Bard from the Bar Defending Scottish Nationalsim

September 10, 2009
   In Scottish politics these days there is actually a point worth debating and a genuine difference between the parties. Well there is a difference between the Scottish National Party (SNP) and THE REST! I cannot tell the difference between New Labour and Old Tory and the LibDems .They are all different sides of the same Unionist coin.
    The Labour party have sided with the Concervative and Unionist party on many occasions rather than see the SNP get thier democratic way. The behaviour of the unionist parties has been disgusting and totally immature and UNDEMOCRATIC!!!!!

I will never be voting for any of these parties again. BUT fortunately I probably will not have too. After Independance NEW political parties will have to be made. TheLabour party used to have an uncontested majority in Scotland . Due to its recent behaviour , for me that started many years ago with the poll tax, they have completely shown themselves to be self serving and petty and untrustworthy. I like many many others will never vote for the monkey in the red rossette again. It was always more a protest vote anyway. I feel today when i vote SNP


OK ,i do not agree with all they say and do ,BUT they have proven themselves to be compitant ,less corrupt and more progressive than the rest of our “bought and sold for English gold” political parties put together. ..,… and I do believe totally in thier plans for Scottish Independance.

The economic reasons for Scottish Independance are delt with in this post.

Lets get stuck into the rest of the issues that unionists try to smear Scottish Nationalists with.

We are traitors to the British crown

WRONG- Scots regiments built the British empire ,English generals used Highland regiments as canon fodder on many occasions.Thes are TRAITORS in my opinion!! The British crown is actually SCOTTISH , the crown that sits on the English throne is GERMAN! That is why she is Queen Elizabeth the SECOND!!!! and NOT the first, she is the Queen of England NOT THE QUEEN OF BRITIAN ,like King James the VI of Scotland or I of Britain. If Lizzy had any right to the “British” or “Scottish” throne she would be Queen Elizabeth the FIRST OF GREAT BRITAIN!!! (The last queen called Elizabeth was only queen of England ,Mary queen of Scots was queen in Scotland and Britain did noy exist!)

If you need more proof , check SCOTTISH POUNDS!! There is no image of queen Liz anywhere.

The TRUTH ,UNIONISTS ARE THE TRAITORS .They support a foreigner on the royal throne and they support English control of Scotland through this process. 


“In contemporary usage, “Quisling” is synonymous with “traitor”, and particularly applied to politicians who appear to favour the interests of other nations or cultures over their own”

Please go and tell the Norwegians that they are stupid to keep thier soverignty instead of throwing thier lot in with the,much bigger,German economy. Like Scotland would be stupid to reclaim its soverignty and leave the British economy and see if you get called a Quisling ,they should know.

As they say ,if its walks like a unionist and talks like a unionist then its probably a Quisling.

Nothing could be further from the truth . I want to give the English thier country back. It was a Scottish King that created the union of the crown . It was a Scottish parliment that voted the union into existance ,against the will of the Scottish people . It was a Scotsman that made the Bank of England , it was a Scotsman that invented capitalism .This millenium the English have been completely run by us Scots, Tony Blair was born and educated in Edinburgh, Gordon Brown is a Glaswegian.

We just want to give you your country back , and we promise we’ll stop f*cking around with it. …and YES I do believe that the English can run thier own country without us Scots holding your hand.

Apparently when we are gone ,you’ll all be richer ,so what are you complaining about? I really do wish the English all the best as they go it alone. I see no differences or racial issues arising from indepandance. Do the English have a serious problem with the Republic of Ireland?


As for xenophobic.How can we be when we have Arab members of the SNP ,who Unionists claim are running or at least appearing at terrorist training camps. This is xenpphobic unionist nonsense! (and shows unionist logic , he’s a xenophobic Arab terrorist and SNP member?!?!?!??!)

The next thing that gets thrown at Nationalists is , you are Nationalist and  Socialists  therefore you are NAZI’s!!!

Well the SNP are more social democrats than Socialists ! As for the SNP=Nazi snipe…well lets see

1.New Labour , pretend socialist party backed by big business, so was the National Socialist party in Germany.

2.New Labour believe in Greater British Nationalism , the Nazi’s believe in Greater German Nationalism

3.New Labour hate the Scottish and Welsh nationalist, the Nazi’s hated the Austrian and Prussian nationalists and Rhineland seperatist.

4.New Labour are into the union of England and Scotland ,Wales and Ireland(just the north for now) Nazi’s where into the union of Germany and Austria Poland and Czechslovakia(just the sedatenland for now)

5.New Labour have a chancellor that was APPOINTED to power . The Nazi’s had a chancellor that was appointed to power.

6.New Labour have LIED about starting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan , The Nazi’s lied about starting wars in the Czechslovakia and Poland.

7.New Labour claim to be responsible for the economic miracle ,that will end in finacial disaster(this prediction I made before the bank collapse btw) The Nazi’s claimed the miraculous economic recovery of Germany but it ended in disaster

8.New Labour introduced the smoking ban in Britain ,Nazis introduced the smoking ban in Germany.

9.New Labour are stealing Scotlands oil , The Nazi’s stole the Balkan’s oil

10.Gordon Brown wears shirts , the Nazi’s had Brownshirts;-)

I’ll let the Bard sum up the unionists and thier actions……………

Fareweel to a’ our Scottish fame,
Fareweel our ancient glory;
Fareweel ev’n to the Scottish name,
Sae fam’d in martial story.
Now Sark rins over Solway sands,
An’ Tweed rins to the ocean,
To mark where England’s province stands-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

What force or guile could not subdue,
Thro’ many warlike ages,
Is wrought now by a coward few,
For hireling traitor’s wages.
The English stell we could disdain,
Secure in valour’s station;
But English gold has been our bane-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

O would, or I had seen the day
That Treason thus could sell us,
My auld grey head had lien in clay,
Wi’ Bruce and loyal Wallace!
But pith and power, till my last hour,
I’ll mak this declaration;
We’re bought and sold for English gold-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

War On Drugs…. another US failed war

September 10, 2009

The War on Drugs is as FAKE and as disasterous as the war on terror.


There are more drugs today on the streets than when the war on drugs started.


There are more terrorists today in Iraq and Afghanistan than when the war on terror started.

BOTH HAVE BEEN COMPLETE FAILURES and still with no-sign of things getting better ….only worse is on the horizon.

Either that OR they where LIARS from the start and this is theREAL  results they always had intended.

Another simple fact is when Ronald Reagan started the “war on drugs” it was hippies selling lids of grass on street corners that was the problem. IMHO this was not a problem at all!

Thanks to Ronald Reagan ,today ,its gangs of crack dealers armed with guns  , nice one Ronald ,now who can I sue?

This 1999 documentary from Dutch TV explains how the “War on Drugs” has led to a loss of civil liberties while at the same time it has become a cash generator for police departments (through asset seizure) and a source of prisoners needed by the growing, privatized “Prison Industrial Complex”. However, it has not had much of an effect at all as far as its supposed purpose of eliminating or, at least significantly reducing, the illegal drug trade.
Indeed, opium production in Afghanistan — much of it in the regions where Canadian and British troops are supposed to be in charge — shot up dramatically last year.
The 49 per cent increase in the opium harvest, right under the noses of NATO forces, represented a doubling of the crop from 2000, when the fundamentalist Taliban were still in control, and solidified Afghanistan’s position as the chief supplier of illegal opium to the world.
But the latest Afghan numbers are so large that the country now accounts for 92 per cent of the illicit global opium crop. backgroun…fghanistan.html
The Afghanistan province being patrolled by British troops will produce at least one third of the world’s heroin this year, according to drug experts who are forecasting a harvest that is both a record for the country and embarrassing for the western funded war on narcotics.
British officials are bracing themselves for the result of an annual UN poppy survey due later this summer. Early indications show an increase on Helmand’s 1999 record of 45,000 hectares (112,500 acres) and a near-doubling of last year’s crop.
“It’s going to be massive,” said one British drugs official. “My guess is it’s going to be the biggest ever.” UN, American and Afghan officials agreed.
“It could be over 50,000 hectares, or over 50% of the total [Aghan] crop,” said General Muhammad Daud, the deputy interior minister for counter-narcotics. …stan.drugstrade

Another thing ,prohibition CREATES CRIME!!!! Do you think the alcohol prohibition was a good thing? It saw the rise of the Mafia ,which is still a strong force in crime today , all thanks to alcohol prohibition.

In fact while its “illegal” its a very good non-taxed revenue for those that can milk it!

“Afghan drug trafficking brings US $50 billion a year”
The US is not going to stop the production of drugs in Afghanistan as it covers the costs of their military presence there, says Gen. Mahmut Gareev, a former commander during the USSR’s operations in Afghanistan.

For more on this topic check this blog.


The Taliban had almost completely irradicated opium production in Afghanistan. The heroine production we see today has risen completley under the supervision on the US and UK. Heroine(refined opiates) was NEVER made in Afghanistan before the NATO invasion!

Who is Funding the Afghan Taliban?
You Don’t Want to Know
By Jean MacKenzie
August 16, 2009 “GlobalPost”
Up until quite recently, most experts thought that drug money accounted for the bulk of Taliban funding. But even here opinion was divided on actual amounts. Some reports gauged the total annual income at about $100 million, while others placed the figure as high as $300 million — still a small fraction of the $4 billion poppy industry.
Now administration officials have launched a search for Taliban sponsors. Richard Holbrooke, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, told a press conference in Islamabad last month that drugs accounted for less of a share of Taliban coffers than was previously thought.
“In the past there was a kind of feeling that the money all came from drugs in Afghanistan,” said Holbrooke, according to media reports. “That is simply not true.”
The new feeling is that less than half of the Taliban’s war chest comes from poppy, with a variety of sources, including private contributions from Persian Gulf states, accounting for much of the rest. Holbrooke told reporters that he would add a member of the Treasury Department to his staff to pursue the question of Taliban funding.
But perhaps U.S. officials need look no further than their own backyard.
Anecdotal evidence is mounting that the Taliban are taking a hefty portion of assistance money coming into Afghanistan from the outside.
This goes beyond mere protection money or extortion of “taxes” at the local level — very high-level negotiations take place between the Taliban and major contractors, according to sources close to the process.
A shadowy office in Kabul houses the Taliban contracts officer, who examines proposals and negotiates with organizational hierarchies for a percentage. He will not speak to, or even meet with, a journalist, but sources who have spoken with him and who have seen documents say that the process is quite professional.
The manager of an Afghan firm with lucrative construction contracts with the U.S. government builds in a minimum of 20 percent for the Taliban in his cost estimates. The manager, who will not speak openly, has told friends privately that he makes in the neighborhood of $1 million per month. Out of this, $200,000 is siphoned off for the insurgents.
If negotiations fall through, the project will come to harm — road workers may be attacked or killed, bridges may be blown up, engineers may be assassinated.
The degree of cooperation and coordination between the Taliban and aid workers is surprising, and would most likely make funders extremely uncomfortable.
One Afghan contractor, speaking privately, told friends of one project he was overseeing in the volatile south. The province cannot be mentioned, nor the particular project.
“I was building a bridge,” he said, one evening over drinks. “The local Taliban commander called and said ‘don’t build a bridge there, we’ll have to blow it up.’ I asked him to let me finish the bridge, collect the money — then they could blow it up whenever they wanted. We agreed, and I completed my project.”
In the south, no contract can be implemented without the Taliban taking a cut, sometimes at various steps along the way.
One contractor in the southern province of Helmand was negotiating with a local supplier for a large shipment of pipes. The pipes had to be brought in from Pakistan, so the supplier tacked on about 30 percent extra for the Taliban, to ensure that the pipes reached Lashkar Gah safely.
Once the pipes were given over to the contractor, he had to negotiate with the Taliban again to get the pipes out to the project site. This was added to the transportation costs.
“We assume that our people are paying off the Taliban,” said the foreign contractor in charge of the project.
In Farah province, local officials report that the Taliban are taking up to 40 percent of the money coming in for the National Solidarity Program, one of the country’s most successful community reconstruction projects, which has dispensed hundreds of millions of dollars throughout the country over the past six years.
Many Afghans see little wrong in the militants getting their fair share of foreign assistance.
“This is international money,” said one young Kabul resident. “They are not taking it from the people, they are taking it from their enemy.”


Pot Is an Anti-Cancer Drug
The active ingredient in marijuana appears to target cancerous brain cells for destruction while leaving healthy cells alone, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Complutense University in Madrid, and published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

Cannabis may prevent osteoporosis 
Researchers first conducted an experiment in mice that had been engineered to carry three different grafts of human brain cancer. They injected the mice daily with the molecule tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) near the site of the tumors once each day. The chemical appeared to stimulate the cancerous cells to engage in a process known as autophagy, in which cells initiate their own breakdown.

“These results may help to design new cancer therapies based on the use of medicines containing the active principle of marijuana and/or in the activation of autophagy,” researcher Guillermo Velasco said.

THC belongs to a class of chemicals known as cannabinoids, named after the cannabis (marijuana) plant in which they occur. It is the chemical responsible for the psychoactive effects of marijuana consumption.

Researchers looking at the effects of cannabis on bones have found its impact varies dramatically with age.

The study found that while the drug may reduce bone strength in the young, it could protect against osteoporosis, a weakening of the bones, in later life.

The results were uncovered by a team at the University of Edinburgh who compared the drug’s effects on mice.

Osteoporosis affects up to 30% of women and about 12% of men at some point in their lives.

The group found that cannabis can activate a molecule found naturally in the body that is key to the development of osteoporosis.

When the type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1) comes into contact with cannabis, it has an impact on bone regeneration.

However, until now, it was not clear whether the drug had a positive or negative effect.

‘Early results’

Researchers, funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign, investigated this using mice which lacked the CB1 receptor.

The scientists then used compounds – similar to those in cannabis – that activated the CB1 receptor.

They found that compounds increased the rate at which bone tissue was destroyed in the young.

Despite this, the study also showed that the same compounds decreased bone loss in older mice and prevented the accumulation of fat in the bones, which is known to occur in humans with osteoporosis.

Stuart Ralston, the Arthritis Research Campaign Professor of Rheumatology at the University of Edinburgh, who led the study, said: “This is an exciting step forward, but we must recognise that these are early results and more tests are needed on the effects of cannabis in humans to determine how the effects differ with age in people.

“We plan to conduct further trials soon and hope the results will help to deliver new treatments that will be of value in the fight against osteoporosis.”

The results are published in Cell Metabolism.

Cannabis treats prostate cancer, study finds
Following the growing interest in medical benefits of cannabis, a new study finds that the compound can help fight prostate cancer.

According to the study published in the British Journal of Cancer, chemicals found in cannabis can stop prostate cancer cells from growing in the laboratory.

Its active chemicals known as cannabinoids — methanandamide and JWH-015 — are also reported to be effective in reducing the size of the tumor in mice.

The compound is believed to block CB2 receptors on the surface of the cancerous tissue, preventing the division and growth of the tumor cells. It is reported to be more effective in treating aggressive prostate cancer cell types, which do not respond to existing hormone treatments.

Scientists hope that cannabis-based medicines could help fight prostate cancer in the near future.
Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink?
For 35 years the federal government has been well aware – yet publicly denied – that cannabis possesses potent anti-cancer and anti-tumor properties. Even under the Obama administration, which promised to “base [their] public policies on the soundest of science,” the myth that pot promotes cancer persists. In fact, the White House’s website,, presently warns, “Marijuana has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and other parts of the respiratory tract.”

Or not.

In a clinical abstract published online on journal of Cancer Prevention Research website in July, a team of U.S. investigators reported – with absolutely no mainstream media fanfare – that lifetime marijuana use is associated with a “significantly reduced risk” of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Investigators at Rhode Island’s Brown University, along with researchers at Boston University, Louisiana State University, and the University of Minnesota assessed the lifetime marijuana use habits of 434 cases (patients diagnosed with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma from nine medical facilities) compared to 547 matched controls.

Authors reported, “After adjusting for potential confounders (including smoking and alcohol drinking), 10 to 20 years of marijuana use was associated with a significantly reduced risk of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNDCC).”

Perhaps even more notably, subjects who smoked marijuana and consumed alcohol and tobacco (two known high-risk factors for head and neck cancers) also experienced a reduced risk of cancer, the study found.

“Our study suggests that moderate marijuana use is associated with reduced risk of HNSCC,” investigators concluded. “This association was consistent across different measures of marijuana use (marijuana use status, duration, and frequency of use). … Further, we observed that marijuana use modified the interaction between alcohol and cigarette smoking, resulting in a decreased HNSCC risk among moderate smokers and light drinkers, and attenuated risk among the heaviest smokers and drinkers.”

Of course, this isn’t the first time that U.S. investigators have documented an inverse association between pot use and cancer. A separate 2006 population case-control study, funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health and conducted by the University of California at Los Angeles, also reported that lifetime use of cannabis was not positively associated with cancers of the lung or aerodigestive tract, and further noted that certain moderate users of the drug experienced a reduced cancer risk compared to non-using controls.

Predictably, the federal government’s goal when green-lighting the UCLA study was to conclusively establish just the opposite result, as explained recently by its lead researcher Dr. Donald Tashkin.

In an interview with the McClatchy newspaper chain in June, Tashkin admitted that he expected his study would find that pot was associated with “increased health effects.” Instead, he summarized, “What we found instead was no association (between marijuana smoking and cancer) and even a suggestion of some protective effect.”

Perhaps that explains why Tashkin’s study, the largest trial of its kind, is inexplicably absent from the White House’s website.

Tashkin added, “[A]t this point, I’d be in favor of (marijuana) legalization. I wouldn’t encourage anybody to smoke any substances. But I don’t think it should be stigmatized as an illegal substance. Tobacco smoking causes far more harm. And in terms of an intoxicant, alcohol causes far more harm (than marijuana).”

Indeed it does. In fact, according to the findings of a study published online August 3 in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, even moderate alcohol consumption (defined as six drinks or less per week) is positively associated with an elevated risk of various cancers – including stomach cancer, rectal cancer, and bladder cancer. The study is the second to be published this year indicating that those who consume even minor amounts of booze are at increased risk for cancer. In February, a British study of some 1.3 million women age 50 to 64 reported that imbibing in as little as one alcoholic beverage per day significantly elevated females’ risk of cancer, particularly breast cancer.

For those of us who have closely studied the physiological effects of pot and alcohol the two substances contrasting association with cancer isn’t surprising. Ethanol, the psychoactive ingredient in booze, is converted by the body to acetaldehyde, a known carcinogen. By contrast, the active components in marijuana – known as cannabinoids – are relatively non-toxic and actually mimic chemicals naturally produced by the body (so-called endocannabinoids) that are necessary for maintaining one’s proper health.

Of course, that’s hardly where the differences between marijuana and alcohol end. As I write in my new book Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2009), alcohol consumption is toxic to cells and healthy organs, can depress the central nervous system (inducing unconsciousness, coma, and death), and is strongly associated with increased risks of injury and acts of violence. The use of marijuana, on the other hand, is incapable of causing fatal overdose – cannabinoids do not act upon the brain stem – and its use is inversely associated with aggression and injury.

Naturally, none of these differences should imply that America should return to the days of alcohol prohibition. Rather, they should spark a long-overdue dialogue in this country asking why our laws target and prosecute those adults who choose to make the rational choice to relax with a substance that is objectively safer, both to the user and to society as a whole, than alcohol. Perhaps when the President finishes his beer, he can provide an answer.
August 12, 2009
Recommended Reading: Much Of Afghan Drug Money Going To ‘Our Friends’
By Steve Inskeep

One of the most revealing things we learned this week about the war in Afghanistan came in a Los Angeles Times report headlined “Taliban Drug Proceeds Lower Than Thought.”

We’ve been told again and again for years on end that the Taliban were running their operations off the opium trade, clearing as much as $400 million per year. Now, a Senate Foreign Relations Committee investigation says the proceeds are closer to $70 million.

But that’s not the real news. The real news is what’s missing: If our enemies aren’t taking as much money as we thought to provide protection to the source of raw material for 90% of the world’s heroin, then who is providing that protection?

Apparently, the answer is: our friends.

The Times goes on to say:

In one of its most disconcerting conclusions, the Senate report says the United States inadvertently contributed to the resurgent drug trade … by backing warlords who derived income from the flow of illegal drugs. … These warlords later traded on their stature as U.S. allies to take senior positions in the new Afghan government, laying the groundwork for the corrupt nexus between drugs and authority that pervades the power structure today.
The cost of this may well go beyond the effect on the heroin shipments.

When we sat down this week with Amin Tarzi, director of Middle East Studies at the Marine Corps University and a native Afghan, he said that the United States has lost credibility with the Afghan populace by allying itself with warlords who have been known across Afghanistan for many years as criminals. We have, he says, handed a golden issue to the Taliban. They first took power in the 1990’s by charging that the existing government was corrupt. Now they can say it again.


The drugs law have more to do with government mass control ,big business profits and financing “black-ops” than any beneficial effect to your average person or society in general.


It is because of these “lobby groups” and corrupt government officials , nothing much changes in politics, that we have Peak Oil , and de-forestation as issues today. BUT IN REALITY WHAT FUEL CRISIS?

 Has no-one heard of a diesel engine?

The first cars where made and ran on hemp!

Henry Ford’s first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the CAR ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED FROM HEMP! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fields. The car, ‘grown from the soil,’ had hemp plastic panels whose impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel; Popular Mechanics, 1941.
Rudolf Diesel, the inventor of the diesel engine, designed it to run on vegetable and seed oils like hemp; he actually ran the thing on peanut oil for the 1900 World’s Fair. Henry Ford used hemp to not only construct cars but also fuel them.

Hemp grows like a weed, requires no fertilizer and pesticides (truly organic), reduces the use of our forests–the lungs of our planet—, replenishes rather than depletes the soil and its fiber is strong and beautiful. The new hemp particle boards are rock solid. The French build entire houses out of hemp!

Industrial hemp/cannabis sativa has been an important element in cultures around the world for thousands of years. The first paper was made of hemp. Levi Strauss made the first jeans in hemp. Our ancestors crossed the frontier in wagons covered in hemp canvas. My grandfather, John G. Crusius, and my father, Lowell Crusius, were “Hemp for Victory” farmers during World War II. After the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was passed, the US Navy stopped using industrial hemp for its rope source and began importing manila hemp(musa textilis) from the Philippines.

Also Hemp can be grown on Fallow land , thus 30% of argocultural land is waiting for hemp production of FUEL , PAPER , CLOTH etc.. all without loosing 1 piece of argocultural land that we use for food production!

As a final pointer for American , when Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 , he did so with hemp sails ,held up by hemp ropes on ships waterproofed by hemp tar following hemp maps under hemp oil lamps ,while wearing hemp clothing!!!

America would not have been descovered without hemp!


The American constitution is WRITTEN ON HEMP!!!

Are US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan well-intended mistakes? What we now know from the evidence

September 10, 2009

Some Americans justify the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well-intended interventions for the good of their people, and the security of our nation and the world. They believe that the President MUST have had evidence of national security risk before taking the last and dire step of invasion.

This is a crucial point. If there was credible evidence of imminent threat to US national security, then the wars were justified under the UN Charter for self-defense. However, if the evidence was not credible, or fabricated, then these wars are illegal Wars of Aggression. So which is it?

Americans and the world no longer need BELIEVE anything; the specific evidence used to justify invading two countries is now public knowledge. All we have to do is match the government’s claims to the exact evidence and you can decide for yourself. This article lays it out.

First, as you may recall, there were four basic claims of fact presented by political “leadership” to invade Iraq:

1. Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), a scary-sounding name for specific chemical and biological weapons.

2. The US intercepted aluminum tubes that could only be used to refine nuclear material; irrefutable evidence that Iraq had restarted a nuclear weapons program.

3. Saddam had attempted to purchase enriched uranium from Niger; more evidence that Iraq had reconstituted nuclear weapons development.

4. Saddam had links to Al Qaeda, the alleged terrorists who attacked the US on 9/11.

Here’s what we know about the evidence from which those claims were made. This is the summary; for my complete briefing, read here, here, and browse here.

1. George Tenet, Director of the CIA, acknowledged that all US intelligence agency reports “never said there was an imminent threat.”  This was based on a long history of intelligence reports, the facts that the chemical and biological weapons under consideration were relatively weak without a delivery system, and that Iraq was highly motivated NOT to use them against the US given their understanding such use would provoke war with the world’s most powerful military.


It was the “west” and Reagan and Rumsfeld that provided the WMD’s and nerve gas to the Iraq’s in the first place.
   So “Our Man” Saddam could continue the war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Islamic revolution being the result of US/UK foreign policy ,see Operation Ajax

As a side issue , the sanctions against Iran are just Operation Ajax II.For more on this please read.

2. The Bush administration claim of aluminum tubes that could only be used as centrifuges to refine fissionable material for nuclear weapons is directly refuted by the best expert witnesses available, the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Their conclusion is that the tubes in question had diameters too small, the tubes were too thick, using aluminum as the material would be “a huge step backwards,” and the surface was anodized that made them impossible to serve this purpose. They also found that the tubes were easily explained for use of conventional, as the specifications perfectly matched tubing for that purpose. The Senate Committee on Intelligence agreed that this claim had no basis from any available evidence. See also here.

 3. This claim, repeated by President Bush in the 2003 State of the Union Address, was based on the “Niger documents.” These papers were written in grammatically poor French, had a “childlike” forgery of the Niger President’s signature, and had a document signed by a foreign minister who had been out of office for 14 years prior to the date on the document. The forgeries showed-up shortly after the Niger embassy in Rome was robbed, with the only missing items being stationery and Niger government stamps. The same stationery and stamps were used for the forged documents. The CIA warned President Bush on at least three occasions to not make the claim due to the ridiculous evidence. In addition, if Saddam really was making an illegal uranium purchase, it’s likely that both Saddam and the Niger government officials would insist on not having a written record that would document the crime. Republican US Ambassador to Niger, Joseph Wilson, confirmed this information and reported in detail to Vice President Cheney’s office and the CIA.


After being CAUGHT LYING! The Bush Administration show thier leasdership and maturity, by NAMING a SERVING CIA operative TRACKING WMD’S!!!!  Thus reducing national sercurity and endangering the lives of many operatives in the field.

Plame Affair (also known as the CIA leak scandal, the CIA leak case, the CIA leak grand jury investigation, and Plamegate) refers to the identification of Valerie Plame Wilson as a covert[1][2] Central Intelligence Agency officer.[3] Mrs. Wilson’s relationship with the CIA was classified information.[1] The disclosure was made in a newspaper column entitled “Mission to Niger” written by Robert Novak, and published on July 14, 2003.[4]

Mrs. Wilson’s husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, has stated his opinion in various interviews and subsequent writings (as listed in his 2004 memoir The Politics of Truth) that members of former President George W. Bush’s administration revealed Mrs. Wilson’s covert status as retribution for his op-ed entitled “What I Didn’t Find in Africa,” published in The New York Times on July 6, 2003

4. As to the claim of a relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, all US intelligence agencies reported that no such relationship existed (and here).

As for Afghanistan, after the attacks of 9/11, the US government requested the cooperation of the Afghanistan government for extradition of Osama bid Laden to be charged with the 9/11 attacks. The Afghan government agreed, as per usual cooperative international law, as soon as the US government provided evidence of bin Laden’s involvement.The US government refused to provide any evidence. The Afghan government refused US troops entering their country and extradition until evidence was provided, and made their argument to the world press for the rule of law to apply to the US extradition request. The US invaded Afghanistan without providing evidence and without UN Security Council approval. President Bush stated, “There’s no need to discuss evidence of innocence or guilt. We know he’s guilty.”

EXTRA- There is MORE EVIDENCE of a relationship between BUSH and BIN LADEN!

 Osama DENIES 911 , but the FBI release 2 FAKE videos and suppresses the REAL video!

The following is an extract from bin Laden’s September 28, 2001 denial of involvement in the 9/11 attacks…
“This system is totally in control of the American-Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the U.S. is not uttering a single word.” [Public Action]
When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, [Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI] said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” [Muckraker Report]
The above demonstrates the bin Laden “confession video” was a propaganda exercise created to justify the pursuit of a preplanned war. 

The Fake 2001 bin Laden
Video Tape
“For those who see this tape, they’ll realise that not only is he guilty of incredible murder, he has no conscience and no soul, that he represents the worst of civilisation,” said President George W Bush. US Senator Ron Wyden, who has also seen the tape, says he hopes it will remove suspicions in countries such as Pakistan that the 11 September attacks were an Israeli plot aimed at drawing the US into a war with Islamic countries. [BBC News]
“It is preposterous for anybody to think that this tape is doctored,” he said during a brief photo opportunity with the prime minister of Thailand. “That’s just a feeble excuse to provide weak support for an incredibly evil man.” [CNN]
The video was very effective in diverting media attention away from the deportation of five Israelis who danced as the twin towers burned – “Osama” certainly picks his moments to appear.
A German TV show found that the White House’s translation of the video was inaccurate and “manipulative”. Bin Laden even praised two live ‘hijackers’ – Wail M. Alshehri and Salem Alhazmi. Why didn’t he know the names of hijackers he personally chose?

This was not the first video claiming to show Osama confessing to the 9/11 attacks…

[Video] footage, to which the Telegraph obtained access in the Middle East yesterday, was not made for public release via the al-Jazeera television network used by bin Laden for propaganda purposes in the past. … The video will form the centrepiece of Britain and America’s new evidence against bin Laden, to be released this Wednesday. [Telegraph 11/11/01]

BOTH VIDOES ARE NOW KNOWN TO BE FAKE!!! For some reason no-one is looking for the person responsible?

My analysis: as you may know, Nazi Germany invaded Poland in 1939 under the lie of self-defense, staging a false-flag attack. A false-flag attack is when you attack yourself disguised as an enemy you want to create public opinion to attack. This was called Operation Himmler. The only difference between now and then is that the US false-threat invasion has not yet resulted in another world war.

EXTRA- Operation Himmler 1933 and the The Business Plot 1933 (also the Plot Against FDR and the White House Putsch) was an alleged political conspiracy in 1933 wherein wealthy businessmen and corporations plotted a coup d’état to overthrow United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt

It was the Bush family and Wall Street that was involved with the attempted Facsist take over of America in 1933. Coincidently at the same time as the 1933 take over of Germany ,the burning of the Reichstag and the following Enabling Act (the German 911 and Patriot Act).
The Reichstag fire was an arson attack on the Reichstag building in Berlin on 27 February 1933. The event is seen as pivotal in the establishment of Nazi Germany.
“As the evidence piled up, there was little doubt that the Nazis themselves had set the fire…
The burning of the Reichstag six days before the election, depicted by the Nazis as the beginning of a communist revolution, resulted in the Reichstag Fire Decree, which (among other things) suspended civil liberties and habeas corpus rights.
Any of this sound familiar?
20 years of unregulated Fractional Reserve banking practices ,.. basically creating money out of thin air by creating debt, which they call money, and charging for services and interest. Artificially raising prices as more people can bid for the items.(A repeat of this has happened since ’80’s Reagonomics AND Thatcherism de-regulated the financial system ,20years later we are all bankrupt!Coincidence , Incompitence or conspiracy? )
Basically deregulating the financial services which led too`the Federal Reserve System’s expansionary monetary policy in the 1920s, arguing that the policy allowed misallocations of capital resources and supported a massive stock price bubble`
20 years later in 1933 the stock market had crashed ,the Great Depression was in full swing and America was BANKRUPT!
The Business Plot (also the Plot Against FDR and the White House Putsch) was an alleged political conspiracy in 1933 wherein wealthy businessmen and corporations plotted a coup d’état to overthrow United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Backed by Wall Street financiers including J.P. Morgan & Co., the Du Pont interests, Remington Arms ,”A BBC documentary claims Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to the 41st and 43rd US Presidents respectively, was also connected.”
“Many traditionalists, here and in Europe, toyed with the ideas of Fascism and National Socialism; many liberals dallied with Socialism and Communism.” Cramer argues that this explains why some American business leaders viewed fascism as a viable system to both preserve their interests and end the economic woes of the Depression
The Congressional committee report confirmed Butler’s testimony (emphasis added):
In the last few weeks of the committee’s official life it received evidence showing that certain persons had made an attempt to establish a fascist government in this country…There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers deemed it expedient.
Why do we know SO LITTLE about this???
In 1934, newspapers were controlled by an élite — according to then-Interior Secretary Harold L. Ickes, 82 per cent of daily newspapers monopolised their communities; the media down-played Gen. Butler’s testimony to protect the interests of advertisers and their owners.
When you consider Prescott Bush
In 1924, Bush became vice-president of A. Harriman & Co. His father-in-law, George Herbert Walker also worked with the company, as did E. Roland Harriman and Knight Woolley, Bush’s Yale classmates and fellow Bonesmen
IN 1940’s
Bush,as well as Harriman, was a member of the Board of Directors of Union Banking Corp, whose assets were seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act due to ownership by “enemy nationals”.i.e. NAZI’s

The Credit Crunch is a rerun of the 1933 Fascist Coup of USA and Germany

Banking on Hitler

Throughout the 1930s, with the loans provided through the Dawes and Young Plans, Germany was able to create a few dominant industrial cartels, which were all financed by Wall Street bankers and industrialists.[52] These cartels provided the basis for and main financial backing of the Nazi regime. Collaboration between the German Nazi industry and American industry and finance continued, specifically with Morgan and Rockefeller interests, as well as Ford and DuPont. The Morgan-Rockefeller international banks and companies associated with them “were intimately related to the growth of Nazi industry.”[53] Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Empire “was of critical assistance in helping Nazi Germany prepare for World War II.”[54] On top of this, the Rockefeller Foundation was also pivotal in not only funding the racist and elitist eugenics movement in the United States, but played a pivotal part in bringing the eugenics ideology to Nazi Germany, facilitating the beliefs that brought about the Holocaust.[55]

Below is the best artistic video I’ve found describing the above documentation. Warning: brief adult language.

As always, please share this article with all who say they want to be competent citizens. If you appreciate my work, please subscribe by clicking under the article title (it’s free).


As far as I see things , 911 was America’s Reichstag fire and the Patriot Act America’s Enabling Act. Afghanistan and Iraq wars are America’s Czech Sudatenland and Poland. False flag operations by governments are as old as Nero ,if not older. Check out  the Lavon Affair ,

The Lavon Affair refers to the scandal over a failed Israeli covert operation in Egypt known as Operation Susannah, in which Israeli military intelligence planted bombs in Egyptian, American and British-owned targets in Egypt in the summer of 1954 in the hopes that “the Muslim Brotherhood, the Communists, ‘unspecified malcontents’ or ‘local nationalists'” would be blamed

USS Liberty ,

The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a neutral United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli jet fighter planes and motor torpedo boats on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War. The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and a civilian), wounded 171 crew members, and damaged the ship severely. The ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nautical miles (47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish

In the 1931 Mukden incident, Japanese officers fabricated a pretext for annexing Manchuria by blowing up a section of railway. Six years later they falsely claimed the kidnapping of one of their soldiers in the Marco Polo Bridge Incident as an excuse to invade China proper.

In the Gleiwitz incident in August 1939, Reinhard Heydrich made use of fabricated evidence of a Polish attack against Germany to mobilize German public opinion and to fabricate a false justification for a war with Poland. This, along with other false flag operations in Operation Himmler, would be used to mobilize support from the German population for the start of World War II in Europe.

On November 26, 1939 the Soviet Union shelled the Russian village of Mainila near the Finnish border. The Soviet Union attacked Finland four days after the Shelling of Mainila. Russia has agreed that the attack was initiated by the Soviets.[4] Also, the nearest Finnish artillery pieces were well out of range of Mainila.[5]

In 1953, the U.S. and British-orchestrated Operation Ajax used “false-flag” and propaganda operations against the formerly democratically elected leader of Iran, Mohammed Mosaddeq. Information regarding the CIA-sponsored coup d’etat has been largely declassified and is available in the CIA archives.[6]

In 1954, Israel sponsored bombings against US and UK interests in Cairo aiming to cause trouble between Egypt and the West.[7] This operation, later dubbed the Lavon Affair, cost Israeli defense minister Pinhas Lavon his job. The state of Israel (where it is known as “The Unfortunate Affair”) finally admitted responsibility in 2005.[8]

The planned, but never executed, 1962 Operation Northwoods plot by the U.S. Department of Defense for a war with Cuba involved scenarios such as hijacking a passenger plane, sinking a U.S. ship, burning crops and blaming such actions on Cuba. It was authored by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, nixed by John F. Kennedy, came to light through the Freedom of Information Act and was publicized by James Bamford.

Former GRU officer Aleksey Galkin,[9] former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko[10] and other whistleblowers from the Russian government and security services have asserted that the 1999 Russian apartment bombings that precipitated the Second Chechen War were false flag operations perpetrated by the FSB, the successor organization to the KGB. Galkin has since recanted his accusations, which were made while he was a prisoner of Chechen rebels. However, there are other theories that the FSB engineered this incident.

For a more in depth view on this subject, read this blog

It can only end in the destruction of the US economy , which is happening in front of our eyes , the dollar is collasping as well.The result …? the multinational companies will be incredibly rich and own most resourses ,paid for with cents on the dollar.

The U.S. dollar reached its lowest point against the euro this year due to a myriad of forces including rising global stocks and commodities prices, low interest rates, and investors diversifying out of Treasury debt and into other assets including U.S. stocks with the Dow Jones industrial average approaching 9500 in late afternoon trading.

Stocks in Asia and Europe saw big gains, and gold topped $1,000 an ounce. (See “Stocks, Commodities Rally After Long Weekend.“) Oil also gained 4.9%, or $3.31, to $71.33, on the New York Mercantile Exchange, due in part to Goldman Sachs affirming its year-long outlook. By midday trading one euro traded for $1.45, meanwhile the Dollar Index, which tracks the greenback against a basket of currencies, fell to its lowest level since September of 2008.

Major Oil Companies Post Record Profits
Oil giants Royal Dutch Shell and BP announced record profits for the first quarter of this year, driven by the surging price of crude oil.

Royal Dutch Shell says its first quarter net income jumped 25 percent to more than nine billion dollars.  BP says its profits soared 63 percent to about $7.6 billion.

Both companies said oil and gas production remained unchanged during the quarter.

Big oil companies post record profits for 2006
The three giant US-based energy conglomerates—ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhilips—posted record profits for 2006, according to reports issued by the companies at the end of the week.

Profiteering off of the doubling of crude oil prices in the space of just two years—topping $78 a barrel in the summer of 2006—the big three recorded combined windfall profits of over $72 billion.

Despite Recession and Spending Cuts, Sales of US Weapons Soar

Study Shows US Claims Vast Majority of Global Arms Market

According to a new Congressional study the United States claimed the vast majority, 68.4 percent, of all worldwide arms sales last year. With an estimated $37.8 billion in weapons sales in 2008, the US had a tenfold edge over its closest competitor, Italy.

Though the report noted that the overall global arms market had dropped significantly over the past year, which was likely attributed to the global recession, the US saw a significant increase in not only its percentage of the market but in overall sales, as competitors like Russia saw their sales cut dramatically.

The US export trade market has soared in the past decade in the face of international instability. In 2001 the United States exported only $4.5 billion, which at the time was enough to earn it only a close second place behind Russia ($4.9 billion).

Next year looks to be another banner year for US weapons merchants, as the administration has already cleared a $2.1 billion sale to India, roughly double the amount sold there in 2008.

I am sure Haliburton(Cheney) and the Carlyle Group(Bush, Bin Laden) are doing very well too…..but of course its just a coincidence.

Iranian Oil Bourse , the real reason for war with Iran

September 9, 2009

The Iranian Oil Bourse[1] (Persian: بورس نفت ایران) International Oil Bourse,[2] Iran Petroleum Exchange or Oil Bourse in Kish[3] (IOB; the official English language name is unclear) is a commodity exchange which opened on February 17, 2008,[4][5][6][3]. It was created by cooperation between Iranian ministries and other state and private institutions. The IOB is intended as an oil bourse for petroleum, petrochemicals and gas in various currencies, primarily the euro and Iranian rial and a basket of other major currencies. The geographical location is at the Persian Gulf island of Kish which is designated by Iran as a free trade zone.[7]

During 2007, Iran asked its petroleum customers to pay in non-dollar currencies. By December 8, 2007, Iran reported to have converted all of its oil export payments to non-dollar currencies. [8] The Kish Bourse was officially opened in a videoconference ceremony on February 17, 2008, despite last minute disruptions to the internet services to the Persian Gulf regions. Currently the Kish Bourse is only trading in oil-derived products, generally those used as feedstock for the plastics and pharmaceutical industries. However, officially published statements by Iranian oil minister Gholamhossein Nozari indicate that the second phase, to establish trading in crude oil directly, which has been suggested might one day perhaps create a “Caspian Crude” benchmark price analogous to Brent Crude or WTI will only be started after the Bourse has demonstrated a reasonable period of trouble-free running

The Iranian oil bourse, first reported in 2005, initially had a widely publicised opening date of March 20, 2006 [10], which is the Iranian New Year, Nauroz. According to an April 2005 report, the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE), the Wimpole Consortium and a private staff fund for retired petroleum workers were to form a consortium developing the exchange [11].

January 2006 Chris Cook of the Wimpole Consortium referred to delays in the process due to the election to the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and subsequent difficulty in appointing a new oil minister acceptable both to the president and parliament [12].

March 2006 the Petroleum Minister of Iran, Kazem Vaziri Hamaneh, announced that due to “technical glitches”, the Bourse launch was postponed, with no new date set. [13]. However, as of April 26 Iran had restarted its move to open the oil market, and Kazem announced the bourse was set to open the first week of May [14].

May 2006 Minister of Economic Affairs and Finance Davoud Danesh-Jafari said the Oil Ministry has a two-month deadline for presenting the Articles of Association of the Iranian Oil Bourse. Danesh-Jafari said that the euro had not yet been finalized as the legal tender of transactions in the oil bourse, and the final decision about that depends upon the Oil Ministry’s proposed IOB Articles of Association [15]

During the first phase of its implementation, the Iranian Oil Bourse plans to offer financial derivatives relating to crude oil.

July 2006 a building has been purchased and the projected opening date was originally slated for September 2006. [16] On September 15, Oil Minister Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh stated that all preparatory requirements had been arranged for launching the oil stock market in the country.[17] However, the launch has still not occurred.

December 2006 Bloomberg cited two Iranian newspapers reporting Iran’s Minister of Economy Davoud Danesh-Ja’fari Iran as wanting to cut US dollar based transactions to a minimum.[18]

March 2007 Tehran based Press TV reported that the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad announced a shift of its major currency from dollars to euros. Iraqis traveling to Iran will pay for a visa in euros in line with other Iran Embassy locations. [19]

March 2007 The Scotsman reported that China’s state-run Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, the biggest buyer of Iranian crude worldwide, began paying for its oil in euros late last year. Iranian officials have said for months that more than half the OPEC member’s customers switched their payment currency away from the dollar as Tehran seeks to diversify its reserves, but news of the Zhenrong change is the first outside confirmation. Japan has also announced that it would be willing to switch to Yen from US Dollars.[20] Iran’s central banker announced in March 2007 that Iran had cut its holding of U.S.-dollar assets to around 20% of its foreign reserves in response to U.S. hostility.[21]

July 2007 Iran asked Japan to pay for its oil purchases in Japanese Yen.[22]

September 2007 Japan’s Nippon Oil has agreed to buy Iranian oil using yen. [23]

December 2007 Iran stops accepting U.S. dollars for oil. [24]

January 2008 Iran’s Finance Minister Davoud Danesh-Jafari told reporters that the bourse will be opened during the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution (February 1-11). [1].

February 2008 On February 4, the Iranian Cabinet approved the creation of the oil bourse in two stages – first a raw oil exchange and secondly an oil byproducts exchange. The Ministry of Finance and Economics, the Oil Ministry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Central Bank of Iran are required to create a workgroup to coordinate the project, and the Iran Commodities Bourse Company is given the task of carrying out the project. The communique from the Cabinet states that the “Ministry of Finance and Economics is required to take measures in making the petrochemical byproducts bourse operational by the end of February 2008.” [25]

What did the West do? Nothing not even mention the fact. They filled the MSM with LIES about WMD’s and Nuclear reactors. Iran has signed the NPT and is perfectly within its rights to build nuclear reactors for civilian use. There is NO EVIDENCE that anything else is taking place. Tony Blair wants Britian to build more nuclear reactors and the UK is an oil producing state, is this not a case of total hipocracy from Tony Blair , but what would you expect from this war criminal and traitor to the British people,as he has  lied to us before and used the British army for the benefit of foreign nationals.That’s TREASON TONY!!!!!

But maybe someone from the West was doing something?!?!?!

Third Cable Cut – Iran has no Internet access!! I told you early Wednesday morning that much of the Middle East and most of India lost Internet access when an undersea cable was cut (it turns out that two cables were cut). Now, a third cable has apparently been severed, and the entire nation of IRAN HAS ZERO INTERNET ACCESS.

Undersea internet cable cut in Middle East – Should Iran be worried?

There has been some concern that the undersea internet cables, that have been cut recently, are perhaps no accident?

The first incident happened 8km from Alexandria in Egypt, which involved 2 cables apparently alongside each other. According to initial reports, the cables may have been “snapped” by a ship´s anchor.

Whilst this explanation is certainly a possibility, it seems a strange coincidence that barely two days later another cable is cut, this time 56km from Dubai in the Persian Gulf. There is even rumor of a fourth cable being damaged, but this has not been confirmed.

The countries most affected by the damaged cables are Egypt, India and the Middle East (in particular Iran).

OF course these cable cuts where all just a coincidence and nothing to do with the US or UK oil companies.If it where to do with US and UK organisations , it could be said to be an “act of war”!

This is not the first time those , crafty Iranians have tried to sell thier own oil and resourses without US and UK help. Look what happened the last time the US and UK interfered. Iran was a secular socialist republic with a nationalised oil industry.The US and UK would rather have a right wing dictator who brutalises his own people.

The actions of the USA and UK directly lead to the formation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Either this was the desired effect all along,(check Iran Contra affair)

 or this was the most spectaular  foriegn policy failure of all time. But it seems we are now hell bent on repeating exactly the same thing OR Operation AJAX II ,this time its personal.


In 1951 Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh was elected prime minister. As prime minister, Mossadegh became enormously popular in Iran after he nationalized Iran’s oil reserves. In response, Britain embargoed Iranian oil and, amidst Cold War fears, invited the United States to join in a plot to depose Mossadegh, and in 1953 President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized Operation Ajax.

The BBC spearheaded Britain’s propaganda campaign, broadcasting the go-code launching the coup d’état against Iran’s elected government.[50] At the start, the coup d’état briefly faltered — and the Shah fled from Iran. However, after a short exile in Italy, the CIA returned him to Iran. Gen. Zahedi replaced the deposed Prime Minister Mosaddeq, who was arrested, tried, and condemned to death.[51][52] Mossadegh’s sentence was commuted to three-years’ solitary confinement in a military prison, followed by house arrest until his death.

The operation was successful, and Mossadegh was arrested on 19 August 1953. After Operation Ajax, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s rule became increasingly autocratic. With American support, the Shah was able to rapidly modernize Iranian infrastructure, but he simultaneously crushed all forms of political opposition with his intelligence agency, SAVAK. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini became an active critic of the Shah’s White Revolution and publicly denounced the government. Khomeini was arrested and imprisoned for 18 months. After his release in 1964 Khomeini publicly criticized the United States government. The Shah was persuaded to send him into exile by General Hassan Pakravan. Khomeini was sent first to Turkey, then to Iraq and finally to France. While in exile, he continued to denounce the Shah.

The Iranian Revolution, also known as the Islamic Revolution,[88][89][90] began in January 1978 with the first major demonstrations against the Shah.[91] After strikes and demonstrations paralysed the country and its economy, the Shah fled the country in January 1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini returned from exile to Tehran. The Pahlavi Dynasty collapsed ten days later, on 11 February, when Iran’s military declared itself “neutral” after guerrillas and rebel troops overwhelmed troops loyal to the Shah in armed street fighting. Iran officially became an Islamic Republic on 1 April 1979 when Iranians overwhelmingly approved a national referendum to make it so. [19][20] In December 1979, the country approved a theocratic constitution, whereby Khomeini became Supreme Leader of the country.

So we can thank US and UK Oil interests for the Iranian Islamic revolution. There would be a Socialist Republic there if we had left them alone.

You would think in this time of “Peak Oil” and war in the middle East that the Oil companies might be “feeling the pinch”,that would explain all the rises in fuel bills the public has seen. Actually nothing could be further from the truth. Oil Companies are making the biggest profits on record thanks to all this! Obvoiusly no conflict of interest here.

REMEMBER THAT!!!!!, while the Global economy is going down the drain and the average man struggles to pay bills and up keep in over priced housing. His pension worthless and his taxmoney going to fraudulant and corrupt bankers.  

Big oil companies post record profits for 2006
The three giant US-based energy conglomerates—ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhilips—posted record profits for 2006, according to reports issued by the companies at the end of the week.

Profiteering off of the doubling of crude oil prices in the space of just two years—topping $78 a barrel in the summer of 2006—the big three recorded combined windfall profits of over $72 billion.

ExxonMobil, the world’s largest publicly traded company, raked in $39.5 billon last year—the largest annual profit recorded in US corporate history. The oil giant generated a staggering average of $108 million in profits a day, or $4.5 million an hour. The total topped the previous record for corporate profit, also set by Exxon Mobil in 2005, of $36.13 billion.

Exxon’s total annual profits amounted to more than the federal government spends on public K-12 education per year and were roughly equivalent to the amount that Congress appropriated to provide health care for some 6 million low-income children over a span of 10 years.

Total revenues for the biggest oil company topped $377 billion last year, an amount greater than the gross national product of countries that include Belgium, Sweden, Turkey and Austria.

The profits of ExxonMobil’s closest US competitors also soared. Chevron, the nation’s second-largest oil company, posted its most profitable year on record with $17.1 billion in earnings, while number-three ConocoPhillips did likewise, taking in $15.55 billion.

The big oil companies have profited mainly off of the volatility and chaos on the crude oil markets, resulting in large part from the war for oil in Iraq and the threat of even widening the war to include military aggression against Iran.

The vast annual profits for ExxonMobil came despite a 4 percent decline in profits for the last quarter of 2006, largely the result of the driving down of gasoline prices in the immediate run-up to the 2006 elections. It is widely suspected that the energy monopolies deliberately cut gas prices in the vain hopes of bolstering the political fortunes of their allies in the Bush administration and the Republican leadership in Congress.

Conscious of public outrage over the profiteering by big oil, ExxonMobil ran full-page ads in national newspapers Thursday claiming that its 2006 profits were not excessive and that much of them are reinvested in the discovery and exploitation of new energy sources to meet growing global demand

Exxon Sets Profit Record: $40.6 Billion Last Year
By any measure, Exxon Mobil’s performance last year was a blowout.

The company reported Friday that it beat its own record for the highest profits ever recorded by any company, with net income rising 3 percent, to $40.6 billion, thanks to surging oil prices. The company’s sales, more than $404 billion, exceeded the gross domestic product of 120 countries.

Exxon Mobil earned more than $1,287 of profit for every second of 2007.

The company also had its most profitable quarter ever. It said net income rose 14 percent, to $11.7 billion, or $2.13 a share, in the last three months of the year. The company handily beat analysts’ expectations of $1.95 a share, after missing targets in the last two quarters.

Like most oil companies, Exxon benefited from a near doubling of oil prices, as well as higher demand for gasoline last year. Crude oil prices rose from a low of around $50 a barrel in early 2007 to almost $100 by the end of the year — the biggest jump in oil prices in any one year.

“Exxon sets the gold standard for the industry,” said Fadel Gheit, an oil analyst at Oppenheimer & Company in New York.

Oil companies have all reported strong profits in recent days. Chevron, the second-largest American oil company, said Friday that its profits rose 9 percent last year, to $18.7 billion; Royal Dutch Shell on Thursday reported net income for 2007 of $31 billion, up 23 percent and the largest figure ever for a British company.

The backlash against the oil industry, which has periodically intensified as gasoline prices have risen in recent years, was predictably swift on Friday.

One advocacy group, the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, called the profits “unjustifiable.” Some politicians said Congress should rescind the tax breaks awarded two years ago to encourage oil companies to increase their investments in the United States and raise domestic production.

“Congratulations to Exxon Mobil and Chevron — for reminding Americans why they cringe every time they pull into a gas station,” said Senator Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York.
Major Oil Companies Post Record Profits
Oil giants Royal Dutch Shell and BP announced record profits for the first quarter of this year, driven by the surging price of crude oil.

Royal Dutch Shell says its first quarter net income jumped 25 percent to more than nine billion dollars.  BP says its profits soared 63 percent to about $7.6 billion.

Both companies said oil and gas production remained unchanged during the quarter.

Exxon Mobil is scheduled to report its first quarter results May 1.  Some economists expect the company will also announce record profits.

ConocoPhillips said April 24 its first quarter profit rose 17 percent to more than $4 billion.

Meanwhile, oil prices continued to ease downward from Monday’s record high of almost $120 a barrel after British refinery workers ended a two-day strike.

The strike shut down production at the Grangemouth refinery and forced the closure of a North Sea oil pipeline, which carries about 40 percent of Britain’s oil.

Investors have also been concerned about Nigeria, where a strike by oil workers and violence have taken a toll on oil production.  Royal Dutch Shell says militant attacks have forced it to suspend the production of about 164,000 barrels a day.

High oil prices are hurting some companies in the oil sector.

Valero, the largest oil refiner in the United States, blamed surging oil prices for a 77 percent drop in first quarter earnings.  The company says first quarter income fell to $261 million.

Oil Companies Post Record Profits While Hatians Eat Dirt
What a world we live in!

I’m not necessarily anti Oil Company. But I am anti human suffering. So when I follow up reading about oil companies and their record profits with an article about poor Haitians eating dirt because they can’t afford even staple food like rice, my blood boils. We live in a nation of privilege, and with that privilege we have a moral obligation to help promote the welfare of those less affluent then we are.
Exxon reported record profits of 40.6 billion dollars! Just imagine how much good that meager .6 could do for the starving Haitians. Think of how that money could buy them community land and fertilizer to grow their own food, you know, out of the dirt they are already eating.
Exxon, Shell Profit Records Cap an Orgy That Weakened U.S., World Economies, Says Group
‘Consumers Now Know Where Their Money Went’; Congress, White House Must Prevent a Repeat of Costly Energy Bubble
October 30, 2008

Santa Monica, CA — ExxonMobil’s $14.8 billion third-quarter profit reports clears up one thing–now consumers now know where their money went, said Consumer Watchdog. Exxon’s mind-boggling profit is again the highest quarterly profit ever reported by a private company, dwarfing even Shell’s record $8.45 billion, also reported today.

Exxon’s profit for the first three-quarters of the year, $37.4 billion, is nearly equal to its all-time record yearly profit in 2007 of $40.1 billion. The 2008 profits were reaped as the price of oil rose on unregulated speculation to over $145 a barrel.

“Consumers got credit card debt and empty wallets, while Exxon got double-digit billions,” said Judy Dugan, research director of the nonprofit, nonpartisan Consumer Watchdog. “Citizens deserve to be mad. They should demand that government get back in the business of protecting them from corporate greed, or the pickpocketing will happen all over again in the next oil-price bubble.”

Exxon reaped its shocking profit even though its oil and natural gas production was down 8%, it refined less oil into fuel, and world oil prices began declining sharply halfway through the quarter. Energy prices during the last 9 months pushed consumers deeper into debt and magnified the harm of the financial crisis, said Consumer Watchdog. Yet government did nothing.

Of course if the dollar was to collapse ,the Oil companies still have oil to sell ,but what do the rest of us buy this oil with? ……..if not dollars?


Carl Gutierrez, 09.08.09, 04:05 PM EDT

Commodities, stocks and foreign currencies all rise as investors sell dollars.

The U.S. dollar reached its lowest point against the euro this year due to a myriad of forces including rising global stocks and commodities prices, low interest rates, and investors diversifying out of Treasury debt and into other assets including U.S. stocks with the Dow Jones industrial average approaching 9500 in late afternoon trading.

Stocks in Asia and Europe saw big gains, and gold topped $1,000 an ounce. (See “Stocks, Commodities Rally After Long Weekend.“) Oil also gained 4.9%, or $3.31, to $71.33, on the New York Mercantile Exchange, due in part to Goldman Sachs affirming its year-long outlook. By midday trading one euro traded for $1.45, meanwhile the Dollar Index, which tracks the greenback against a basket of currencies, fell to its lowest level since September of 2008.

Get rid of your dollars while you still can , buy gold before its too late!!!

Coca Cola’s US cocaine factory?

September 9, 2009

How did the world’s most popular soft drink come about? Well its a history of prohibition and drug abuse.

Coca cola had to stop being alcoholic due to the US prohibition laws. It continued to be made from active coca leaves.


The flavouring in Coca Cola is the Coca Leaf. Favoured stimulant of the indigenous peoples of South America and raw product in the manufacture of cocaine.

Coca wine was an alcoholic beverage that combined wine and cocaine.[1] The most popular brand was Vin Mariani developed in 1863 by Corsican entrepreneur Angelo Mariani. It was a popular drink at the time.[2]

In Atlanta, John Pemberton, a pharmacist, developed his own cocktail based on Vin Mariani and called it Pemberton’s French Wine Coca. It proved popular among American consumers. But in 1886, when Georgia introduced Prohibition, he had to replace the wine in his recipe with non-alcoholic syrup. The new recipe was similar to, but not the same as Coca-Cola.[2]

At the end of the 19th century, the fear of drug abuse made coca-based drinks less popular. This eventually led to the prohibition of cocaine in the United States, and the removal of cocaine from coca wine as well as Coca-Cola (though coca leaf remained).[2] The drink itself essentially became illegal when its other main drug, alcohol, was banned just a few years later under alcohol prohibition.

When the cocaine business went south (geographically as well as metaphorically), Coke pulled the cocaine out of the formula – although they still use coca leaves today to flavour the drink. In fact, they own a pharmaceutical company called Stepan Chemicals in Chicago, whose primary purpose is to take the cocaine out of the coca.


Coca cola has a US factory “whose primary purpose is to take the cocaine out of the coca”.

Is this not what we call a Cocaine Factory?

Coca Cola the Real Thing?!?!?!?!?

MoD blocked warning that Britain faces Afghan defeat

September 7, 2009

THE Ministry of Defence has suppressed a report which warned that British troops are facing “strategic defeat” in Afghanistan.

The decision to block publication of the critical academic paper in the army’s in-house journal coincides with a scathing attack by a senior US military officer on the “arrogance” of UK tactics in Iraq.

Colonel Peter Mansoor, who worked closely with General David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq until a year ago, said Britain’s political and military leaders had “abdicated responsibility” in Basra by failing to protect local people.

Mansoor’s comments are made in the latest edition of the British Army Review which demands the “brutal truth” about the UK’s shortcomings in guerrilla warfare.

Sir David Richards, the new head of the army, favours a public debate so that lessons can be learnt from previous military mistakes.

However, critics believe that mandarins at the MoD have deliberately been less open to spare the blushes of politicians.

Last Friday Gordon Brown, insisted that Britain’s aims in Afghanistan were “realistic and achievable”, contrary to the warnings of Eric Joyce, who resigned as ministerial aide to Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary.

“The line from Whitehall is that it’s okay to talk about mistakes in Iraq but not helpful to reveal errors in Afghanistan,” said a senior army officer.

“Attempts to censor debate to limit short-term embarrassment for ministers . . . loses wars and gets soldiers killed.”

Although they allowed Mansoor’s article to be used by the British Army Review, defence officials vetted the publication line by line, watered down the editorial and banned three other pieces. One of these was a paper written by David Betz and Anthony Cormack, two academics at the department of war studies at King’s College London, who had extensive access to the military.

In their paper, which had already appeared in an American journal, they predicted Britain would pull out in failure from Basra earlier this year and faced looming defeat in Helmand, Afghanistan.

They wrote: “The plain fact of the matter is that, at the time of writing, it seems entirely possible that Britain will suffer what amounts to a strategic defeat in both its ongoing counter-insurgency campaigns.”

The academics argued that the army has been undermined in Afghanistan because “defence reforms” have geared it up to take part in large-scale battles rather than guerrilla warfare.

Ultimately, they blamed failures to date on the government’s lukewarm commitment and unwillingness to provide sufficient resources.

Betz said he was “disappointed” by the article’s exclusion. “It’s important to learn lessons from Iraq but even more important to learn lessons from what’s happening in Afghanistan and apply them fast while there is still an opportunity of changing things,” he said.

Such views are shared by Richards, who took over leadership of the British Army at the end of August.

General Stanley McChrystal, the American commander in overall charge of allied troops in Afghanistan, has indicated that the military strategy needs to be overhauled. He believes that greater emphasis should be placed on protecting the population and winning hearts and minds rather than killing Taliban insurgents.

It is precisely these tactics that the British Army failed to heed in southern Iraq, according to Mansoor, a retired former chief-of-staff to Petraeus. American forces, by contrast, were able to adapt their strategy, building on their experience on fighting insurgents in Vietnam.

At the end of 2007, British troops completely pulled out of Basra city and tried to cut ill-conceived deals with Shi’ite leaders to maintain the peace.

Mansoor writes: “Rather than protecting the Iraqi people in Basra and thereby insulating them from militia violence and intimidation, British political and military leaders had abdicated responsibility for their security — the exact opposite of what was happening in Baghdad and elsewhere, as US forces were moving off their large forward operating bases to position themselves among the Iraqi people where they lived.”

Failure in Basra was not due to the conduct of British troops, “which was exemplary”, says Mansoor, but rather to “a failure by senior British civilian and military leaders to understand the political dynamics at play in Iraq, compounded by arrogance that led to an unwillingness to learn and adapt”.

New elite force for Helmand

BRITISH military commanders are to be given the use of 900 extra special forces troops as part of a rethink of tactics in Afghanistan, writes Michael Smith.

A new company of 150 elite soldiers will be attached to each of the army’s six frontline “manoeuvre” brigades.

However, the special forces units are likely to be drawn from the brigades’ existing ranks, meaning there will be no increase in the number of British troops in Afghanistan.

The role of the new special forces will be to probe into Taliban-held territory to gain information and provoke responses ahead of operations.

Until now British commanders have had to create ad hoc formations that are disbanded once the brigade returns to its base in the UK or Germany.

The new special forces will be additional to the SAS, Special Boat Service and Special Forces Support Group, who will continue to work with the Americans. Each unit will be known as a Brigade Reconnaissance Force, after a similar but smaller unit already in place with the Royal Marines’ 3 Commando Brigade. They will include specialist forward air controllers to call in airstrikes, artillery and mortar fire controllers, snipers and explosives experts.

Major Gordon Clifford, who will lead the unit for 11 Light Brigade, which will deploy to Helmand next month, said his men will have to operate for long periods in small groups in remote areas. “We will be expected to be the brigade commander’s eyes and ears,” he said.

Of course we are there is spread Freedom and Democray!!! ……..American style it seems.

Of course its just coincidence that the man getting all the fraudulat votes is “OUR” man and an ex-employee of American Oil Companies.

800 Afghan Polling Sites ‘Existed Only on Paper’

Western Diplomats Confirm ‘Fraud en Masse’ in Afghanistan

Western diplomats tonight are confirming that there was widespread voter fraud in Afghanistan, with most perpetuated on behalf of the campaign of incumbent President Hamid Karzai. Though such reports have been persistant since last month’s vote, the scope of the fraud is sure to surprise even the most hardened skeptic.

For one thing, officials say about 800 polling sites, nearly 15% of the overall number in the election, never actually opened and indeed “existed only on paper.” That didn’t stop the sites from reporting thousands of votes. Unsurprisingly, President Karzai did remarkably well among fictitious voters.

In some provinces officials are also saying that the ballot box stuffing was so severe that President Karzai got 10 times as many votes as there were people who actually voted. Though officials have disqualified 447 stations so far, the number seems to be a drop in the bucket compared to what officials say is “fraud en masse.”

The latest reports are likely to do serious harm to US ambassador Richard Holbrooke’s claims that the Afghan election was a “great success” and that the fraud was the sort of thing that “happens in every democracy.”


Despite Recession and Spending Cuts, Sales of US Weapons Soar

Study Shows US Claims Vast Majority of Global Arms Market

According to a new Congressional study the United States claimed the vast majority, 68.4 percent, of all worldwide arms sales last year. With an estimated $37.8 billion in weapons sales in 2008, the US had a tenfold edge over its closest competitor, Italy.

Though the report noted that the overall global arms market had dropped significantly over the past year, which was likely attributed to the global recession, the US saw a significant increase in not only its percentage of the market but in overall sales, as competitors like Russia saw their sales cut dramatically.

The US export trade market has soared in the past decade in the face of international instability. In 2001 the United States exported only $4.5 billion, which at the time was enough to earn it only a close second place behind Russia ($4.9 billion).

Next year looks to be another banner year for US weapons merchants, as the administration has already cleared a $2.1 billion sale to India, roughly double the amount sold there in 2008.


A standing army cannot defeat a guerilla army. Afghanistan is the graveyard of Empires . They did not plan 911 or are they hiding WMD’s and they are NO THREAT to UK or the USA. BUT while we have politions that do not have to fight in the war ,but stand to make loads of money from lobby groups, the war will continue .Even when the politions know its lost. They would rather see a pile of dead bodies than admit THEY where  LIARS and only in it for the money! BUT of course it will always be someone elses fault.

Politions would be the first people to sell us all down the river ,if they themselves where threatened, these same people that would expect YOU and ME to fight to the last man ,in the ruins of all we owned.

Ten Good reasons for Scottish Independence

September 7, 2009

UPDATE;- My Scottish Indepedence Poll was “hacked” shortly after the mommentus Scottish election results ,that gave Scotland a majority SNP government ,without the need of another political party as support. It was a LANDSLIDE!! All 3 heads of the unionist parties resigned after the election results

The next day exactly 100 votes ,all from a very narrow IP range, where added to the “Abolish the Scottish parliement ” vote option.

Can I thank the unionist vandal for showing us thier democratic values of unionism, and thier fair play and good sportsmanship…or in fact the complete lack of any of these qualities……..It also shows me ,we have you scared and making desperate actions, you have really made my day and given me strength to carry on in good spirits and renewed hope! Thank you

I take it you work at a call centre , from the IP addresses given! Time to get back to work now, or maybe you have found better employment at Macdonalds as you seem to be able to provide worthless crap in a short turn over time….

For those not up to speed on this issue, Scotland has been part of the UK since 1707. The union was FORCED on Scotland ,very much against the will of the people of Scotland. Riots and public unrest was the result.

“such a parcel o rogues in a nation,bought and sold for English gold” asRabbie Burns described the QUISLINGS that voted Scotland parliment out of existance.

Today Scotland has got its parliment back and it has a Scottish Nationalist Government (SNP) which stands for Scottish Independance. 

Here are some of the arguements for Independance as found on

 I have read the various opinions of Trolls and detracters on this forum and would like to reprint a leaflet I wrote for Siol-nan-gaidheal last year. I list the ten most common questions or objections raised by brainwashed unionists in Scotland:

Question 1:

Everyone tells us that Scotland is too poor to stand on its own feet and we will always require an English subsidy.

 Fact Scotland has 8.6% of the UK population yet raises 10.41% of all UK tax revenues. (Source Treasury red Book 2002) Go figure it out for yourself. Exactly who is subsidising who?

Question 2.

Scotland could not survive without the Barnet formula handout from England.

 The Barnett Formula is nothing more than a device which gives Scotland some of its own pocket money out of Scotlands pay packet which is taken by England. In 2002, Scotland contributed £42.7Billions to the UK Exchequer and received £18.1 Billions doled back in return via Barnet. It would be a much better idea to keep the £42.7 Billions as an Independent Country.

Question 3.

North sea oil is running out fast and soon there will be nothing left……

According to Professor Alex Kemp, of Petroleum Economics at the University of Aberdeen. North Sea Oil and Gas production will still be present in 2050. There is as much known oil left yet to be extracted than has already been exploited

Question 4.

Britain is becoming a net importer of oil and natural gas.

False. Scotland is a net exporter of Oil and Gas. Fact: An independent Scotland with 17.5% of Europes Oil reserves will be a net exporter of oil and gas for at least 25 years more years. Properly invested the proceeds will make Scotland the second richest nation on earth for its size. There will be huge social and economic benefits for all Scotlands Citizens and public services.

Question 5.

Scotland is too poor and small to afford to defend itself.

Why not? Switzerland uses just 1% of its GDP to provide a modern efficient Army and Air force. Norway spends 1.9% and can defend itself adequately. The UK spends 2.32% of GDP on its armed forces (Including Trident) Scotland can afford 1.6% of its GDP and still have modern professional armed forces half the size of the present UK.

Question 6.

We have a huge balance of payments problem, Scotland cannot possibly hope to pay her way.

False. The UK as a whole has Balance of Payments deficit of £35 Billions per annum. Scotland however actually contributes a Surplus of £2.3Billions.

Question 7.

Scotland could not compete against the mighty economic muscle of England.

Untrue. Denmark has an economic superpower to her south (Germany) and she does very well indeed. Switzerland is surrounded by three great economic superpowers, France, Italy, and Germany, yet she is the most prosperous nation in Europe. Singapore is a tiny island of 4 million people right next door to Indonesia with a population if 201 Millions yet is the powerhouse driving the SE Asian economy. Scotland has more than enough expertise to compete and prosper.

Question 8.

Scotland is too far away from the centre of Europe to prosper.

Iceland with a population of only 400,000, is situated far to the north by the arctic circle yet has the third highest standard of living in Europe.

Question 9.

The City ofLondon is too powerful a financial centre for Scotland to compete against. Scotland is one of Europe’s top ten financial centres, supporting employment for in the region of 200,000 people. Financial Services accounts for 8% of Scotland’s GDP and generates more than £20 bn annually for the economy. Scotland is reckoned to be the 12th leading global financial centre.

Question 10.

Scotland does not have the financial expertise to run its own affairs.

Who says so. Its strange that the late British Empire relied on a preponderence of Scots to run their affairs. Scots bankers, economists and Accountants (reckoned to be the best in their fields) are to be found at all levels of Government. Therefore the expertise is there.

For me Scottish Independance is a non-brainer, Scotland should be independant,nevermind the economics. But I do think it is OBVIOUS that Scotland would be economically better off as well.

Those that say Scotland cannot survive as a country are bordering on RACISM in my book. WHY should Scotland not be able to do what many countries have been doing for hundreds of years and what European peoples are still demanding today in Slovenia , the  Czech Republic , Slovakia , Bosnia , Serbia ,Latvia , Estonia etc etc etc….