This year, the following stories will continue to make headlines, and are not going to be resolved, so be prepared to watch how they play out in the long-term:

1. The US Will Continue Making the Case For War Against Iran and Syria. War is coming, with either nation or both, by 2007. One analyst with contacts in Israel says the strike on Iran's nuclear facilities is coming as early as March of 2006. I think there will be a limited pre-emptive strike on Iran, but that has the potential of mushrooming into something big. As I predicted in past briefs, we will see the US resurrect information the Bush administration has kept hidden to make its case against both nations. That's easy to do since the US already has the intel and has been keeping it under wraps -- even at the expense of taking a beating over the lack of WMD in Iraq. That tells volumes about the conspiracy to attack other nations as part of a larger agenda, as opposed to merely targeting Saddam Hussein. They are obvious picking their own timing for attack -- that's the only variable.

2. Obstacles to Israeli "Peace Process" Sellout. At least two unforeseen events have temporarily blocked globalist plans to undermine Israel's security through the phony "peace process:"

1. The stroke and imminent death of sellout architect and phony right-wing leader Ariel Sharon; and 
2. The election win of terrorist radicals from Hamas, who now control the semi-sovereign Palestinian Authority and the Gaza Strip. The latter is supposed to be the showpiece of trading land for peace -- an endeavor which is not working.

3. Domestic Spying By the President Will Reach Its Intended Conclusion. The PTB are unnecessarily making this an issue. The government has been doing illegal spying for decades. The only purpose in bringing this issue to a crisis is to gain the Supreme Court's approval -- and make government tyranny under the guise of "national security" forever legal.

4. The Far Left Will Consolidate Control Over Latin America. Latin America will continue to move to the left, although disunity and infighting will remain. Only Colombia, Paraguay and Peru currently remain under American globalist influence, and Peru will most likely fall to the left this year as well. Brazil and Chile are playing along with the Americans, but they are fully intending to betray that trust after garnering all they can from loans, trade and technology transfers. Watch for Venezuela's Hugo Chavez to move forward with his Latin American loan bank proposal and energy sharing projects -- joining forces with Bolivia and Brazil -- to buy favor among other leftist controlled nations.

Nevertheless, the US will not surrender all influence in the region. The US still has its dark-side projects in Paraguay (a new military base), Brazil (CIA/NSA listening posts in the Amazon), and billion dollar payoffs to Colombia's President Uribe under the cover of anti-drug warfare. The US also has an amazing ability to bribe leftist leaders into playing along economically with the IMF. Uruguay's Tabare Vasquez is talking about accepting free trade offerings from the US (after being stung by Kirchner's Argentine piquetero bridge blockages in an environmental dispute). Even bad boy coca grower champion Evo Morales (the newly elected President of Bolivia) shows signs of partially playing along, after secret meetings with US diplomats.

5. Something Significant Will Happen in North Korea This Year. The US is increasingly viewed by leftist controlled South Korea as a hostile negotiating partner in the North Korean nuclear standoff. Indeed, South Korea may finally break with US policy itself. I think the US will finally find a way out of its hardline stance on NK nuclear weapons and broker a major breakthrough. I expect some kind of dramatic unification agreement this year that will bring North Korea out from the cold -- without having to give up its nuclear weapons program (though it may appear to do so). All this will be just as phony as the "fall of communism" in Russia.

6. China Will Continue to Build a Huge Energy and Military Nexus in the Far East. Just as Iran is forced to look eastward to China for protection and alliances, so will Saudi Arabia and India. The politics of oil and gas pipelines will win out over US pressure and bribes (nuclear technology to India). Pakistan is still caught in the middle of having been the CIA's whore for a decade. Now it is looking for a way out. Everyone in the Middle East is waking up to the fact that the US intends to betray them someday. There's still a lot of blackmail going on as the US tries to keep the old secret energy network intact.

7. Russia Will Continue Its Re-Sovietization and Building For a Future War. Russia is still playing its deceptive "fall of the Soviet Union" routine to the hilt, but evidence continues to surface that it is still a ruse. Even its game with cutting off gas to Ukraine is a ruse. Cards still to be played: getting a few more former Soviet States (Ukraine and Georgia) into the EU and NATO. Despite the colored "revolutions" (all phony and controlled), elected leaders in the "former Soviet states" still take orders from Moscow. EU and NATO membership of these countries will play handily into Moscow's plans when it attacks the West.

SOME DETAILS:

IRAN, IRAQ AND SYRIA

The first bits of the hidden evidence that Syria took possession of Iraq's WMD just before the Iraq war has now been allowed out -- even though I believe the US government knew about the transfer before the Iraq invasion. A NY Sun article reports, "The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed. The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, Saddam's Secrets, released this week. 'There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands,' Mr. Sada said... Mr. Sada's comments come just more than a month after Israel's top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam 'transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria.'"

With the CIA's integral intel sharing relationship with Israel's Mossad, the US has known about this for a long time. The US even has satellite photos of the Russian trucks moving WMD's to Syria. Why not reveal this evidence earlier? Why would Bush admit to not finding WMDs in Iraq when he could have pointed to this and other evidence? I think the answer is that this evidence had to be saved and revealed later in order to justify yet another war, with Syria. 

Meanwhile, the threat of war with Iran continues to loom larger. France's Jacque Chirac took aim at Iran this past week in his threat to use tactical nuclear weapons on terrorist states. Iran promptly repeated its intent to retaliate as it began to move its financial assets out of Europe in anticipation of Security Council sanctions.

Military analyst Michael Chussodovsky predicts a time line for an attack on Iran as early as this spring: "For the last year or so, the United States, Israel and Turkey have been preparing an aerial bombing of Iran. This went into the planning stage back in November of 2004. In other words, it's over a year now and essentially this operation is using the pretext of Iran's nuclear program to bomb its nuclear facilities. In fact, what is actually being planned is a [broader] nuclear war and that nuclear war has nothing to do with Iran. We are not talking about surgical strikes. That's what's being presented to public opinion. [I disagree with this; it's too early for WWIII. It will be only surgical strikes. -- ed]

"But what is now very disturbing is that actually the timeline for this operation has already been announced -- March of 2006. In other words, in the next three months. This (timeline) has been confirmed by the Israelis. Prime Minister Sharon has made the statement. His political opponents, in particular Benjamin Netanyahu, have confirmed that they are also in agreement with this posture -- that they will wage surgical strikes against Iran. But if you look at it in a broader context, you will realize that this is not strictly an Israeli operation. It's an operation which involves the United States, Turkey, and Israel as the main military actors but which is firmly supported by America's coalition partners in NATO. In other words, NATO has given its approval to this military operation. There are no dissenting voices within the Atlantic military alliance as occurred prior to the war in Iraq and in effect, I think that there won't be many dissenting voices in the United Nations Security Council, and eventually a pretext will be built that Iran is a threat to global security in view of its nuclear program, and that is of course a very controversial issue. But as to whether this is up for civilian use or for military use, but there is no evidence that Iran at this stage is developing nuclear weapons. [I think there is, and the US has even helped them along, and thus is partly responsible.]" [End of Chussodovsky quote.]

The US and the EU continue to pursue sanctions as a necessary diplomatic prelude to war, and are only awaiting assurances from Russia or China that they will not veto such a move. If Russia and China allow the sanctions to pass unchallenged, it will be a sign that they are also in collusion to use Iran as a catalyst for future war (although for different reasons than the Anglo-American establishment).

But now the US and Russia are playing a funny little game. President Bush laid out conditions this week for what the US would consider an "acceptable alternative" for Iran: "That the material used to power the plant would be manufactured in Russia, delivered under IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspectors to Iran, to be used in that plant, the waste of which will be picked up by the Russians and returned to Russia." But Iran has said repeatedly that it would reject such a proposal, insisting on its right under the non-proliferation agreement to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. Why? Russia is Iran's partner in crime. It would be more than simple for Iran to agree with this ruse and then to continue the secret nuclear work as Iran and Russia have done all along. It's almost as if Iran is looking for a fight. Time will tell.

ISRAEL

The US and Israel tried to save Fatah from election defeat in the Palestinian Authority, but Fatah lost anyway. The US poured in millions in aide and even sent in US election specialists at the last moment to stem the tide of public dissatisfaction with Fatah, which is notorious for its financial corruption and its secret deals with the Israeli left and their globalist backers. Israeli temporary PM Ehud Olmert tried to offer more promises of West Bank land to the PA if Palestinians would support Fatah. (He even allowed Marwan Barghouti, the jailed Palestinian terrorist who is running for election from his Israeli prison cell, to give a televised interview for broadcast. Barghouti will no doubt have to be released now because he is now an elected official of the Palestianian terrorist state.) How ironic, that those claiming to be fighting a war on terror (US and Israeli governments) reward the very terrorists (PLO-Fatah) who killed American and Jews. Fatah was playing along with the West only recently, and had entered into a deal with the globalists to sell out Israel's security. Now, with the victory of Hamas in the elections, the plans have come crashing down.

This puts the US and Israeli negotiators in a real bind. The US and Israel had bragged to the world that Sharon's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza would lead to negotiations and peace. Now they have a semi-autonomous state run by unrepentant terrorists who got elected on the platform of not giving up the fight against Israel. President Bush said, "Hamas cannot be a partner for Middle East peacemaking without renouncing violence." He also claimed that the US will "not deal with Palestinian leaders who do not recognize Israel's right to exist." We've heard that before, but the US always finds a way to do so.

Now, if Hamas is smart, they will fake their repentance and play along like Fatah did. However, Hamas is filled with so many hateful firebrands, it is doubtful they would be able to pull this off. Hopefully, they won't. Only then will the Israeli government be forced to confront the new threat for what it is -- real live war in the offing.

More research is surfacing about temporary Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The cigar chomping former Mayor of Jerusalem has got a longer history of political and personal corruption than Ariel Sharon. My Israeli source, Barry Chamish, has details of this corruption on his website at http://www.barrychamish.com/article-archive/bclist.html. (Click on "Olmert At It Again".)

As I've said for years, God can't save Israel by working with the Jews who are in power (who have turned against God and Israel), but He can throw a monkey wrench in their secret plans by using unstable terrorist factions to oppose the conspirators. Of course, the terrorist factions have evil motives as well, but sometimes God uses evil to combat evil to save the good (Israel) -- when the "good" don't have power to save themselves.

IRAQ ELECTION

Reporter Liz Sly details the results: "Iraq is braced for a long period of political haggling after the final results of last month's election showed no group had won enough seats to be able to rule without forming a coalition. [The US stipulated a 2/3 majority to rule specifically to force them to include Sunnis, but it may not work out that way. -- ed]

"The United Iraqi Alliance, which groups the country's leading Shi'ite Islamic parties, has failed to win an outright majority. It won 128 seats in the 275-member national assembly..The Kurdish Alliance won 53 seats, 22 fewer than its previous total, largely because of changes to the election law and the participation of the Sunni minority, which boycotted the previous election. Sunni parties won 58 seats, going to three Sunni groups. Another 25 seats went to the secular group led by the former interim prime minister and US ally Ayad Allawi, who shares the Sunni parties' disdain for the Shi'ite religious parties.

"The remaining 11 seats were distributed among six smaller parties and independents, who could be in a strong position to influence the final formation of the government. The Kurds and Shi'ites can probably count on the support of at least six of the smaller independent groups and could therefore muster the votes required for the election of a president. This would put them in a position to rule without the Sunnis."

The Shiites and Kurds could possibly divide up Iraq's oil resources among their respective southern and northern semi-autonomous states. This would leave the central Baghdad region without political power and without oil revenue (except as shared by the Shiites and Kurds).

The Sunnis' answer to all this is threatening: "[W]ithout the Sunni Arabs they will not be able to rule the country," said one Sunni elected official. "They will not even be able to walk in the streets." Just like now.

CHINA'S ENERGY AXIS WITH ARABIA, INDIA, AND IRAN

Reuters reports that oil-hungry China is courting Saudi oil. "The world''s number two oil consumer, China, has been scouring the globe for crude to feed its booming economy, tempting potential partners with aid packages, diplomatic support -- and for those at odds with Washington [like Iran and Venezuela] -- the prospect of a large non-US market. "Chinese analysts said that while China is eager for stable oil supplies, it has neither the cash nor will to challenge the United States [for Saudi Arabian oil]. [This is not true. It has the cash, and is setting things up for a future delivery of oil during war at the expense of the US. -- ed] 'The United States and Saudi Arabia have a special relationship, and it doesn't matter how good relations with India or China become, it's not going to break that special connection,' said Chen Fengying of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, a government think-tank. Saudi Arabia was China's top supplier of oil in the first 11 months of last year, providing 17 percent of its imports, nearly 440,000 barrels per day (bpd)."

I think Beijing "doth protest too much" about its desire to not challenge the US. It is obviously saying this only for current reasons of detente. This posturing won't hold true in the long term. It was also telling that King Abdullah next went to talk about future oil deals for India (a huge potential customer), Malaysia and finally Pakistan. China is also cutting deals with Kuwait to set up new refinery capacity in China -- ostensibly because Gulf oil is heavier than what Chinese refineries are used to. That's a cover story. Refineries can be easily modified to handle a variety of weights of oil. China needs more capacity -- much more, and from a variety of sources.

China is also working with Pakistan -- a traditional ally -- to provide China with a large port facility at Gwadar, Pakistan. China has a "string of pearls" strategy, where she will acquire the rights to ports all along the South China Sea to give her many alternative points of commerce in time of war. Those ports include facilities in Bangladesh, Myanmar, Cambodia, and Thailand.

SAO PAOLO FORUM: CONSOLIDATING LATIN AMERICA FOR THE LEFT

See Alexsander Boyd's article on the real agenda of the Sao Paolo forum (where LA nations are forming a new Soviet styled control system) at http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?content=letters/200601200905.

SPYING SCANDAL

This week saw several administration officials, including the President, defending the indefensible: a blatant disregard for law and the Constitution, all in the name of "national security." Yesman Attorney General Gonzales essentially told Americans, in a defense of the administration's warrantless spying program, that the President can do anything he wants in a time of national emergency. Everyone, including the President, continues to advance the lie that this warrantless surveillance is very limited and targets only those who dial known terrorists. The fact that the press doesn't expose this lie indicates more than journalistic cowardice. There are at least half a dozen people in the know who claim that the NSA traps every communication it can -- all the time.

In a speech at the National Press Club, former NSA chief General Michael Hayden said if the program had been in place before the Sept. 11 attacks, it may have detected some of the 9/11 hijackers. Baloney. It had been in place. Besides, the government had all the hijackers in their files anyway -- and did nothing to stop them. According to sources at the Press Club, "Hayden gingerly sidestepped the question as to whether the President has the authority to authorize warantless surveillance, but he stressed again that NSA's post 9/11 programs have been 'very focused' and 'limited.'" John Pike, a US military analyst with the Pentagon, disputes this: "Most people just don't understand how pervasive government surveillance is. If you place an international phone call, the odds that the National Security Agency is listening are very good. If it goes by oceanic fiber-optic cable, they are listening to it. If it goes by satellite, they are listening to it. If it is a radio broadcast or a cell phone conversation, in principle, they could listen to it. Frankly, they can get what they want."

Editor and Publisher Magazine takes apart Gen Hayden's claim that the surveillance is in line with the Fourth Amendment. Jonathan Landay, a well-regarded investigative reporter for Knight Ridder, posed the last question to Hayden at the conference. It proved to be too hot for the General. E&P reports, "Hayden repeatedly referred to the Fourth Amendment's search standard of 'reasonableness' without mentioning that it also demands 'probable cause.' Hayden seemed to deny that the amendment included any such thing, or was simply ignoring it. Here is the exchange...

"QUESTION: Jonathan Landay with Knight Ridder... my understanding is that the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution specifies that you must have probable cause to be able to do a search that does not violate an American's right against unlawful searches and seizures. Do you use -- 

"GEN. HAYDEN: No, actually -- the Fourth Amendment actually protects all of us against unreasonable search and seizure. 

"QUESTION: But the --

"GEN. HAYDEN: That's what it says.

"QUESTION: But the measure is probable cause, I believe. 

"GEN. HAYDEN: The amendment says unreasonable search and seizure.

"QUESTION: But does it not say probable --

"GEN. HAYDEN: No. The amendment says --

"QUESTION: The court standard, the legal standard --

"GEN. HAYDEN: -- unreasonable search and seizure." [End of quote.]

Who's right? Landay was right. Here's the Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Insight Magazine claims, "A coalition in Congress is being formed to support impeachment," and that a "prelude to the impeachment process could begin with hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February." Of course those hearings would be controlled by JFK assassination cover-up artist Sen. Arlen Specter. I have my doubts the Republican controlled Congress would vote to impeach or that the Senate would convict. More than likely one or more of the pending lawsuits on the matter will end up in the Supreme Court, which I believe will rule in the President's favor, making this tyranny fully legal. That's the plan.

DON'T FOLLOW GOVERNMENT ORDERS BLINDLY IN A CRISIS

Renowned primitive skills teacher Larry Dean Olson was interviewed by Tom Brown (of Tracker fame) some time ago. Olson revealed something about how government bureaucrats think when crises get beyond their puny powers to "manage" the crisis: "[T]he state of Washington hired me to come to Seattle one year to be part of a think tank. And the challenge for that year was to find ways to evacuate the people of Seattle if there was an atomic bomb threat on the shipping yards and the military base[s] that's there. [Sadly, none believe that's a possibility anymore.] They were trying to figure out how to get the people across those bridges off the sound and up over the mountains into those valleys beyond the mountains where they would be safe from fall-out [not true -- the fallout would go in that direction. This shows how stupid the civil defense people were from the start]. We had three days to sit and think and talk and there were four or five other men there that were brought from around the country.... But we came up with an evacuation plan. After the civil defense people read our evacuation plan, they decided that the people in Seattle had reached such a state of helplessness that there would be no point in rescuing them. Their conclusion was, and there's official documentation on it even to this very day, '[S]eal the bridges and leave them there. They wouldn't know what to do when they got them to safety.' So they said, 'tell everybody to just stay in your homes. That's the answer, trust us.'" [End of quote.] No, DON'T TRUST THEM! Think for yourselves and prepare in advance.

ANOTHER WHISTLEBLOWER DEATH -- BY "SUICIDE"

Wayne Madsen reported on Jan. 23, "More details emerge on Col. Ted Westhusing's 'suiciding' in Iraq. Days before his supposed suicide by a 'self-inflicted' gunshot wound in a Camp Dublin, Iraq trailer, West Point Honor Board member and Iraqi police and security forces trainer Col. Ted Westhusing reported in e-mail to the United States that 'terrible things were going on Iraq.' He also said he hoped he would make it back to the United States alive. Westhusing had three weeks left on his tour of duty in Iraq when he allegedly shot himself in June 2005.

"It is noteworthy that after Westhusing's death, two top Army generals, both responsible for training Iraqi forces,... were quickly transferred without much fanfare to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas and Fort Hood, Texas, respectively... Informed sources report that Westhusing was prepared to blow the whistle on fraud involving US Investigations Services (USIS), a Carlyle Group company, when he died... Westhusing's personal bodyguard was given a leave of absence shortly before the colonel's death.

"The U.S. Army's official report on Westhusing's death contained a number of falsehoods, according to those close to the case. Most importantly, the Army report stated that Westhusing had electronically communicated an interest in obtaining hollow point bullets. The bullet which killed Westhusing was a hollow point. However, the Army's statement was false, according to an informed source. In addition, the Army combed Westhusing's service record and interviewed a number of colleagues in order to concoct a story that would make suicide appear plausible." [End of quote.] It is strange how many whistleblowers die by "suicide" before they can tell their story publicly.

In a follow up story on Jan. 25, Madsen reports, "According to informed sources, the President of USIS Professional Services Division (PSD -- a Carlyle Group Company ), Bill Monet, has left the company. Monet reportedly was hired last June, the same month that Col. Ted Westhusing was 'suicided' in Baghdad after complaining about the firm's activities in Iraq. Sources claim that Monet had previously worked for Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)."

Both the Carlyle Group and SAIC are mercenary companies that have secret insider relations with the Federal government. They may even be CIA front companies, judging by the no-bid contracts that come their way and the secrecy about the quasi-military operations they conduct. They also have a knack for buying and selling dark-side mercenary companies like DynCorp -- keeping such units "all in the family." I think Monet saw the same potential scandal that Westhusing saw and wanted out before a possible leak came. The PTB used to be able to promise unlimited protection for dark side operations. Now it seems that the government itself is leaking dark secrets like a sieve in order to discredit the Bush administration. There have got to be a lot of mercenary executives that are looking over their shoulder.

HOMELAND SECURITY WILL CONTROL SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES IN A CRISIS

A source at Bellaciao.com filed the following report, which I have confirmed from other sources:

"A family member from Irvine, CA (who's a branch manager at Bank of America) told us two weeks ago that her bank held a workshop where the last two days were dedicated to discussing their bank's new security measures... [M]embers from the Homeland Security Office instructed them on how to field calls from customers and what they are to tell them in the event of a national disaster. She said they were told how only agents from Homeland Security (during such an event) would be in charge of opening safe deposit boxes and determining what items would be given to bank customers. At this point they were told that no weapons, cash, gold, or silver will be allowed to leave the bank -- only various paperwork will be given to its owners. After discussing the matter with them at length, she and the other employees were then told not to discuss the subject with anyone.

"The family member has since given her notice to quit the bank. I found the news alarming and decided to find out more myself. On a trip to my bank here in Houston, I remarked to a young bank employee (who's new there), 'Well I guess you've been told all that stuff by the manager and the Homeland Security about what to tell your customers' - and to my amazement, the young woman came right out and said yes she'd been through all that, then whispered to me across the counter, 'but we're not supposed to talk about it - I could lose my job.'" Lesson to learn: don't depend on getting access to a safety deposit box. If you must use one, only keep documents in it -- no valuables. Obviously the feds plan on confiscating gold again!

ARMY INTERROGATOR LET OFF EASY FOR MURDER OF IRAQI GENERAL

The Washington Post played this story as soft as the military jury in Colorado, which issued a mere "reprimand" for Chief Warrant Officer Lewis E. Welshofer Jr., 43, for "negligent homicide." The Post, like other major dailies in the US, kept referring to Welshofer's acts as a mere "aggressive technique" of interrogation. It was not an interrogation technique. It was torture by life-threatening methods. Death came after the former Iraqi general Abed Hamed Mowhoush had been in custody for the 16th day at a U.S.-run detainee facility in western Iraq called the Blacksmith Hotel -- an obvious reference to how they treat prisoners there.

The Post claimed, "After Mowhoush's capture in November 2003, Welshofer shoved him into a sleeping bag, wrapped him in a cord and straddled him in a last-ditch effort to get him to talk." Last ditch meaning, "If you don't talk (which he didn't) you're going to die (which he did)." Welshofer even admitted to clamping his hand over the detainee's mouth several times to keep him from invoking the name of Allah. According to photos introduced at trial, his body showed signs he was beaten multiple times both by Welshofer and by others, including CIA agents. (The defense attorney revealed the CIA connection to a secret witness in the trial -- a lapse of judgment.) Non-torture interrogations don't allow someone to be suffocated as a threat (like water boarding threatens drowning), and when an interrogator keeps at it until the victim stops moving, that's murder -- not interrogation.

The reprimand Welshofer received lies in stark contrast to the Abu Ghraib prison prosecutions, where Charles Graner received a ten-year jail sentence and Lynndie England received a three year sentence -- and they didn't kill anybody! Where's the outrage?

SADDAM TRIAL JUDGE REPLACED AGAIN

The US controlled puppet government in Iraq is having a tough time keeping honest judges in front of the cameras during Saddam's show trial. Reporter Kim Sengupta reports, "The trial of Saddam Hussein descended further into chaos as the chief judge in the case was replaced for the second time in a week. Just days after assurances by US and Iraqi officials that the case would proceed without further alterations, Sayeed al-Hamashi, the latest presiding judge who replaced Rizgar Amin, was forced to step down yesterday. The court trying the ousted Iraqi president has now appointed Raouf Abdel Rahman, a Kurd, to the post. The announcement was immediately followed by a declaration by Saddam Hussein's legal team that the trial had lost all credibility and should be moved to another country." No chance of that happening. This is getting suspicious. With as much power as the US has in Iraq, these sort of Three Stooges antics looks more and more like "planned chaos" to help antagonize the world against the US.

PHANTOM OSAMA ON TAPE AGAIN

The continuing nine lives of Osama bin Laden belies all description of reality. Kurt Nimmo again shows the evidence of why we must be suspicious of the continual parade of government certified taped appearances of al Qaeda leaders. This is essential reading to understand the continuing disinformation about the supposed Osama threat. I don't have the space to print them, so here are the links:

• Phantom Osama bin Laden: http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=195.
• Phantom Ayman al-Zawahiri too. http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=199.

CANADA VOTES IN BUSH GLOBALIST, THROWS OUT "ARROGANT" LIBERALS

Canadian conservatives are rejoicing that the scandal ridden Liberal party of PM Paul Martin has finally been defeated. But nothing much will change in Canada as to its march down the globalist path. As reporter David Usborne said, "Canada has moved cautiously to the right after voters in a general election chose Stephen Harper, the 46-year-old leader of the Conservative party, as the next prime minister but tied his hands by denying him the chance to form a majority government. [Harper is a pro-Bush yesman who will try and convince Canada to go along with continued US intervention around the globe. -- ed]

"The results were a humiliation for the outgoing Prime Minister, Paul Martin, whose Liberal Party has governed Canada for the past 13 years. Addressing supporters in Montreal, he said he would stay in parliament but relinquish his leadership post, opening the race to succeed him.

"It was not the sweet victory Mr Harper might have hoped for. His party took 124 seats in the new parliament in Monday's election, far short of the 155 needed for a majority. The Liberals won 103 seats, while 29 and 51 seats went respectively to the left-leaning New Democratic Party and to the pro-sovereignty Bloc Quebecois [which won't be likely to vote for any of the new PM's bills -- ed].

"Analysts said the outcome reflected on the one hand a weariness among voters with the Liberals, whom they identify with broken promises, scandals and virtual one-party rule, but also a sense of uncertainty about Mr Harper and his conservative socio-economic ideals. [He is anti-abortion and anti-gay rights which liberal Canadians don't like. -- ed]

"'Canadians did not endorse neo-conservatism when they elected him last night,' The Globe and Mail newspaper commented. 'They voted against a Liberal Party that had become smug and arrogant.'" [End of quote.] Except for the very conservative voters in Alberta and BC, this assessment is right on target.

© 2006 Joel Skousen
Editorial Archive & More Information

World Affairs Brief
Weekly Internet  |  Monthly Print Edition
subscription information