Johnson was so keen to deploy troops that he fabricated the whole episode. More than 58,000 Americans and a Million Vietnamese died in the ensuing conflict.

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/01/wviet01.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/11/01/ixworld.html

O World, Thou Choosest Not

O World, Thou Choosest Not


(George Santayana)



O World, thou choosest not the better part!
It's not wisdom to be only wise-
and on the inward vision close the eyes,
But it is wisdom to believe the heart.
Columbus found a world, and had no chart,
Save one that faith deciphered in the skies;
To trust the soul's invincible surmise,
Was all his science and his only art,
Our knowledge is a torch of smoky pine,
That lights the pathway but one step ahead,
Across a void of mystery and dread.
Bid, then, the tender light of faith to shine,
By which alone the mortal heart is lead,
Unto the thinking of the thought divine.