nothing is what it seems in the Balkans. Never was. Probably never will be. At least not to the rational man. All views are partisan, including those of foreign diplomats. Which is why they are often diametrically opposed, depending on one's personal or national interests. And thus confusing to the average western citizen.

Take the current conflict in Kosovo, for example. According to the western establishment media, the situation is cut and dried, just as it was in Bosnia. Serbs (Orthodox Christians) are the local bogeys who carry out "ethnic cleansing" (another nouveau English word the Balkans has contributed to the English language). Muslims, including Albanian Muslims in Kosovo, and Catholics (Croats) are the "good guys." Consequently, such media ignore transgressions of the latter while overemphasizing those of the former.
For example, during the night of July 18-19, a group of several hundred heavily armed foreign mercenaries (mostly "mujahideens," Islamic "holy warriors") frontally attacked from Albania the Yugoslav Army border guards near the Djeravici mountain. The attack was repulsed by the Serbian troops, and the foreign assailants suffered heavy casualties. Among the dead were six mercenaries from Yemen, five from Saudi Arabia, four from Macedonia.
A short while later, Yugoslav authorities arrested Nuri Salip Muhamed, a Lieutenant Colonel in the Iraqi Army as he was trying to enter Yugoslavia illegally from Bulgaria. This Iraqi officer, who reportedly spoke perfect Serbian, was supposed to have commanded the July 18-19 terrorist attack from Albania. But lucky for him, he had not arrived there in time.
Yet not a word about any of this was ever reported by the establishment media. Just as in Bosnia in 1992-1995, Kosovo news is often manipulated by omission, not only by fabrication or exaggeration.
In the aftermath of the July 18-19 attack from Albania, the Yugoslav Army impounded 10 tons of various weapons and over 100,000 rounds of ammunition. Apart from 300 assault rifles, the assailants also left behind 60 heavy machine guns, 10 recoilless cannons, and 10 heavy mortars.
Nor was this an isolated incident. Between January and July, 1998, Serbian border patrols prevented 374 illegal crossings at the Kosovo border - 57 from Yugoslavia to Albania, and 317 from Albania to Yugoslavia. How many more they failed to prevent is anybody's guess. In 54 of the 72 recorded border incidents the Yugoslav Army border guards were fired upon.
"There is no question that tremendous amounts of weapons and other materials were being smuggled for years into Kosovo from Albania across a very porous border," said a senior western military source who spoke to me on condition of anonymity during my recent visit to Serbia. "And there is no doubt that Serbia (Yugoslavia) had legitimate reasons and right as a sovereign country to defend its territorial integrity in Kosovo against such onslaught."
But as you may be sensing, the proverbial "but" was coming up… "But they never even tried (to take out only the KLA terrorists)," our source continued. "They just leveled entire (Albanian) villages to the ground with artillery fire. I am sorry to have to use such an inflammatory term, but it was nothing short of 'ethnic cleansing'. I watched for four hours how they shelled Junik, for example" (a small town and a former KLA stronghold in Kosovo).
"So is it your opinion that the Serbs are using excessive force?" I asked.
"No question."
The western leaders who are now threatening to bomb Serbia certainly seem to agree. On the other hand, they seem to ignore other factors. My senior western military source also pointed out that some 40 or so Serb civilians had been massacred by the KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army). And that about 300 hundred are missing and should be presumed dead. He also said that he saw several bodies on this last trip to Kosovo (hours before we met) with evidence that they had been executed from close range.
"Close range?" I wondered. "How close?"
He made a motion with his hand depicting a gun firing upward through the mouth shattering the top of the skull. Again, not a word about that, either, in the western establishment media. No wonder that most Serbs and other experts not yet dumbed down by the globalist propaganda are seething. Already oppressed for 10 years by a communist turncoat dictator (Slobodan Milosevic), and having suffered nearly five years of genocidal sanctions (1992-1996) imposed by the New World Order cabal, a tiny European, predominantly Orthodox Christian nation of 10 million is now engaged in a deadly game of "eeney, meeney, miney, mo…" Will NATO bomb us, or won't it?
According to an Oct. 8 dispatch from a German source, the bombing of Serbia should have already started within 48 hours (which have now come and gone).
But a "usually reliable" Belgrade source suggested the whole thing is just a big NATO bluff, designed to make Milosevic's consent to deployment of foreign troops in Kosovo appear palatable to his own people.
Time will tell which alternative will end up being "it." But our Belgrade source seems closer to reality. That's because ever since the summer of 1994, Milosevic has been playing the role of a "designated bogey," thus facilitating the realization of the U.S. government's geopolitical aims in the Balkans, and the dismemberment of his own country. In return for Milosevic's being such a good "bad guy," Washington has repeatedly propped him up when the Serbian people rose up against this former communist.
But if, in the end, NATO does end up waging war against Serbia, even if only to absolve Milosevic from the responsibility of giving up Kosovo, the action will set a dangerous precedent. It will mean nothing less than the end of national sovereignty and all inherent rights which sovereign nations have enjoyed for centuries world over. As a result, any nation will now have reasons to fear the capricious wrath of the "world's only remaining superpower," the new neo-colonial Big Brother. Capricious, because the new Big Brother's power is only based on a "might makes right" legal principle.
For example, even if the Serbian government did do what the West is accusing it of having done, and even if the protection of supposedly endangered minorities is the overriding legal principle which outweighs the issues of national sovereignty, how can one explain the fact that this only applies to Serbia? The U.S./NATO never bombed Turkey over its atrocities against the Kurds; or China over Tibet; or Indonesia over East Timor; or Israel over its various enemies, including even extra-territorial military assaults on neighboring countries; or Russia over Chechnya; or Great Britain over Northern Ireland; or Spain over its treatment of the Basques; etc.
In short, NATO's involvement in the Balkans is NOT about protection of civilians - Albanian or any other kind. It is about projection of power into a political vacuum created by the end of the Cold War. And about connecting NATO East (Turkey) with NATO West (Bosnia) - over the backs of a small predominantly Orthodox Christian nation whose territory unfortunately happens to intersect these NATO strategic interests.
If the Serb leader had been smart, he would have realized all this, and would have worked for his country to become a part of NATO, just as the predominantly Orthodox Christian Greece is, for example. As it were, Milosevic totally misread the geopolitical tea leaves around the end of the Cold War. This former communist counted on the backing of the Soviet Union as he chose to snub the world's biggest superpower (in the 1989-1990 period). When the Evil Empire collapsed, Milosevic was left stark naked, without a friend in the world. And the Serbian people have been paying the price for his arrogance and stupidity ever since. In August 1994, Milosevic finally realized his error, turned coat, and turned on the Bosnian Serbs, too (whom he had been supporting prior to that). He became a western vassal, a "designated bogey," and a facilitator of the destruction of his own people. What followed was NATO's bombing of the Bosnian Serbs in August-September 1995; expulsion of some 250,000 Serbs from Croatia; the Dayton "Peace Accords" - actually the terms of surrender which Milosevic had signed in November 1995; and NATO's occupation of the Serbian territories in Bosnia in early 1996.
And now, the next (Kosovo) phase of NATO's expansion in the Balkans is about to unfold - with or without the bombing of Serbia. The "perpetual war for perpetual commerce" globalist principle is being affirmed once again in Kosovo. Which means that the U.S. and other western taxpayers can now start playing an "eeney, meeney, miney, mo…" game of their own: How much money and how many human lives will this overseas troops deployment cost us? Americans can also ask why we don't zip out of office - PERMANENTLY - the U.S. "Zippergate" officials who preach the virtue of chastity while chastising virtue the world over?

Kosovo: "Bosnia II" and Serbia's Aztlan, Chechnya

PHOENIX - Here we go again... "Bosnia II" is in the making in the Serbian province of Kosovo. The U.S. government officials are stoking the fires of another ethnic war while publicly opposing it. They are playing their usual, duplicitous roles pulling the strings behind the scenes. Just as they kept adding fuel to the ethnic fire in Bosnia while claiming to douse it.
The special U.S. envoy for the Balkans, Robert Gelbard, was in Serbia only days before the latest outbreak of violence. And just as his predecessors at the State Department declared in June 1991 that the territorial integrity of the former Yugoslavia is inviolable, Gelbard warned the secession-minded Albanians that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia. But words are cheap. Especially those of the U.S. diplomats. Less than a year after such a solemn declaration, the U.S. recognized in April 1992 Slovenia's, Croatia's and Bosnia's secessions, setting off the three-and-a-half year Bosnian war.
So Kosovo looks like Bosnia "déjà vu all over again," in the words of Yogi Berra. Why should we, Americans, care? Because Kosovo, just like Bosnia, will ultimately lead to American involvement, including a deployment of U.S. troops (highlights added 2/28/08).
How do we know that? Well, the New York Times, for example, has already been clamoring for redeployment of American troops in Macedonia, a stone's throw from Kosovo. In a Mar. 2 lead editorial, which "coincided" with the latest outbreak of violence in that Serbian province, it called for "new peacekeepers, possibly under the auspices of NATO and OSCE" to be sent in when the U.N. mission leaves. And, of course, international troops are already deployed in the neighboring Albania, following this country's brush with its own civil war last year.
Another tell-tale sign of upcoming trouble in Kosovo was the arrival of some U.S. establishment media buzzards there. The New York Times reporter, for example, was given a private tour of Albanian terrorists' hideouts BEFORE the latest outbreak of violence. This implies a coordination between the U.S. government, the Albanian terrorists, and the "independent" U.S. media.
A far-fetched speculation? Only for the ignorant. For, the same pattern was discernible during the war in Bosnia. The western media buzzards "miraculously happened to be in the neighborhood" when grisly killings occurred. The CNN, ABC, or SKY... cameras were rolling even before some of the victims died.
Good journalism? Luck? Or careful coordination? Take your pick...

In this writer's wartime travels through Bosnia, for example, one former Serb resident of Sarajevo showed his sense of black humor.

"Western reporters can be deadlier than snipers," he said. "Whenever I saw one, I ran for cover. When I saw a group, I dove for cover."
"But if you happened to see CNN's Christiana Amanpour, or ABC's Peter Jennings, for example, maybe you should have actually joined them," I suggested.
"Really? Joined them? Why?"
"Because the buzzards don't kill the buzzards. Though they are not picky about what they eat." :-)
Meanwhile, in Kosovo, as in Bosnia, the New York Times focused on the reaction - the alleged Serbian police brutality against the ethnic Albanians on Mar. 1, while downplaying the cause - the attacks by Albanian terrorists on Feb. 27 in which four Serb policemen were killed. This establishment paper covered in the similar fashion the "spontaneous" demonstrations by some 30,000 ethnic Albanians in Kosovo which followed on Mar. 1, in which 24 people were killed. It sympathized with the terrorists, not the law.
But while the media are willing accomplices, it is the U.S. government, that keeps manufacturing crises around the world. Now that Iraq has quieted down again, "why don't we light a match somewhere else?" one can just see our Secretary of Hate, Madeleine Albright, hinting. Nor is she the lone hawk in the U.S. government's bloodthirsty foreign policy crowd.
Richard Holbrooke, for example, the "father of the November 1995 Dayton Agreement" which ended the Bosnian war, inserted a clause in it about Kosovo. Resolving the Kosovo problems was one of the conditions for lifting the so-called outer sanctions on Serbia (read availability of NWO funds).
What did Kosovo have to do with Bosnia? Nothing whatsoever. Except that Holbrooke's move revealed where the next stage of the New World Order's (NWO) expansion in the Balkans was likely to take place. In a Dec. 7, 1995 ARIZONA REPUBLIC column, "Dayton Sellout," I called this expansion a "Green Interstate," an ethnic/ geopolitical highway with a dual carriage and a dual purpose:
(1) Connecting NATO West with NATO East (Turkey);
(2) Projecting the Islamic influence into the soft underbelly of Christian Europe (Albanians are predominantly Muslim, though many of them, like the Bosnian Muslims, are former Serbs who forcibly or voluntarily converted to Islam to avoid the Turkish persecution).

"With Macedonia, Bulgaria and Albania already in the U.S. backpocket, NATO could afford to lose (or ignore) the nominally pro-Serb Greece and still maintain its geographic continuity." (also see TiM GW Bulletin 95-15, 12/14/95).

The second hint about the NWO globalists' future Balkan intentions came in 1996, when the State Department requested and got Serbia's permission for the U.S. to open a USIA post in Pristina, the largest city in Kosovo. It was the first and the only such office set up outside of our embassy in Belgrade. I figured its real purpose was to be a command post, where American and ethnic Albanian would-be insurgents can whisper into each other's ears free of electronic bugging by the Serbian government.
The third hint was provided by the Kosovo Albanians themselves. They have been boycotting all Serbian elections since the fall of communism in 1990. This sent a clear signal that they were planning to achieve their political aims by bullets, not ballots. A steady flow of arms into Kosovo, financed in part by the Albanians' drug trafficking operations based in Switzerland, and by fund-raising events in the New York area (see New York Times, Mar. 2), reinforced the assessment that it was just a matter of time before Kosovo exploded in violence.
Let us pause here for a moment for a logic check. The U.S. globalists may have wanted the Kosovo clause inserted in the Dayton Agreement. Many other U.S. officials - from the former ambassador Warren Zimmerman in 1989, to Bob Dole in 1990, to Alphonse D'Amato and a number of other senators - have been for years championing the cause of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.
But why did Serbia's president, Slobodan Milosevic, agree to all these terms? Why did he sell out Serbia's national interests?
Because he is evidently a globalists' tool himself. I takes two to tango. To manufacture a crisis, you need the "bogeys" as well as the "white knights" who ride in to save the day.
Why do you think George Bush spared Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War? To save him for another president to use as a punching bag. And to justify continued presence of the U.S. troops in the region, eight years after the war ended!
So Milosevic sold out Serbia's national interests for the same reason the globalist U.S. government has been selling out America's national interests - by equating them with interests of Big Business. Why do you think the U.S. government refused to back openly the massive pro-democracy demonstrators' calls for Milosevic's resignation last winter? Because Milosevic is a valuable Serbian punching bag. He has now learned when to wag his tail, and when to bare his teeth, depending on what his NWO masters need in a given situation. Without him as a villain, the U.S. anti-Serbian policy would be shown for what it is - a genocide against an entire people, which is what the old and the new sanctions are.
This vile relationship is symbiotic in reverse, too. Every time a new crisis is manufactured, it enables a dictator to usurp more powers from the people on account of a national emergency. That's exactly what Milosevic and Croatia's president, Franjo Tudjman did in April 1991, less than a month after Milosevic was almost deposed during the first massive demonstrations against him in Belgrade on Mar. 9, 1991. Killings and disturbances in the Serbian part of Croatia created a national emergency in both former Yugoslav republics. This led to a full-fledged war after Croatia unilaterally seceded from Yugoslavia in June 1991. Within months, erstwhile anti-Milosevic demonstrators were being drafted and sent to the front to die for him.
For the same reason, manufactured crises, such as the recent on in Iraq, actually benefit the dictators like Iraq's Saddam Hussein. They give him a chance to consolidate or increase his power over his own people.
I don't know Saddam Hussein. I've never met the man. But I have met Slobodan Milosevic one-on-one. Twice. Once in January 1990. Another time in February 1992. Both times, after several hours of conversation, heated at times, this former communist dictator left me with an impression of being woefully out of it when it came to foreign policy or world affairs.
Back in January 1990, for example, Milosevic told me that, in his opinion, the U.S. government was supposedly interested in the Kosovo Albanians' cause because Albania (geographically) denies the Soviet Union a direct access to the Mediterranean Sea.
I was stunned by Milosevic's ignorance, especially coming on the heels of Romania's Ceauscescu execution, which took place less than two weeks before our meeting. And considering that the Berlin Wall came down only two months before that.
"Hasn't that foreign policy card gotten a bit yellow by now?" I asked.
"Yes, it has. But the State Department bureaucrats take a long time to catch up to the real world," he replied.
Maybe they do. But it obviously took even longer for Serbia's president to figure out which end was up in world affairs.
The next time we met, in February 1992, just before the Bosnian war broke out, I warned Milosevic that he himself may face charges as a war criminal one day unless he condemned such crimes by the Serbs. He said he already had, grinning and making some notes about my comment in his pad. He evidently either didn't think he'd be prosecuted, or didn't care.
That's when it first started to dawn on me. The man must be a part of the con. The NWO elite need their "Hitler's," their "Stalin's," their "Saddam's," their "butchers," so as to justify their parasitic existence. Because the overriding principle of the globalist elite-driven foreign policy is PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL COMMERCE. Because foreign wars and subsequent "peacekeeping" engagements are good for business of the global merchants of death.
So forget the State Department rhetoric. Words are cheap. Watch the body language and actions of the Big Business' stooges in Washington.
But to try to understand from the ground level what's really going on in Kosovo, consider a scenario in which some "Americans" advocate secession of the American Southwest and its joining a foreign country, say Mexico. That's exactly what some ethnic Albanians in the Serbian province of Kosovo want. They want Kosovo to become a part of "Greater Albania."

Nor is this parallel between Kosovo and the American Southwest a hypothetical one. As I pointed out in my WASHINGTON TIMES column, "When Cultures Collide..." (Aug. 18, 1996), the Chicano groups, including MEChA and La Raza Unida (The Race United), want to "demolish the border." They want to reclaim the American Southwest for Mexico and rename it Aztlan. And, just as in Kosovo, some Clinton administration officials seem to be encouraging them by attending their rallies.

The situation in Kosovo is an even more drastic example of demographic terrorism, followed by political insurrection. Unlike Aztlan, this region has NEVER been a part of Albania. Kosovo has been a cradle of the Serbian civilization ever since King Stefan Nemanja threw out the Byzantines from Kosovo in 1180. And even before that, during the two centuries of Byzantine Empire's occupation, there were Serbs living in Kosovo. Which means that Serbs have lived in Kosovo for over 1,000 years now, as attested by numerous ancient Christian monasteries which grace this "land of blackbirds," which is what Kosovo means in a loose translation ("kos" is a Serbian word for "blackbird").
In fact, the Serbs constituted a majority of Kosovo's population prior to the purges and repression of Christian Serbs which commenced in 1945 under the communist rule. In 1929, Serbs constituted 61% of the population in 1929, ethnic Albanians 33%, and others 6%. By 1961, the pendulum had swung the other way, as a result of the communist-sponsored demographic terrorism. Ethnic-Albanians accounted for 67%, the Serbs for 27%, and others for 6%.
Today, the ethnic-Albanians represent about 90% of Kosovo's population, according to their own and the western media figures. But since there has not been a census done in Kosovo for over 10 years, such claims cannot be independently verified. Whatever the actual figures, the demographic conquest of the sovereign territory by immigrant aliens and exploding birth rates represents another parallel between Kosovo and the American Southwest.

SUMMARY

Given that the overriding strategy of the U.S. globalists' foreign policy is PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL COMMERCE, are there some discernible tactics in the way they manufacture crises around the world? Yes, there are. Generally, they try to incite a minority group to rise up against a majority, using the old "divide and conquer" tactics.
They back Israel, for example, against the majority of its Muslim neighbors. They backed the Chechnya Muslim rebels against the Russian majority. They backed the Bosnian Muslims and the Croats against the majority Serbs in the former Yugoslavia. And now they are backing Kosovo Albanians against the majority Serbs in Serbia.
Closer to home, the "politically correct" views of neo-liberals, including the "affirmative action," has led to a virtual dictatorship of the minorities. Any criticism, no matter how logical, factual or reasoned, is immediately attacked as "racist," or "white supremacist."
But there are also exceptions to the above tactics. When Christians are the minority fighting for justice or survival, the NWO elite look the other way. That's what they did in Lebanon. That's what they are doing in China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Israel, for example, when Christian minorities are persecuted. That's what they do when the ethnic (Christian) Russian minorities' rights are abused in the former Soviet republics. That's what they did in the former Yugoslavia - when the minority Croats or Bosnian Muslims were allowed to secede from Yugoslavia, while the minority (Christian) Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia were not permitted to secede the newly minted countries of Croatia or Bosnia. Worse, hundreds of thousands of Serbs were later "ethnically cleansed" from Croatia and Bosnia - with the U.S. military aid, too.
Finally, in Kosovo, the NWO globalists not only looked the other way while the (Christian) Serbs in Kosovo were being virtually exterminated; they are now blaming and punishing the Serbs for the latest escalation in violence - just as they did in Bosnia.
Earlier generations of the NWO elite displayed similar attitudes. Remember the genocide which Turkey carried out against the (Christian) Armenians in 1915? Or the pogroms of the minority (Christian) Greeks which the same Muslim country committed in 1922?
So what is one to conclude from all these examples? That, besides being inhumane and driven by materialism (PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL COMMERCE), the NWO elite policy is and has been inherently ANTI-CHRISTIAN throughout the 20th century! And it has become even more so since the end of the Cold War. The above exceptions in warmongering tactics only confirm this rule.
If this comes as a shock to you, it should not be surprising. For, "at a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act," wrote George Orwell. And we live indeed at a time of universal deceit.
What to do? First, pay no attention to the State Department or White House rhetoric. Judge them solely on their deeds, such as the above examples. In fact, assuming the opposite from what they are saying will increase the probability of getting closer to the truth, than would taking their words at face value.
Second, apply an old proverb to the globalist elite: "The best way to kill a snake is to cut off its head." Which means remove the inhumane, anti-Christian Washington stooges of the NWO elite from power. At least in this country, we have the right to do it by legal, non-violent means. If we don't, we'll only have ourselves to blame when our turn comes to be bitten by the NWO snake.
-------------------------------------------------
 

APPENDIX I - KOSOVO: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

"Kosovo Polje" stands for a "Blackbirds' Field" in a literal translation from Serbian. But this Blackbirds' Field is also a field of death. And a shrine for Serbian patriots who gave their lives in defense of their country and Christianity.

On June 28, 1389, a mighty battle was fought at Kosovo Polje. It pitted the Serbian defenders of Christ's holy cross against the invading Ottoman Empire (Turkey) adherents of the Muslim crescent moon.
The Christian medieval Europe was fretting and hoping that the Serbs' holy cross would prevail over the Islamic crescent moon. At one point, the bells of the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris rang out in premature and erroneous salute to the Serbs' victory.
But it was not to be. The Serbs were defeated. One of them, however, Milos Obilic, managed to cut the gut of the invading Emperor, Murat, with his sword, killing him, before being cut to pieces himself by the Sultan's guards.
For 600 years and counting, Kosovo Polje, the Blackbirds' Field, has been etched as a place of honor and glory in the hearts and minds of every child born by a Serbian mother. It's like Alamo, Bastogne, Siege of Leningrad (St. Petersbrurg) - combined. On June 28, 1989, the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo, over a million Serbs, 10% of the nation, made a pilgrimage to this sacred ground to pay their respects to the Kosovo heroes.
The New World Order warmongers knew all that. They knew that the Serbs will never give up Kosovo. That would be like turning the Arlington cemetery to the Germans or the Pearl Harbor memorial to the Japanese. That's why they chose to stoke the ethnic fires in Kosovo.

APPENDIX II - BOSNIA: MADE FOR TV MURDERS

For those among our readers who may not have been following the Bosnian war blow-by-blow, we should point out that the western media huddled with the Bosnian Muslims in downtown Sarajevo. That's why the American public only got to see the incoming shells, allegedly fired by the Serb gunners surrounding the city. Sometimes, however, gruesome massacres were staged for the western cameras when the Sarajevo government shelled its own people while blaming the Serbs - to win the sympathy of western viewers. For some examples of those, check out the books "Peacekeeper," by General Lewis MacKenzie, the first U.N. commander in Sarajevo, and "The Sharp End, A Canadian Soldier's Story", by James R. Davis.

Also, check out... "Biting the Hand That Feeds You", "A Balkan Affairs Potpourri", "Put the U.N. Justice on Trial", "International Justice 'Progresses' from Kidnapping to Murder", "Milosevic: 'A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery'...", "Kosovo Lie Allowed to Stand", "New World Order's Inquisition in Bosnia", "Kosovo Heating Up", "Decani Monastery Under Siege?", "Murder on Wall Street",  "Kosovo: 'Bosnia II'",  "What If the Shoe Were on the Other Foot?", "Green Interstate - Not Worth American Lives", and/or "Clinton arme secrètement les musulmans bosniaques"

Or Djurdjevic's WASHINGTON TIMES columns: "An Ugly Double Standard in Kosovo Conflict?", "NATO's Bullyboys", "Kosovo: Why Are We Involved?", and "Ginning Up Another Crisis"

EUROPE blackmailing Serbia Kosovo: This is an 8 EU demands that Belgrade must meet! European officials expect big changes from Serbia before becoming a member of the EU, the most important question of all is - Kosovo. The EU has a total of eight demands of Belgrade when it comes to Kosovo....

Since the full implementation of the Brussels agreement depends on when the European Union will open the first chapter in the negotiations with Serbia.
They expect to finish drafting the statutes of the Community of Serbian municipalities. Also, demand that Belgrade implement all agreed with Pristina in the field of telecommunications, energy, construction of permanent administrative crossings.
The conditions are:

1. The draft statute of the Community of Serbian municipalities
2. Implementation of the agreement on telephony - country code for Kosovo
3. Application of the achieved agreements on energy
4. Construction of permanent crossings between Serbia and Kosovo
5. Blocking illegal crossings "for smuggling"
6. Acceptance of Kosovo passports at the borders of Serbia
7. Participation in Pristina all forms of cooperation in the region
8. Regulation of the Peace Park in northern Mitrovica
Among the requirements are and blocking illegal crossings, accepting Kosovo documents at crossings with foreign countries, the full inclusion of Kosovo in regional cooperation. This includes the regulation of the Peace Park in northern Kosovska Mitrovica, which is opposed to Pristina.
Authorities in Belgrade from the EU announced that the European partners are not satisfied with the level of application of the agreement from Brussels. Although these conditions are again repeated Serbian authorities are known from before.
FIRST ON KOSOVO
A lot of fulfillment of the Brussels agreement is particularly important in Germany. Authorities in Berlin, and the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel and parliamentarians from the Bundestag, consider that of the EU and Serbia should first open section 35, concerning Kosovo. To open this chapter is, however, necessary to implement agreements reached so far from the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina in Brussels.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn said that although Kosovo no government, there are things that Belgrade can I do

Pensioners storm banks, sue president as economic blockade enforced on E.Ukraine

Kiev is enforcing an economic blockade on eastern Ukraine, where banks are closed and cash machines and credit cards aren’t working. Disrupted social payments to the elderly have become the most acute issue.
Only a handful of cash machines are still functional in the breakaway parts of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions, after local banks received an order from Ukraine’s central bank earlier this week to “suspend” operations.
This follows a controversial decree signed by Ukrainian President Petro Porishenko on November 16 that is now coming into effect. Kiev is cutting economic ties with rebel-held areas by freezing bank accounts and stopping social payments, including pensions.
READ MORE: Ukraine scraps human rights treaty for rebel areas, cuts services, freezes banks
“As soon as we regain control [over E. Ukraine], all of the payments will be carried out,” Ukraine’s PM, Arseny Yastenyuk, said on Wednesday. “We would have liked people in the Lugansk and the Donetsk regions to be able to get their payments now, but we can’t send money there, because it gets stolen in banks and in cash delivery vehicles.”
Those willing to withdraw whatever’s left on their accounts have to spend hours standing in queues. And what’s left is not much.
“I was getting my pension via Oshchadbank,” a woman from Makeevka told RIA Novosti. “I have 3,000 hryvnas (around $200) left on my account. But I can’t get them. There has been no money in the banking machine for a week already. How am I supposed to live? I don’t even have money for my medicines.”
The only option left for many in the breakaway areas is to go to nearby towns under Kiev’s control and try to withdraw cash there. Many are trying to reissue their bank accounts in government-held areas, so as not to lose money. Queues at bus stations are huge

European Central Bank Taking a Page From Federal Reserve's Playbook

On November 21, European Central Bank President Mario Draghi announced that the ECB would be pumping more money into the euro bloc to fight what he called “excessively low” inflation.
"We will do what we must to raise inflation and inflation expectations as fast as possible," Draghi told an audience of bankers in Frankfurt. "If ... our policy is not effective enough to achieve this, or further risks to the inflation outlook materialise, we would step up the pressure and broaden even more the channels through which we intervene, by altering accordingly the size, pace and composition of our purchases," he said.
Although many investors and financial commentators were surprised by Draghi’s announcement, they should not have been. As we reported months ago, the table had already been set for Draghi and the ECB to follow a Federal Reserve-style menu of inflationary options at the Fed’s Jackson Hole confab in August. We noted then that the Federal Reserve’s  2014  Economic Policy Symposium in Jackson Hole did not bode well for the global economy. The annual conclave of the world’s top central bankers and their privileged economist cohorts at the picturesque Wyoming retreat took place August 21-23. European Central Bank (ECB) chief Mario Draghi  provided the big news, with a speech that indicated the ECB will be adopting the Fed’s policies of the past several years, principally “quantitative easing” (QE), a Fed phrase for currency debasement, or simply, counterfeiting by computer entry. Under former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and his successor Janet Yellen  the Fed has magically conjured up more than $4.4 trillion out of thin air — and shoveled much of that into the palms of their fellow bankers.

The ECB should now be expected to copy the Fed’s bond-buying binge and go on a huge bond-buying spree of its own, creating trillions of new euros. This was really not “news,” however, since Draghi and the ECB had already embarked on their QE counterfeiting gambit at least as far back as the beginning of June with their revolutionary step of cutting bank deposit interest rates to below zero, meaning a negative interest rate. The Frankfurt-based ECB announced they were reducing the deposit rate to -0.1 percent, forcing banks to pay a charge if they continue to park money for safekeeping at the ECB.

But that was only the opening round, portending much larger actions to come, as Draghi made clear at the time. “Are we finished? The answer is no,” said Draghi. “If required, we will act swiftly with further monetary policy easing. The Governing Council is unanimous in its commitment to using unconventional instruments.”

Ah yes, “unconventional instruments” — another Fed neologism, meaning we’ll invent new programs and usurp new powers to do whatever we please. That announcement by Draghi back in June was a public signal that the ECB was on track to follow in the Federal Reserve’s tracks. Which is precisely what Ben Bernanke had urged it to do in 2012, as The New American’s Alex Newman reported in this article entitled, “Europe Must Further Centralize Fiscal Power, Claims Fed Boss Bernanke,” back in August of 2012.

The ECB’s rate cuts in June caused tremors throughout the EU, especially in Germany, where Draghi’s ultra-loose monetary policy and usurpation of powers were denounced as autocratic and dictatorial.
Georg Fahrenschon, the head of the German Association of Savings Banks, accused the ECB of raiding the savings of the thrifty. Fahrenschon said: “We are tearing a hole in the pensions of savers. Over time these low rates will destroy the value of assets.”
Savers will be penalized — again — while the politically connected Insider bankers will walk away with more hoards of expropriated cash.
David Owen, from Jefferies Fixed Income, pointed out that banks will be able to borrow €400bn for four years at near zero rates. They will be able to tap the ECB for funds equal to seven percent of their private loan book without using up collateral. “They can get free money for four years.” Owen said.
But that, as we have noted, was just the start. When the ECB’s new Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) program gets rolling, the bank will be buying unlimited quantities of government bonds. And that will create an avalanche of unbacked currency, with inflation following in its wake.
In a thoughtful article on the Jackson Hole meeting in Forbes magazine, Steve Forbes offered sound free-market critiques of many of the Fed’s actions. Unfortunately, his solution is legislation to create “a commission to examine thoroughly and dispassionately the whole area of monetary policy and to make recommendations of where we should go from here.”
What we do not need is another commission study of the Fed. What we do need is an honest audit of the Fed, something Rep. Ron Paul very nearly succeeded in obtaining in 2010, before the Fed’s Wall Street cronies squashed it in the Senate. A genuine audit of the Fed would reveal the theft of trillions of dollars, which would stir the public outrage needed to abolish the Fed. No individuals or institution should have the unchecked powers exercised by the Federal Reserve.
On September 17, 2014, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly (333 to 92) in favor of H.R. 24, a measure by Representative Paul Broun (R-Ga.) calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve. If you have not already done so, now would be a very good time to contact your senators to urge them to support the companion measure, S. 209, in the Senate.

Muslim Columnist: Regulation, “Diversity” Could Stop Negative Newspaper Coverage of Islam

While Britain already has hate-speech laws that stifle criticism of Islam, this isn’t enough for the political director of the Huffington Post UK, Mehdi Hasan. Speaking at a London media industry event hosted by Mindshare UK last Thursday, the columnist complained of what he called “demonizing press coverage” of Muslims and said it will not “change unless … there is some penalty.” He entertained the idea of “externally imposed” regulation as a possible remedy and also called for efforts to increase “diversity” in newsrooms.
The Guardian reported on the story:

The columnist … said the press has proven “singularly unable or unwilling to change the discourse, the tone or the approach” towards Muslims, immigrants and asylum seekers.

Hasan … said: “We’re not going to get change unless there is some sanction, there is some penalty. This is not just about Muslims; it is about all minorities.”

“Therefore you have to ask questions about: does it need to be externally imposed, either by better regulation or via some form of commercial imperative? Though, that requires a separate campaign to get companies to give a damn about this stuff,” Hasan added.

Hasan characterized much Islam coverage as “misinformation” and said it was “morally wrong.” He also complained of a double standard in which statements routinely made about Muslims would not be tolerated were they made about Jews. He asked, “Why isn’t anti-Muslim bigotry as unacceptable in the press as anti-Jewish bigotry?” He did not specify, as far as we know, whether this double standard is why there are so many more newspaper stories about Muslim suicide bombers than about Jewish ones.



Speaking of double standards, bigotry, and printed words that may require amending, some are pointing fingers right back at Hasan and the Islamic faith, which he has often defended. As an example, Thomas Lifson at American Thinker asks, “I wonder how concerned Hasan is about the Koran’s portrayal of Jews as apes and pigs?”

For Hasan’s part, he says he has been mischaracterized. Defending himself in a piece yesterday entitled “Hiding Anti-Muslim Bigotry Behind ‘Free Speech’ Won't Work,” he wrote that during his Mindshare UK appearance he was simply outlining “the various ways in which sections of the British press routinely demonises, discriminates against and fearmonger about British Muslims, especially in the form of inaccurate, misleading and dishonest headlines, images and stories.” He then also stated, “I suggested that, in the context of an ongoing British debate over the best form of press regulation, there needed to be tougher action by any proposed new regulator against the promulgation of falsehoods and smears against marginalised minorities of all types — Muslims, Gypsies, asylum-seekers, etc. I made no mention of the religion of Islam, to beliefs, practises, theology and the rest.” Yet this seems belied by the fact that, as The Guardian reported, he hosted a session at the Mindshare UK event entitled “The Muslims are coming!”

Hasan’s comments have caused a backlash against him in certain quarters, which is no doubt why he had the aforementioned Guardian piece updated on Monday to include the statement that he is “all in favour of free speech and the robust criticism of all religious beliefs.” Yet critics find this hard to take at face value given Hasan’s history of having, as Lifson put it, “flexible” standards. For instance, while Hasan preaches against bigotry, as Breitbart pointed out:

In 2013 Hasan caused controversy when he told a Muslim audience “We know that keeping the moral high-ground is key. Once we lose the moral high-ground we are no different from the rest of the non-Muslims; from the rest of those human beings who live their lives as animals”. Saif Rahmen, author of The Islamist Delusion [sic] called upon Hasan to apologise for the comment, saying “I don’t want apologetics, nor condescending articles attempting to brush the matter off: I’d appreciate an apology with a sprinkle of humility.… You might fool some of the British public by cloaking yourself in Arabic and throwing a cultural relativistic smokescreen over it, but not all.”

Another example of flexible standards, say observers, is criticism Hasan leveled at the Daily Mail during a 2013 BBC appearance when he called it an “immigrant-bashing, woman-hating, Muslim-smearing, NHS-undermining, gay-baiting” newspaper and implied that it hates Britain. Yet as Breitbart also reported:

The Mail promptly revealed that just three years earlier, Hasan had written to their editor asking for a job. He wrote “I’m very keen to write for the Daily Mail.… I have always admired the paper’s passion, rigour, boldness and, of course, news values.… I admire your relentless focus on the need for integrity and morality in public life, and your outspoken defence of faith…. I am also attracted by the Mail’s social conservatism on issues like marriage, the family, abortion and teenage pregnancies.”

How the Mail went in short span of time from the “relentless focus on … morality” to a purveyor of what Hasan calls “morally wrong” has not been explained.

The Netherlands' Newest "Accomplishment"

The first national Muslim party in the Netherlands is now a fact.

The Netherlands, that country that so bravely pioneered movements such as gay marriage and the legalization of marijuana, seems on the brink of pioneering yet another: the official Islamization of Europe's parliaments.
That, anyway, would seem to be the wish of Tunahan Kuzu and Seleuk Ozturk, the founders of the country's newest political party, which they established only a few days ago after splitting from the Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA), or Labor Party, in a dispute over Dutch Turkish organizations and the Dutch Turkish community at large. Although their party, Group Kuzu/Ozturk, has not yet been entirely defined, its creators describe it in sweeping terms as "the party the Netherlands longs for," aimed at promoting "a society in which everyone is treated equally."
Except that does not seem to be what they actually have in mind.

Seleuk Ozturk (left) and Tunahan Kuzu (right) speak to the media, November 2014. (Image source: NPO video screenshot)

According to observations of former PvdA colleagues in local media reports, both Ozturk and Kuzu have shown clear antagonism towards women -- even intimidating their female colleagues. More significantly, the two have also held tightly to their Turkish roots and Islamic faith, demanding, among other things, Islamic prayer spaces in the Parliament building -- a clear violation of separation between church and state. (Those demands, it should be noted, were refused.)
And Ozturk, reported the national daily, Telegraaf, has regularly demonstrated a stronger allegiance to Turkey and to Islam than to the secular Dutch state he was elected to represent. On at least one occasion, for instance, he skipped a day of parliamentary voting, and explained his absence only the following day with the casual remark that, "Yesterday was a Muslim holiday."
Ozturk, who defended the Turkish government's violent backlash against protesters during the 2013 Gezi riots, has also demonstrated particularly strong support for Turkey's Islamist President (and former prime minister) Recep Tayyip Erdogan -- again indicating a greater solidarity with Turkey, and its current regime -- than with The Netherlands.
This should probably come as no great surprise: the Dutch parliamentarian also holds ties to the Diyanet, Turkey's office of religious affairs, (which, the Telegraaf reports, also provides funding for most of The Netherlands' Turkish mosques). In fact, it was PvdA Social Affairs minister Lodewijk Asscher's proposal to investigate the Dutch Diyanet connection (along with the activities of other Turkish conservative religious organizations in the Netherlands) that precipitated Ozturk's and Kuzu's defection from the party.
Asscher's concern, in turn, stemmed from recent reports about the problematic integration of Dutch Turks; it indicates the development of a "parallel society" in the community -- a society encouraged by the work of groups such as the Diyanet and others -- most of which seek to strengthen ties between Dutch Turks and Turkey, rather than to encourage integration into Dutch culture. As such, they stand as instruments of Erdogan's outspoken efforts to fight the assimilation of Europeans with Turkish roots into European culture.
Now, it seems, Ozturk and Kuzu plan to go one better: they are providing Dutch Turks with a political party in the Netherlands based largely on the Turkish community and culture, and with conservative Islamic values and mores. And although they were not elected to Parliament as leaders of their new party, because they earned their seats in the Parliament through the PvdA, they are able to keep them -- at least until the next national elections. The first national Muslim party is now a fact.
In many ways, this was inevitable. The PvdA, which is largely considered the "immigration party" with broad support among Dutch Muslims, has been plagued of late by the radical positions of several of its Muslim members. Last summer, for instance, Yasmina Haifi, a PvdA member and employee of the Ministry of Justice, declared ISIS "a Zionist plot." In 2013, former PvdA member Mohammed Talbi founded Rotterdam's local Nida party on the basis, according to the party's website, of "the Islamic spirit within all of us" and the "universal principles of god as expressed by the prophet."
More recently, as political columnist Afshin Ellian points out, the PvdA's Michiel Servaes proposed official recognition of Palestine -- on precisely the day that Palestinian terrorists slaughtered four Jews during morning prayer in Jerusalem.
And even as far back as 2002, the PvdA refused to provide protection for then-member Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who received death threats for her outspoken criticism of Islam and accusations (proven true) of honor killings in the Dutch Muslim community. Hirsi Ali was forced to flee the country, returning only when the competing Party for Freedom and Democracy [VVD] guaranteed her 24-hour bodyguards if she would leave the PvdA for them. She agreed. It was a huge win for the VVD and a strategic loss for the PvdA; but even more, it set out in black and white the priorities of the party whose strategies now seem to have made possible a pro-Islam party within Holland's own national government.
That party is already seeing some success: less than a week after its founding, a November 18 poll found that approximately 77% of Dutch Turkish PvdA voters plan to switch allegiances from the PvdA to Group Kuzu/Ozturk; and among all Dutch Turkish voters, about a third expect to support the party, although most seem to feel that they would like Kuzu and Ozturk to broaden their appeal to all the Dutch, and not just those of Turkish background.
That expansion, however, does not seem to be in their plans. In their first parliamentary vote, the duo has already opposed requirements that foreigners speak Dutch in order to qualify for welfare. Even before leaving the PvdA, their final words to fellow member Ahmed Marcouch, a Dutch-Moroccan known for his rigorous support of integration programs, spoke volumes: "May Allah punish you!" Ozturk said.
Now, only a week later, the pair is finding support not for their programs and proposals (they have none) but for their ethnicity and religion. Already the future of their party -- and its potential power -- suggests a very real threat to the Netherlands, and the course of freedom it has kn

Spain: Fate of Ex-Muslim Critic of Islam Hangs in Balance

The Supreme Court's ruling is eerily similar to an international blasphemy law being promoted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of 57 Muslim countries dedicated to implementing a worldwide ban on "negative stereotyping of Islam."
Firasat's lawyers say that they have presented the court with irrefutable evidence that the charges against Firasat were fabricated by Indonesian authorities, but that this evidence has been ignored by a judiciary that is under political pressure from the Spanish government to get rid of Firasat once and for all.
"Even if Indonesians do not punish me for death, how will I be protected from Muslims who consider me a blasphemer and an apostate? Will I be able to get a fair trial when the judges, prosecution, fake witnesses and lawyers, everybody will be a Muslim?" — Imran Firasat
Firasat said it was never his intention to provoke the Spanish government, but that he felt it was his duty to "warn of the dangers of not understanding or stopping what is known as Jihad."

A Spanish court is deliberating the fate of Imran Firasat, an ex-Muslim from Pakistan who faces imminent deportation because the Spanish government has deemed his criticism of Islam to be a threat to national security.
Firasat's lawyers, however, argue that sending him back to Pakistan or any other Muslim country would be the equivalent of a death sentence because Islamic Sharia law prescribes the penalty of death for Muslims who commit apostasy.
Firasat, now 36, obtained political asylum in Spain in 2006 because of death threats against him in both Pakistan and Indonesia for leaving the Islamic faith and marrying a non-Muslim.
But six years later, Spanish authorities initiated deportation procedures against Firasat, after he released a one-hour amateur film entitled, "The Innocent Prophet: The Life of Mohammed from a Different Point of View." The movie, which was posted on YouTube, purports to raise awareness of the dangers that Islam poses to Western Civilization.

Left: Imran Firasat and his family. Right: The poster for "The Innocence of Islamic Jihad," a video produced by Firasat in 2013.

On December 21, 2012, Spanish Interior Minister Jorge Fernández Díaz issued an order to deport Firasat, based on Article 44 of the Law on Asylum and Protection, which allows the state to revoke the refugee status of "persons who constitute a threat to Spanish security." The deportation order stated that Firasat constituted a "persistent source of problems due to his constant threats against the Koran and Islam in general."
Since then, Firasat's legal team has deftly navigated the labyrinthian ways of Spain's political and judicial systems in an effort to prevent his deportation. But Spanish public prosecutors have successfully outmaneuvered Firasat's attorneys by changing their legal tactics, apparently in a bid to ensure that Firasat leaves Spain and never comes back.
In 2013, Firasat appealed the deportation order at the National Court [Audiencia Nacional], arguing that the expression of his views about Islam fall within the constitutional right to free speech.
But the National Court rejected Firasat's appeal. A ruling dated October 3, 2013 stated:

"The right to the freedom of expression can be subject to certain formalities, conditions, restrictions or sanctions, which constitute necessary measures, in a democratic society, to preserve national security, public security and the constitutional order."

On May 30, 2014, the Spanish Supreme Court not only confirmed the National Court's ruling, it went one step farther by stating:

"The right to the freedom of expression does not guarantee the right to intolerant manifestations or expressions that infringe against religious freedom, that have the character of blasphemy or that seek to offend religious convictions and do not contribute to the public debate."

This paragraph is eerily similar to an international blasphemy law being promoted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of 57 Muslim countries dedicated to implementing a worldwide ban on "negative stereotyping of Islam."
Warning of potential trouble ahead for the exercise of free speech in Spain, two judges—Manuel Campos and Isabella Perelló—dissented from the majority opinion. They signed a statement in which they asked whether the source of the danger to national security is in the actions of Firasat, or in the reactions of Islamic fundamentalists. They wrote:

"The pernicious effects against national security do not strictly derive from the conduct of the refugee, but rather from the violent reactions of third persons."

In any event, the Supreme Court also ruled that Firasat and his family should not be delivered "to a country where there is danger to life or freedom." This would have prevented the Spanish government from deporting Firasat back to Pakistan.
In an apparent effort to get around this obstacle, Spanish public prosecutors changed their approach by pushing for Firasat to be extradited to Indonesia, where he is wanted on murder charges.
The alleged crime occurred in June 2010, while Firasat was visiting Indonesia with his wife and children. In July 2010, Indonesian authorities deported Firasat for an alleged immigration violation (his family stayed behind in Indonesia), but a few days after he returned to Spain, Indonesian police said Firasat was a fugitive from justice and filed an international arrest warrant with Interpol. At the time, Spanish authorities refused to extradite Firasat due to his refugee status in Spain.
After the Spanish Supreme Court upheld the legality of the revocation of Firasat's refugee status, however, the Spanish cabinet met on July 19, 2014 and voted to proceed with his extradition. Firasat was arrested on July 29 and was sent to a penitentiary situated near Madrid, where he remains to this day.
In its latest ruling issued on October 28, the National Court stressed that it does not know whether the accusations against Firasat are true or false, but that he should be tried in Indonesia because that country observes "the same level of respect for human rights and formal guarantees of public and private freedoms as those observed in Spain."
In an appeal, Firasat's lawyers counter that this claim is patently untrue, especially considering that Sharia law is broadly—although not exclusively—applied in Indonesia, and that Firasat has little or no chance of getting a fair trial in that country.
Firasat's lawyers say that they have presented the National Court with irrefutable documentary evidence that the charges against Firasat have been fabricated by Indonesian authorities, but that this evidence has been ignored by a judiciary that is under political pressure from the Spanish government to get rid of Firasat once and for all.
In its appeal, Firasat's defense team has also argued that his extradition would violate domestic and international law because he would be subject to torture and probable death due to at least three factors:

1) Indonesia has a substandard human rights record—especially in regards to religious tolerance—as documented by the United Nations and other bodies;
2) Firasat's high-risk profile, based on the death threats he has received from Islamic extremists, leaves him in a particularly vulnerable situation; and
3) Multiple rulings by the European Court of Human Rights, which hold that extraditions of this nature should not proceed.

Beyond the legal technicalities, Firasat's lawyers say that by extraditing him to Indonesia, the Spanish government would be sending him to face almost certain death because of his religious convictions and personal opinions.
Strangely, the judges who ruled that Firasat should be extradited are the same ones who are considering his appeal. The National Court is expected to announce its decision on Firasat's appeal on November 28.
In a November 11 letter from prison, Firasat wrote:

"I received the judgment in which the judges have agreed to extradite me to Indonesia. The Spanish judiciary completely ignored the lies and irregularities from the Indonesian authorities which my lawyer proved during the trial. The judges did not even care about the death threats that I have received from Indonesian Islamic groups and that there has been much news in the Indonesian media about my films and activities on Islam. My conversion from Islam to Christianity also doesn't make them think that I will be the target of radical Muslims in Indonesia.
"For the Spanish judiciary it is good enough that Indonesian authorities present formal guarantees that I won't be given death punishment. If the Indonesian Embassy in Madrid presents that guarantee in 40 days, I will be extradited. And Indonesia will of course give that guarantee as for them it will be only a piece of paper which not necessarily will be respected in the future.
"Even if Indonesians do not punish me for death, how will I be protected from Muslims who consider me a blasphemer and an apostate? Will I be able to get a fair trial when the judges, prosecution, fake witnesses and lawyers, everybody will be a Muslim? And you know what image I hold in Muslim's eyes. My arguments, proofs and the clear risk of torture and death have been completely ignored by the politically influenced Spanish judiciary. They do not care if the accusations are false and religiously motivated, if I will be able to survive the Islamic anger in the nation with the biggest Islamic population on earth and if there will be violation of international human rights conventions in case of my extradition to an Islamic nation...
"Please spread the news of my extradition and help me to get some media support. Only this can make Spain shy away from what they are doing to me. Please help me. I don't want to die. I want to have a new life with my family. I thank you for all the help and support until now and I trust you will do your best to help me in protecting my life. Thank you so much. God bless you."

In a November 17 interview with Cadena SER, the largest radio network in Spain, Firasat said it was never his intention to provoke the Spanish government or the Interior Ministry, but that he felt it was his duty to "warn of the dangers of not understanding or stopping what is known as Jihad."
Firasat also pointed to the irony of his situation. In 2006, the Socialist government in Spain gave him refugee status because Pakistan sentenced him to death for criticizing Islam. In 2014, the Conservative government in Spain wants to deport him for the same reason: criticizing Islam.

What are you Thankful for?

 “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop.” He began it by surveying world history in response to God's question: “When would you have liked to be alive?” King answered, “If you allow me to live just a few years in the second half of the twentieth century, I will be happy.” Why? Because “I see God working in this period of the twentieth century in a way that men in some strange way are responding. Something is happening in our world.”

What was happening? “We are determined to be men. We are determined to be people.” We are standing up. “A man can't ride your back unless it is bent.” For a brief window of time — just long enough — MLK was able to use his voice to restrain violence and overcome hate: “We are masters in our nonviolent movement in disarming police forces. They don't know what to do.” He kindled a kind of fire that no dogs could quench and no fire hoses could put out.

It was “a dangerous kind of unselfishness.” Like the Good Samaritan. “The Levite asked, ‘If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?’ But the Good Samaritan reversed the question: ‘If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?’ That's the question before you tonight.”

A dangerous unselfishness.

So dangerous it would cost MLK his life. And he saw it coming. That morning there was a bomb threat on his plane from Atlanta to Memphis. He felt it coming. So he closed his sermon prophetically:

We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now, because I’ve been to the mountaintop. And I don’t mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life — longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over, and I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land. And so I’m happy tonight; I’m not worried about anything; I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

Ten hours later he was dead. My world was changed forever. And I am thankful

1. “We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope.”

 

2. “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

 

3. “Forgiveness is not an occasional act. It is a permanent attitude.”

4. “I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.”

 

5. “Faith is taking the first step even when you don’t see the whole staircase.”

6. “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’”

 

7. “Never succumb to the temptation of bitterness

8. “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

 

9. “We may have all come on different ships, but we’re in the same boat now.”

 

10. “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

 

11. “Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle.”

 

12. “Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into friend.”

 

13. “There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.”

 

14. “Let no man pull you so low as to hate him

15. “If you can’t fly then run, if you can’t run then walk, if you can’t walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sisterthundershow/2014/11/27/what-are-you-thankful-for

 

BE THANKFUL
A wood burning cook stove held a place in the corner of my Mom’s kitchen. When my middle brother headed off for the Army, I inherited the responsibility to kindle the fire in it every morning. After, of course Mom roused me from beneath the pile of quilts that made up my bed.

 Mom’s kitchen was warmed by that old stove whether she cooked anything on it or not. She did have an electric range sitting on the other side of the kitchen. It warmed with the flip of a switch, but certainly lacked the character of the wood burner. My bucket list includes a kitchen with a wood burning cooking stove, if for no other reason but to keep alive cherished memories.

 I often find myself thinking of those days. We called them simpler times, a time when life was not so complicated. Truth is the times seem more complicated today than they did last year, or last month or even last week. Times change, but people mostly remain the same.

 At this time for giving thanks, we have difficulty deciding for what we should be thankful. Some of us even ponder to whom or to what we should be thankful. I do not know any man or woman’s heart in that regard so I will leave the question to whom or what as something each of us might ponder. It is a time for thankfulness, but so too is it a time for introspect.

 Thanksgiving was a special time when I was growing up. Mom’s kitchen was a busy place and even the old wood burner would see some work. We did not run to the store for turkey or ham and there was really no telling what might turn up on the table for dinner. I remember birds losing their heads over the matter, being scalded, plucked, singed, dressed and put in the oven. There would be ham from a hog that I dutifully slopped one time or another and as hunting season was on there was no anticipating what else might show up. As long as there was Mom’s potato salad, sweet potatoes, banana pudding, chocolate pie and big fat yeast rolls, I was set. It was a time to be thankful and I was taught a time to count my many blessings and to count them one by one.

 I am thankful that I was born an American. I am thankful for our founders and their brilliance in examining the reasons other nations and forms of government failed and from that examination designing for us the most effective form of government ever. It is a system designed to right itself when led astray by unscrupulous people, but as they warned us a government that only works for a moral, law abiding citizenry.

 I am thankful for the men and women who sacrificed throughout our nation’s history, from the very beginning up to this very day to secure and preserve freedom in this land and others.
I am thankful for the honesty of those I count as my friends. Friends who do not fear telling me the truth, otherwise they would not be friends.
In this life, I certainly feel blessed and certainly more than I deserve. Through life’s trials, situations that for me could have turned disastrous did not. There have been times when I have felt wronged or to some degree rejected only to find the new path on which I was placed a better one – the right one. I believe we all have a path to travel and as long as we stay on the right trail things will work out. I am thankful for that bit of life’s wisdom and my belief of its origin.
I am thankful for the family values taught me at times of lighting that wood burner and the honesty and work ethic I saw each day from my Dad. I am thankful for the best wife, son, daughter-in-law, and grandchildren a man could be blessed to have.
I am thankful for the faith that just as people find the right path to travel our country will also find its way.
Take time to gives thanks this week. Count your many blessings. Count them one by one. --- J. D. Pendry ---
To your family from mine, have a blessed Thanksgiving.

Christianity is being extinguished in the land of its birth and the West is to blame, say Syria's faithful.........
Outgoing artillery shook St Elias church as the priest reached the end of the Lord's Prayer.
The small congregation kept their eyes on the pulpit, kneeling when required and trying to ignore the regular thuds that rattled the stained glass windows above them.
Home to one of the oldest Christian communities in the world, the hard to reach Syrian agricultural town... of Izraa has stood the comings and goings of many empires over the centuries.
But as the country's civil war creeps closer, it is threatening to force the town's Christians into permanent exile: never to return, they fear.
"I have been coming to this church since I was born," said Afaf Azam, 52. "But now the situation is very bad. Everyone is afraid. Jihadists control villages around us."
Related Articles
Al-Qaeda closes in on Syrian Christian stronghold 06 Sep 2014
Syrian rebels release nuns held since December 10 Mar 2014
We Christians live in fear in Syria 08 Mar 2014
Christians are dying for us to help 28 Sep 2013
Syrian protesters under attack in Izraa 26 Apr 2011
A Canaanite city that was mentioned in the Bible, Izraa has lived through Persian and Arab rule, with St Elias's Church being built in 542AD - 28 years before the birth of the Prophet Mohammed in Mecca.
During the past four years of Syria's war, its Christian population has largely stayed put, despite the war destroying much of the surrounding province of Deraa.
In the last two weeks however, men from the al-Qaeda linked Jabhat al-Nusra and other rebel groups have captured the nearby towns of Nawa and al-Sheikh Maskin, bringing the frontline to less than two miles away. They are now trying to assault Izraa.
Some of the rebels were vetted by the CIA as "moderate Muslims" and subsequently trained and armed in Jordan, as part of a US-led program to bolster a non-sectarian opposition to President Bashar-Assad.........

At the end of January 2009, the month President Barack Obama was first inaugurated, Communist China owned $744.2 billion in U.S. government debt and the Fed owned $475.129 billion. In May of 2012, the Federal Reserve has approved applications by three big Chinese government-controlled banks to set up branches and take stakes in US banks after deciding they were adequately regulated in their home market.

 The Chinese ownership of U.S. debt, compared to the Federal Reserve, appears to be unchanged in 2014. However, the Chinese are slowly but surely acquiring the Federal Reserve and thus, are acquiring a greater amount of U.S. government debt. Therefore, much of the debt owned by the Federal Reserve, is now owned by the Chinese and their new partners consisting of two large Spanish banks, a German bank and the Chinese. The complete Chinese takeover of our economy is silent but undeniably insidious. It would be appropriate to think of this development as the United States government doing a debt consolidation of all its treasury bonds because it can no longer pay or service the debt and the Chinese and their partners are acquiring the assets of America for pennies on the dollar. It will soon be announced that China is in the process of purchasing major Western banks (e.g. Bank of America, Wells Fargo) and physical assets. These banks make up the majority owners of the Federal Reserve. By purchasing these banks as distressed properties, the Chinese, will in effect, have purchased the Federal Reserve because these banks own the Federal Reserve. For the naysayers that will write to me and say there is no way that this will ever take place, I will respond by telling you that you are a day late and a “distressed dollar” short with your anxiety over the future of the American economy.

 Late last year, China purchased the JP Morgan building in Manhattan for $725 million. This was a symbolic move like planting the U.S. flag on top of Iwo Jima’s Mount Surabachi during the famous WW II battle. This signified that the Chinese have laid claim to all assets in the United States. One might reason that the Chinese have in fact purchased all of JP Morgan. When this happens in earnest, it will come in the midst of a dollar devaluation, or collapse and we are well on the way to this happening as evidenced by the fact that in preparation for the event, the G20 declared that bank accounts are no longer considered money. As a result, all account holders go to the bottom of the line and will not be compensated when the banks collapse. And where will the bank deposits go? Well, of course, they will go the holders of the derivatives debt and to the Chinese which explains why the Chinese are buying up the Federal Reserve.

 Who owns your mortgage note on either your business property or your personal residence? Answer: The banks.
Who is on their way to completely controlling the U.S. banking system? Answer: The Chinese.
This means that you owe money to the Chinese, not to the United States government. By default, this administration has pledged your homes and businesses to the Chinese. THE CHINESE WILL NOT DESTROY WHAT THEY ALREADY OWN!

 If one really wants to go conspiratorial, consider the following: What if Executive Order 13603 is really about pledging all assets to the Chinese in repayment for the debt through a declaration of martial law (e.g. Ferguson riots)?

 I have written extensively on Executive Order 13603. This EO sets up the most draconian martial law authority on the planet. Literally, everything is controlled by the government. All food, all industry, all energy and you are controlled by the President. The interesting thing about EO 13603 is that does not require an emergency declaration to be acted upon.

 Let me tip my conspiracy cap back a little farther. When the banks collapse, or the Ferguson riots spread across the country, what is to prevent our Constitutionally abiding President from invoking EO 13603 and handing off ALL of our resources to the Chinese in repayment for the debt?
Implications

 Now that you have seen the evidence, how believable is the NSA Director’s claim that China is a knee-jerk reaction away from destroying our power grid? Why would the Chinese destroy what they already own? In this light, the statements made by the NSA director must be considered in the context of the preceding paragraphs. China will never attack this country with an EMP. However, it is highly likely that the recent warning by the NSA Director is right out of the Hegelian Dialectic play book. I think it is very possible, based upon this evidence, to conclude that the grid will be taken down for a time, but it will not be the result of an economy and country-destroying EMP and this is what last year’s Grid EX II was really about. I think it is also likely that the taking down of the grid is designed to induce helplessness and compliance among the American people and this could be accomplished through a fake EMP attack.
http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/…/not-the-chinese-but-th…/

"One if by land...two if by sea."

I have a plan to destroy Americaby Richard D. Lamm
I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that “an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” Here is my plan:
1. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way: “The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons and Corsicans.”
2. I would then invent “multiculturalism” and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.
3. We can make the United States a “Hispanic Quebec” without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently, “The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved, not by tolerance, but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.” I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences, rather than Americans emphasizing their similarities.
4. Having done all this, I would make our fastest-growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50 percent dropout rate from school.
5. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.
6. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would “celebrate diversity.” “Diversity” is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other–that is, when they are not killing each other. A “diverse,” peaceful or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia.
Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf’s “World History” tells us: “The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games in honor of Zeus, and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors … (local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions …)” If we can put the emphasis on the “pluribus,” instead of the “unum,” we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.
7. Then I would place all these subjects off-limits–make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to “heretic” in the 16th century that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like “racist”, “xenophobe” halt argument and conversation. Having made America a bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of “victimology,” I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra –”because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good.” I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.
8. Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson’s book “Mexifornia” –this book is dangerous; it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please–if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed–please, please–don’t buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” –Noam Chomsky, American linguist and U.S. media and foreign policy critic.

Amnesty: Pundits warn that a funding fight over the president's move to grant de facto amnesty to illegal aliens threatens a politically risky government shutdown. But there's something much more important at stake here.

 The Founders had good reason to give Congress the power of the purse: Short of impeachment, it's the most effective way to stop a lawless president from disobeying the will of Congress and usurping powers not granted by the Constitution.

 The question is: Will Congress use this power to thwart President Obama's shredding of the Constitution with his executive amnesty plan?

 Incoming Senate Budget Committee Chairman Jeff Sessions is on record as opposing any long-term budget resolution that would include funding for this executive travesty. He wants a short-term bill to get us to the point where the new Congress can fund everything except the Homeland Security Office responsible for carrying out the president's amnesty plan.

 "This executive amnesty scheme will give work permits, photo IDs and Social Security numbers to millions of illegal immigrants, taking jobs directly from unemployed Americans. Congress must not fund this effort," Sessions said a week ago.

 Liberal talking heads and administration spokespersons are again warning of a government shutdown and its political peril for the GOP. After the 2013 shutdown, when the GOP controlled only the House, they also went ballistic, blaming Republicans for putting barricades in front of veterans in wheelchairs who were trying to visit the World War II Memorial.
Yet somehow the GOP recovered in an election in which voters were not too stupid to realize that they could no longer trust Democrats with purse strings or power. Go ahead, Mr. President, make our day.
Even if a shutdown were to happen, and Sessions' piecemeal approach seems designed to prevent it, the media and the White House could not blame it on an intransigent GOP House of Representatives with the president an above-the-battle bystander. This time, the bills would be on his desk, and it would be his choice.
There's more at stake here than mere political fortunes. We are at the constitutional tipping point that Georgetown University law professor Jonathan Turley warned us about as Obama continues to wield executive authority that he himself once said he did not have.
We live in a constitutional republic, and the president who says he cannot wait for the Congress to act ignores a Constitution that says he has to. Article I, Section 8 gives Congress exclusive authority to "establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization" and Article II, Section 3 says that it's the president's duty "to take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Professor Turley told the House Judiciary Committee at a Dec. 3 hearing that Obama's abuse of executive power has grown to the point that "he's becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid."
It's time to protect the Constitution. Don't show him the money, Congress.